1 Mr Victor Lye asked the Acting Minister for Transport (a) whether studies were conducted on the impact of the revised Preferential Additional Registration Fee (PARF) rebate schedule on (i) car depreciation rates (ii) new car demand and (iii) COE renewal behaviour; and (b) whether the findings can be shared.
2 Mr Victor Lye asked the Acting Minister for Transport in respect of the revision in preferential additional registration fee (PARF) rebate announced in Budget 2026, whether transitional measures were considered to mitigate unintended financial impacts on car buyers who planned purchases based on the previous depreciation framework.
3 Ms Poh Li San asked the Acting Minister for Transport on the revised Preferential Additional Registration Fee rebate (a) how will it affect new car prices; and (b) what recourse is there for buyers who have purchased new cars but have not yet registered their Certificates of Entitlement before 6 February 2026.
\tThe Acting Minister for Transport (Mr Jeffrey Siow): Mr Speaker, may I have your permission to take Question Nos 1 to 3 in today’s Order Paper together?
\tMr Speaker: Yes, please proceed.
Mr Jeffrey Siow: Thank you. The Preferential Additional Registration Fee (PARF) rebate was designed to encourage the renewal of the vehicle population to keep the vehicle fleet younger and hence, safer and less pollutive. With electric vehicles (EVs) becoming more commonplace, there is now less of a need to encourage early deregistration through the PARF rebate. This is why we lowered the PARF rebate and also reduced the rebate cap from $60,000 to $30,000. We do not expect the changes to affect Certificate of Entitlement (COE) renewal behaviour significantly.
The recent changes to vehicle taxes were implemented with immediate effect, in line with our general approach on market sensitive tax changes. In this case, it was to avoid bidders rushing to market, or distorting the COE market. This was the same approach we had taken in 2023 when the PARF rebate cap was implemented and the Additional Registration Fee (ARF) was raised. Vehicle taxes and rebates are also consistently levied at the point of registration, not the point of sale, to ensure all buyers in a specific COE bidding exercise are treated equally.
Fewer than 2,000 car buyers with committed purchases are estimated to be affected. These include mostly buyers of higher-end internal combustion engine cars. Buyers with existing purchase agreements who have yet to secure a COE may wish to discuss with their dealers to come to a mutually acceptable agreement. We understand that some dealers have already made alternative arrangements with affected buyers.
\tMr Speaker: Mr Lye.
\tMr Victor Lye (Ang Mo Kio): Thank you, Speaker. Thank you, Minister. With the changes in the PARF policy, does it signal a shift that we are now moving from ownership pricing to usage pricing? And if so, can Singaporeans have a sense of the roadmap so as to make better transport decisions, private or public otherwise?
\tMr Jeffrey Siow: Thank you, Mr Speaker. I think we will always need a balance of both ownership as well as usage controls, both of which are necessary and important to keep road congestion in check. With Electronic Road Pricing (ERP) 2.0 and other usage tools, we have the ability to sharpen our usage policies to make it more targeted and perhaps to then make the usage of our roads more efficient. And depending on the outcomes, potentially we can then adjust our ownership policies and our vehicle quotas accordingly.
Mr Speaker: Ms Poh.
\tMs Poh Li San (Sembawang West): Thank you, Speaker, and Acting Minister. I would like to ask, does this shift in the PARF framework indicate the Ministry of Transport's (MOT's) intent to accelerate the uptake of EVs further, given that in the past few years, the take-up rate for EVs has already increased quite a fair bit?
\tMr Jeffrey Siow: Thank you, Mr Speaker. We had decided to make adjustments to the PARF rate precisely because the take-up of EVs has increased, and this has made the original objective of PARF, which was to encourage early renewal of vehicles and therefore, have a younger vehicle fleet that is less pollutive, that initial objective is now less relevant with the take-up of EVs.
We are watching the adoption of EVs very closely. I think the trend is positive. And as Members know, what we are trying to do is to encourage more emission friendly cars, and we will continue to do that in the coming years.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Community Support Services to Address Gaming Disorder Among Young Adults","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"4 Mr Gerald Giam Yean Song asked the Coordinating Minister for Social Policies and Minister for Health (a) what more community support services are being developed to address gaming disorder among young adults; (b) whether the Ministry has studied jurisdictions that implemented playtime limits or identity verification to curb problematic gaming; and (c) beyond public education, what direct measures are taken to ensure the gaming industry embeds responsible features in digital products.
\tThe Senior Minister of State for Health (Dr Koh Poh Koon) (for the Coordinating Minister for Social Policies and Minister for Health): There are counselling and intervention programmes available in the community for those seeking help with gaming addiction, such as TOUCH Community Services and WE CARE Community Services.
The Government has also progressively introduced regulatory measures to better protect users from harms associated with gaming. The Code of Practice for Online Safety – App Distribution Services requires designated app stores to put in place measures to minimise users’ risk of exposure to harmful content, including those found in gaming apps. Designated app stores must also put in place age assurance measures by March 2026 to reduce the likelihood of young users accessing and downloading age-inappropriate apps, including gaming apps.
The Government will continue to monitor developments in other jurisdictions, including playtime limits or identity verification, and study if safeguards for online video games are required.
\tMr Speaker: Mr Giam.
\tMr Gerald Giam Yean Song (Aljunied): Sir, I think the Senior Minister of State for his reply. In view of the 10.3% prevalence rate for Internet gaming disorder among young adults in Singapore, will the Government take more urgent measures and more strictly regulate the gaming industry? For example, will it mandate game developers to have ethical design features and implement real world currency mandates, cool down periods, and regulate gacha and pay-to-win mechanics, while protecting skills-based competitive gaming? This will help curb predatory dark patterns without stifling the e-sports industry.
And second, could the Senior Minister of State provide an assessment of whether the current intervention, such as generic cyber wellness talks, are effective and well-received by young people and their parents? Will the Ministry consider holding more technical workshops that shed light on how algorithms actually work and engineer addiction, so as to foster more genuine digital literacy by both gamers and their family members?
\tDr Koh Poh Koon: Sir, the Member's first question would be more appropriately directed to the Ministry of Digital Development and Information (MDDI), which is the agency and the Ministry responsible for working with the app developers on app design and how they put forth products onto the market. So, I urge the Member to perhaps raise the questions with MDDI in a subsequent Parliamentary Question.
But on his question of whether we will do more to educate and protect users from some of the harmful things that might be available on apps, the answer is yes. But we will need to look at how we can balance between increased protection for users versus personal autonomy, and the practicality of enforcement. Because at the end of the day when we – I am not sure whether the Member was referring to young adults as in adults or if he was referring to teens – because if we are talking about a young adult, he is still an adult and he does have personal autonomy. So, our approach has been to go more upstream to educate, to raise awareness, but also to work upstream with developers and app stores to make sure that there are some age appropriate safeguards, so that for those who are below a certain age threshold for which they are not deemed as adults, put some barriers in place so that they are not actually exposed to it when they are still teens or young people.
So, I think that that is something that we will continue to do in a evidence-driven way – looking at the proportionality of the measures that we are going to do, but also make sure that it is feasible and ensure that there are no unintended consequences of any measures we put forth.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Plans to Manage Numbers of Private Hire Car Driver's Vocational Licences Issued","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"The following question stood in the name of Mr Vikram Nair –
5 To ask the Acting Minister for Transport (a) whether the steady increase in Private Hire Car Driver's Vocational Licence is a sustainable trend; and (b) whether there are plans to manage the number of private hire car drivers.
\tMr Christopher de Souza (Holland-Bukit Timah): Question No 5.
Mr Speaker: Who is answering?
\tThe Acting Minister for Transport (Mr Jeffrey Siow): I apologise, Mr Speaker, the question is Question No 5, which is on whether or not there is a steady increase in the vocational licences, whether there is a sustainable trend and whether there are plans to manage the number of private hire car (PHC) drivers.
The number of PHC Driver’s Vocational Licences has continued to be roughly maintained at the same level for the past few years. There are no plans at the moment for us to constrain the total number of drivers. It is important for us to have PHCs continue to be an important mode of transport in our transport system, largely because they provide for people who are unable to drive or are unwilling to own a car but yet would like to have access to private transport on a pay-per-use basis. And I think we want to be able to continue to do that.
The taxi or the point-to-point population has increased from 28,000 10 years ago, to roughly around 70,000 today. That represents a significant increase. But at the same time, I think if you look at the number of total rides, it is about 400,000 a day, that is substantial and it complements our public transport provision, which is still going to be our main focus for our transport policy. So, we have no intention at the moment to curtail the number, but I think the number has stabilised over time.
Mr Speaker: Mr Nair.
\tMr Vikram Nair (Sembawang): I thank the Minister for the response. I think generally leaving the numbers to the free market is not objectionable. The only caveat is that in the case of PHC drivers, people may be giving up opportunities to engage in other professions in order to have the freedom of being a PHC driver. And if the numbers were to go up too much, they may not be able to earn a livelihood. I suggest there might be some basis to intervene in the market, if the numbers appear too large, or PHC drivers' incomes and all that keep going down.
\tMr Jeffrey Siow: Thank you, Mr Speaker. I agree with the hon Member that indeed there are alternative occupations that, particularly this group who are Singaporean, can potentially take in the economy. But this group of PHC drivers, it is a diverse group. There are professional drivers who are doing the same thing as taxi drivers, driving full-time. There are people who are also in transient employment and this is a good way for them to come in and continue to earn an income, maybe when they are in between jobs.
And so, to that end, we have not intentionally tried to restrict the numbers But as the Member has pointed out, this is a important pool of labour. Certainly, I would appreciate if some of them go into the bus industry, help us address the constraint that we have for public buses. But we have to leave it to the market and to let them decide.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Intended Role of Community Mental Health Services within Singapore’s Care Continuum","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"6 Dr Hamid Razak asked the Coordinating Minister for Social Policies and Minister for Health (a) how does the Ministry define the intended role of community mental health services within Singapore’s care continuum; (b) whether community mental health services are primarily designed as (i) first-contact services (ii) post-hospital step-down care or (iii) both; and (c) how does this inform service design and resourcing.
\tThe Senior Minister of State for Health (Dr Koh Poh Koon) (for the Coordinating Minister for Social Policies and Minister for Health): Mr Speaker, my response will also address written Question No 9 filed by Dr Hamid Razak and filed in yesterday's Order Paper.
Community mental health teams include Community Outreach Teams (CREST) and Community Intervention Teams (COMIT). CREST is designated as one of the First Stops for Mental Health to improve access to screening, basic emotional support and other mental health resources. On the other hand, COMIT provides higher level psychosocial interventions, such as cognitive behavioural therapy, for individuals with moderate mental health needs. Both CREST and COMIT attend to patients referred for follow-up after undergoing treatment at the acute hospitals.
So, the short answer to his question today is, yes, both these resources are to cater as a first stop and also, for follow-up in the community.
The Ministry of Health (MOH), together with the Agency for Integrated Care, monitors several indicators of these services. These include clinical and functional outcomes using tools such as the Patient Health Questionnaire, Generalised Anxiety Disorder and the World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0. We also monitor the service utilisation and intensity of care needs of clients, including the referral sources. We use such data in our ongoing review and refinement of community mental health services, and to determine the resourcing for these services.
\tMr Speaker: Dr Hamid.
\tDr Hamid Razak (West Coast-Jurong West): Thank you, Mr Speaker, and I thank the Senior Minister of State for his answer. My question really stems out of, when we look at a parallelism in terms of physical care, when we talk about community care in the aspect of physical health, we often look at step-down care in terms of intermediate and long-term care. So, this space of community mental health, since they are dual-purpose for both first touch as well as follow-up care, how does the Ministry ensure that our community mental care workers are adequately resourced and staffed so that the care itself is not compromised, as well as for the welfare of our community mental health workers?
\t
\tDr Koh Poh Koon: Sir, the National Mental Health Office works closely with various agencies, including the Agency for Integrated Care, as well as touchpoints with our community partners that are delivering some of these care in the community. Through the regular interactions and structured meetings, we do get a sense of what the resourcing gaps might be.
And right now, one of our measures is to push forth training resources and having some pocket guides to help the care providers right-site the clients to the right level of care so that they are not overburdened by those who need more care than they can provide. In these interactions and formalised meeting sessions, we will be able to get a sense of where the gaps might be and if need be, provide them with extra resources. It could be funding, could be training support to be able to deliver the services that they need to do in the community.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Steps to Reduce Vegetation Fires","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"7 Mr Vikram Nair asked the Coordinating Minister for National Security and Minister for Home Affairs in light of the increase in the number of vegetation fires since 2022 as well as the increase in Singapore's annual average temperature over the years, whether the SCDF is taking precautionary steps aimed at reducing vegetation fires.
\tThe Minister of State for Home Affairs (Mr Goh Pei Ming) (for the Coordinating Minister for National Security and Minister for Home Affairs): Climate change has resulted in drier and hotter weather in recent years, increasing the risks of wildfire. The Singapore Civil Defence Force (SCDF) leads an inter-agency Wildfire Task Force, comprising members from relevant agencies, such as the Singapore Land Authority, National Parks Board, National Environment Agency and PUB, to proactively minimise the risk of vegetation fires.
The Wildfire Task Force actively monitors weather patterns and initiates preventive measures ahead of anticipated dry spells. These measures include identifying potential hotspots, such as areas with dense vegetation for closer monitoring, watering and trimming of overgrown vegetation, creating \"fire breaks\" or buffer zones to prevent fire spread during vegetation fires, and educating the public not to indiscriminately discard lighted materials, such as cigarette butts, onto grass patches.
\tMr Speaker: Mr Nair.
\tMr Vikram Nair (Sembawang): I know in the past, the SCDF has managed to reverse the rising trend of wildfires. Does the SCDF envision that this can happen again with the additional measures that are in place?
\tMr Goh Pei Ming: Speaker, I think the Member is right in that, over the last few years, the number of vegetation fires has generally been kept under control – under 200 per year over the last five years.
However, we do know, especially for the weather, we do have to take a much bigger and longer-term perspective. When we look at 2018 to 2019, the numbers were much higher. In 2019, for example, it was in the 800s per year. That was also because during 2019, there were sustained periods of dry weather leading to spontaneous fires sparking off.
What is important here is that we need to watch the weather patterns very carefully. It is seasonal, very dependent on how much rainfall we get. It is important for us to stay vigilant and take proactive measures, the measures that I have mentioned above. Whenever we work very closely with the other agencies, when the Meteorological Service tells us we should anticipate dry weather, I think that is when we need to take even more proactive prevention methods.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Reason for Lower-than-projected Health Ministry Operating Expenditure in FY2025","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"8 Mr Gerald Giam Yean Song asked the Coordinating Minister for Social Policies and Minister for Health (a) what specific factors led to the $0.31 billion projected reduction in the Ministry’s revised FY2025 operating expenditure compared to the initial estimates; and (b) how does the Ministry reconcile lower-than-projected funding needs for public healthcare institutions with the increased care demands of a rapidly ageing population.
\tThe Minister of State for Health (Ms Rahayu Mahzam) (for the Coordinating Minister for Social Policies and Minister for Health): Mr Speaker, the reduction in the Ministry of Health's (MOH's) estimated financial year (FY) 2025 operating expenditure of $310 million is about 1.6% of the total initial estimate of $18.8 billion. It is mainly due to lower-than-expected increases in operating costs at the public healthcare clusters and is within an accepted margin of budget variance.
Overall, MOH's operating expenditure maintains an upward trajectory. The revised FY2025 estimate of $18.49 billion is $1.63 billion, or 9.7%, higher than the actual FY2025 operating expenditure. [Please refer to \"Clarification by Minister of State for Health\", Official Report, 4 March 2026, Vol 96, Issue 24, Correction By Written Statement section.]
The trend of increase will continue, as shown by the estimated FY2026 operating expenditure of $20.04 billion.
\tMr Speaker: Mr Giam.
\tMr Gerald Giam Yean Song (Aljunied): I thank the Minister of State for the reply. Can I get more clarity on what the operating costs that were lower than expected were?
\tMs Rahayu Mahzam: Mr Speaker, the net decrease comprises many lines of reduction and these include the timing of some decisions. It is an operation, as the Member will know, so there are many different things that could happen. But actually, in total, it partially also offsets increases. So, there will be some decreases, some increases and largely because there are operational demands within the public healthcare institution.
\tMr Speaker: Mr Giam. Mr Giam had another clarification.
\tMr Gerald Giam Yean Song: Sir, I think I do want to request a bit more clarity on what are the operational costs that went down more than more than expected. Is it due to things like lower take-up rate of salary enhancement schemes or is it because of other aspects that might have led to longer waiting times for patients? Because we would have expected that because of an ageing population, operating costs should have gone up and if anything, it would have exceeded the expectations and the budgeted amounts rather than decrease. So, is patient care compromise in any way because of this?
\tMs Rahayu Mahzam: I can appreciate the Member's concern, Mr Speaker. Some of the information are non-public information with regard to the operations. But Member can be assured that it was not an issue of compromising of care to patients. Largely, it related to the different projects and different decisions that were made on certain items, but healthcare services continued to be priority and continued to be delivered well to the patients.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Council to Provide Recommendations on Reasonable Integrated Shield Plan and Rider Premium Increases for Private Healthcare","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"9 Mr Yip Hon Weng asked the Coordinating Minister for Social Policies and Minister for Health whether the Ministry will consider establishing a council to provide recommendations on reasonable Integrated Shield Plan and rider premium increases for private healthcare.
\tThe Minister of State for Health (Ms Rahayu Mahzam) (for the Coordinating Minister for Social Policies and Minister for Health): Mr Speaker, Integrated Shield Plans (IPs) and riders are private, commercial products and IP insurers operate in a competitive market. Therefore, the quantum and frequency of premium revisions are subject to insurers' actuarial and commercial considerations which are best left to market forces. The Government's role should be to ensure affordable, accessible and good quality subsidised healthcare for Singaporeans.
\tMr Speaker: Mr Yip.
\tMr Yip Hon Weng (Yio Chu Kang): Thank you, Mr Speaker. I thank the Minister of State for her reply. My question pertains to seniors. Many retirees may downgrade or drop private coverage due to premium increases, even as MediShield Life premium also rises. Will the Ministry consider establishing a pricing council or having broader regulatory guardrails that helps in terms of financial security and access options for seniors as well as middle-income households?
\tMs Rahayu Mahzam: Mr Speaker, in response to the Member's question, I would just also reiterate the point I made earlier that we do want to take a balanced approach, because while we do want to actually protect consumers, it is important to appreciate that some of the premium revisions are really issues of market decisions and we do have to leave some of this to market forces.
Having said that, I appreciate that there are concerns on the impact to consumers. As mentioned in previous Parliamentary Questions, firstly, information is made available, and there are a lot of guidelines to try and get people to make the best decisions.
Separately, we have also been looking at different modalities and approaches, including introducing benchmark for private professional fees to guide pricing and guard against overcharging. We have taken enforcement actions against a small minority of doctors who made errant claims. We have also intervened to improve consumer fairness and transparency.
We will continue to work on these to make sure that consumers are protected.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Number of Air-conditioned Classrooms in Schools and Schools that are Most Vulnerable to Urban Heat Island Effect","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"10 Mr Cai Yinzhou asked the Minister for Education (a) whether the Ministry has identified schools most vulnerable to urban heat island effect; (b) what progress has been made in applying cool paint and installing ventilations across older school campuses; and (c) whether building standards for new schools will mandate passive cooling designs so as to avoid the need for full air-conditioning.
11 Mr Cai Yinzhou asked the Minister for Education (a) what is the current number of air-conditioned and non-air-conditioned classrooms in schools; (b) whether the Ministry has conducted any studies to elevate the impact of thermal comfort on students' academic performance; and (c) if so, what are the results.
\tThe Minister of State for Education (Ms Jasmin Lau) (for the Minister for Education): As outlined in our reply to Mr Patrick Tay and Mr Kenneth Tiong for the Parliament Sitting on 22 September 2025 and Senior Minister of State David Neo's Committee of Supply speech on 3 March, the Ministry of Education (MOE) aims to provide a conducive learning environment for students, through heat-resilient school design focussed on passive cooling and additional heat mitigation measures.
All new schools are designed to achieve Green Mark Platinum Super Low Energy certification, which emphasises passive design to reduce heat gain, reduce reliance on air-conditioning and optimise natural ventilation. For example, school buildings are oriented in a north-south direction for natural cross-ventilation, with shading to minimise direct sunlight and large window openings for enhanced airflow and passive cooling, supported by ceiling fans. Where possible, more shade and greenery are incorporated to further reduce the ambient temperature.
On the additional heat mitigation measures that Mr Cai Yinzhou asked about, these are being implemented progressively. By 2027, all schools will be provided with additional and more powerful fans for classrooms as well as the coating of external building facades with cool paint.
We have also been working with schools to identify those that may experience pervasive heat build-up due to specific site constraints, conditions or surroundings that impede natural wind flow. In cases where the current measures are insufficient, additional cooling measures may be deployed in a targeted manner. Air-conditioning can also be considered for classrooms that need to be enclosed for extended periods due to persistent dust or extreme noise, such as from nearby construction sites.
MOE remains committed to ensuring that all students, regardless of which school they attend, have access to conducive learning environments. MOE is working with other agencies and researchers to study the effects of rising temperatures on student learning and well-being, including gathering more data on local conditions and their effects.
As we gather more evidence on the local impact of rising temperatures on students, we will continue to refine our approach to achieve optimal thermal comfort across all schools in an environmentally sustainable manner. This includes exploring further heat adaptation and active cooling measures for classrooms, such as mixed mode air-conditioning.
\tMr Speaker: Minister of State, does your reply also cover Question No 11 as well?
\tMs Jasmin Lau: Yes.
\tMr Speaker: Mr Cai.
\tMr Cai Yinzhou (Bishan-Toa Payoh): I thank the Minister of State for her response. I was just wondering further if there are studies on in the impact of thermal comfort on academic performance and with effects, like the urban island heat effect, are there hotter schools than cooler schools, and is there studies on the correlations of academic performance based on that?
\tMs Jasmin Lau: I thank the Member for his question. Well, we did have a 2024 National University of Singapore study that identified that cognitive performance does decline above a certain temperature threshold. But this does not mean that all schools may need the same set of cooling measures. We will continue to look across our schools and target the measures at the ones where students may be experiencing more discomfort and this may be temporary or permanent in nature.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Setting Up Helpline and Oversight for Tripartite Framework for the Prevention of Abuse and Harassment in Healthcare","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"12 Mr Dennis Tan Lip Fong asked the Coordinating Minister for Social Policies and Minister for Health whether the Ministry will consider establishing an independent and centralised helpline or oversight under the Tripartite Framework for the Prevention of Abuse and Harassment in Healthcare to enhance follow-up and accountability of internal reporting of abuse in all public healthcare institutions for all non-police cases.
\tThe Senior Minister of State for Health (Dr Koh Poh Koon) (for the Coordinating Minsiter for Social Policies and Minister for Health): Mr Speaker, all public healthcare institutions have put in place internal mechanisms to ensure due follow-up of reported cases of abuse or harassment. These include protocols for immediate incident response and reporting, post-incident management including support provided to the affected staff, and follow-up actions against perpetrators.
The Tripartite Workgroup for the Prevention of Abuse and Harassment of Healthcare Workers, comprising the Ministry of Health (MOH), union and healthcare employers from public healthcare, community care and private healthcare sectors, also convenes regularly to share best practices on the management of abuse and harassment cases.
\tMr Speaker: Mr Tan.
\tMr Dennis Tan Lip Fong (Hougang): Thank you, Mr Speaker and I thank the Senior Minister of State for the answer. The reason why I filed this Parliamentary Question is arising from a concern expressed by a resident who is a medical professional working in a hospital. The concern of my resident is that there should be an independent and transparent process of handling feedback, not by the hospital in question, purely because the concern that perhaps the hospital may, in certain circumstances, take the side of the patient rather than the staff.
And also, in addition to that, for more independent tracking and monitoring, whether from a patient point of view or from a staff point of view, there would be more independence if it is done on a centralised and by an independent authority or body, rather than a hospital in question. There may be some conflict of interest as well when it comes to that hospital.
\tDr Koh Poh Koon: Thank you, Sir. I want to thank the Member for expressing some of the potential concerns and indeed, as he has a resident who has spoken to him on this. I should take this chance to also reiterate that MOH and the Government takes a zero-tolerance stance against abuse of any healthcare workers. I am aware that hospitals do even report perpetrators to the Police for further investigation and take actions against them.
The reason why it is important for the hospital to have an internal process is because the incident management itself does involve making an assessment on the perpetrator – sometimes, the perpetrator himself is the patient. And therefore, there are medical confidentiality issues to allow appropriate judgement on whether that action was something that ought to be taken to task for or if the patient is not compos mentis and he is actually not in the right frame of mind. And so, the action was committed because he has no self-control, because he could have mental illness, for example.
So, there are real reasons why we keep this process internal to the hospital, because they are in the best position to make a judgement.
If I can just illustrate this, there are three parts to incidence management.
First, is the immediate response and that involves actually dealing with, sometimes, the patient who is the one causing the harassment or the patient's next of kin. That has to be something that is dealt with onsite, not by an external third-party.
Secondly, is the reporting and review of the incidence. That is where I made the point earlier about reviewing the medical information behind this. The circumstances that led to the incident would involve some confidential information about the patient, for example.
The third is the post-incidence management and this is where the zero-tolerance stance by the institution is something that we emphasise to management within the hospitals.
So, I want to assure the Member, as well as all our healthcare workers, that incidents like these will be taken seriously. If there is a concern that the hospital has not been fair to the staff, they can escalate it to MOH, where we will take a separate independent review on this as well.
Mr Speaker: We have established a new record: 30 minutes of Question Time and we cleared 12 Parliamentary Questions. It goes to show, if supplementary questions and replies are succinct, what we can achieve.
Order. End of Question Time. The Clerk will now proceed to read the Order of the Day.
[Pursuant to Standing Order No 22(3), provided that Members had not asked for questions standing in their names to be postponed to a later Sitting day or withdrawn, written answers to questions not reached by the end of Question Time are reproduced in the Appendix.]
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Estimates of Expenditure for the Financial Year 1 April 2026 to 31 March 2027","subTitle":"Committee of Supply – Paper Cmd 4 of 2026","sectionType":"OS","content":"[(proc text) Order read for consideration in Committee of Supply [5th Allotted Day]. (proc text)]
[Mr Speaker 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 L (Ministry of Sustainability and the Environment)","subTitle":"A vibrant and sustainable home","sectionType":"OS","content":"[(proc text) Head L (cont) – (proc text)]
[(proc text) Resumption of Debate on Question [3 March 2026], (proc text)]
[(proc text) \"That the total sum to be allocated for Head L of the Estimates be reduced by $100.\" – [Ms Poh Li San]. (proc text)]
[(proc text) Question again proposed. (proc text)]
The Chairman: Senior Minister of State Zaqy Mohamad.
The Senior Minister of State for Sustainability and the Environment (Mr Zaqy Mohamad): Mr Chairman, I will speak on our approach to strengthen food resilience.
As a country heavily reliant on imports, we are particularly vulnerable to external shocks and supply chain disruptions. Over the past five years, Singapore's food supply has been repeatedly tested by events beyond our control.
During COVID-19, there were concerns that countries' COVID-19 measures would lead to food supply disruptions, such as eggs. In 2022, Malaysia's ban on the export of live chickens disrupted their supply to Singapore. More recently, the disruption in pork supply from Bulan, Indonesia in 2023, due to an African Swine Fever outbreak, further highlighted our vulnerabilities.
Each time, we managed to tide through the disruption with the collective support of our importers, retailers and consumers who switched to alternative options. We must stay prepared for rising geopolitical tensions and trade restrictions which could disrupt our food supply. The latest chain of events in the Middle East only underscores this global climate of uncertainty.
We also need to manage our risks from animal diseases, which add to further pressure on global food supply and global prices. As a long-term risk, we must be able to adapt to climate change, such as extreme and erratic weather which affects crop yields globally.
This is why we need to build options and flexibility to deal with the different types of disruptions – whether they affect single or multiple food items, single sources or entire regions, and whether they last for days or they last for months.
We have learnt many lessons from our \"30 by 30\" initiative. While it had successfully catalysed local production growth, mainly focusing on one pillar – Grow Local – left us vulnerable to the very disruptions that we sought to address. What have we learnt? A single-pillar approach, no matter how ambitious, cannot provide the food supply resilience that Singapore needs.
This brings us to the Singapore Food Story 2, which Minister Grace Fu announced in November last year. It includes four pillars: diversify imports, grow local, stockpile and global partnerships. These enable us to tap onto the different combinations to address different types of scenarios and that will strengthen our food resilience.
But first, what does it mean to achieve \"food resilience\"? Food resilience means ensuring Singapore has reliable access to our basic needs – ensuring that during disruptions, there is still food on the table, food on our shelves and meals remain as familiar to us as possible. It will not always be possible to have everyone's favourite food and brand available in every disruption. I think we have to accept that. But we will prioritise staples such as rice, proteins and vegetables. And like any insurance policy, we must be strategic about what we protect and how we protect it. This approach allows us to provide food assurance where it matters most, whilst managing our risks responsibly.
The first food pillar is for industry to diversify imports. This means importing our food from multiple sources and building up alternative sources. Doing so reduces the impact when there are disruptions to particular sources, helping us to stabilise our food supply. And also, it makes easier to pivot to alternative sources when needed.
The Government will support the industry by accrediting new sources, for food of higher food safety concern, such as meat and eggs; we will help our local food importers with business matching; and safeguarding supply stability by establishing regionalisation agreements with key sources.
When disease outbreaks happen, we do not shut down supply from entire countries – we get more precise these days. Our regionalisation agreements allow us to continue importing from disease-free areas within affected countries. For example, during Brazil's Avian Influenza outbreak last year, we maintained poultry imports from accredited farms in unaffected regions, rather than restricting imports from the whole of Brazil.
We will continue to facilitate accreditation and explore regionalisation arrangements with suitable sources.
Diversification alone is not enough and has its constraints. For example, importers may need to buy from sources that are not necessarily the cheapest. So, we have to also strengthen the resilience of existing food supply chains by working with like-minded countries and regions. This is where global partnerships, our newest pillar, comes in.
Mr Ng Shi Xuan asked how we assess whether our global partnerships can support diversification. As shared in Parliament last month, partnerships can take various forms, such as facilitating production overseas, in addition to having government-to-government arrangements and agreements.
For such partnerships to be meaningful and sustainable, they must be win-win. And this will look different for various partnerships. As the Member has mentioned, recent examples include the two memoranda agreements on rice trade signed with Vietnam and Thailand last year. These help us ensure a stable rice supply to Singapore and provide an avenue for Singapore to activate additional rice supplies when needed.
The joint study with Brunei on the feasibility of an Agri-Tech Food Zone in Brunei will explore how both countries can leverage on our respective strengths to enhance agri-food trade and food supply resilience, starting with aquaculture.
When the next disruption hits, we do not want to be scrambling for alternatives. We want to have pre-established channels, we want to have tested protocols and trusted partners who are ready to respond. This transforms crisis management from reactive scrambling to proactive deployment. We will continue to explore mutually beneficial arrangements with like-minded economies to strengthen our food supply resilience.
Chairman, even with our efforts to reduce the likelihood and impact of disruptions, it is still possible that we could face widespread disruptions where food cannot reach our borders for some time. And this is why we will stockpile essential food items, such as rice. It gives us the time and breathing space to restore our food flows and sustain our population.
As shared in this House in November last year, since COVID-19, we have expanded our stockpiles to include frozen protein and canned vegetables to cover all three food groups – carbohydrates, fibre and protein. We will continue to work with the industry to stockpile more effectively.
Moving on to grow local. Grow local remains an important pillar of our food resilience strategy. Stockpiles are finite and imports can be disrupted. Local farms can provide us with a regenerative source of fresh food, that is maintained even during prolonged disruptions. More of our farms are moving towards controlled environments which makes them more climate-resilient and land-efficient.
Ms Poh Li San asked about the lessons learnt from failed local farms and Mr Ng Shi Xuan asked about Singapore's role in alternative proteins. We must first recognise that most of our farming industry is nascent and in an early phase of growth. It will take them time to develop viable technologies and business models. We must also take a practical approach on what we can grow locally in a sustainable manner. It would neither be efficient nor possible to locally produce every food item that we have on our plates today.
Hence, our refreshed local production targets under Singapore Food Story 2, we are focusing on fibre and protein types that are feasible to be produced at scale efficiently in Singapore. These are fresh leafy and fruited vegetables, such as xiao bai cai and tomatoes, beansprouts and mushrooms for fibre; and eggs and seafood for protein. These goals take into account the strengths of our local farming ecosystem and the potential for growth in supply.
We have also got to be realistic about our economics. Our local farms will always face higher land and production costs compared to farms from the region. Unfortunately, that is simply our reality. But the situation is no different from how Singapore differentiates from low-cost alternatives in other industries, such as manufacturing. We have to improve our value-add, bring higher-productivity and cost-efficiency, and with Government's support to invest in capability and capacity development.
But here is what we have also learnt on the demand side: consumers and large buyers, like supermarkets, are willing to pay a reasonable premium for fresher, pesticide-free local produce that comes with guaranteed supply certainty. What this means is that they want consistent supply at scale. So, the key is thus to get our farms to the right scale and cost structure. Take our local egg industry. It has achieved this balance, with local production making up to 30% of local consumption.
Ms Lee Hui Ying and Mr Cai Yinzhou asked how we will support and promote awareness of our local farms. We are helping farms to increase productivity and reap economies of scale, we are helping them to build capabilities, strengthen supply resilience of agri-inputs and enhance demand offtake.
The first tranche of the Agri-food Cluster Transformation (ACT) Fund, launched in 2021, has shown that Singapore farms can transform into advanced farming operations that are of higher yield, that are more pest- and disease- resilient, and increasingly climate-resilient too.
Since its launch, we have awarded $55 million to nearly 150 projects. The Fund has enabled both agri- and aqua-farms to adopt everything from simple, small-scale technologies, like LED grow lights, automated feeders and automated irrigation systems that reduce manual labour, to large-scale farming systems in climate-controlled environments that guarantee year-round production regardless of the weather.
Take Singapore Aquaculture Technology as a good example of this transformation. Using ACT Fund support, instead of adopting conventional open cage fish farm technologies, they deployed a closed containment aquaculture system. What is the outcome? They now operate at three times the productivity of conventional sea-based fish farms and in using closed containment aquaculture system, they face lower risk from environmental hazards, such as algal blooms. Closed containment aquaculture system technology is still nascent and requires industry readiness.
Thus, to Ms Nadia Ahmad Samdin's question, it will take time for the local industry to adopt systems such as closed containment aquaculture system. The Singapore Food Agency (SFA) will continue to support farms who are keen and ready for this transition.
Another beneficiary of the ACT Fund is Yili Farm who upgraded their cultivation systems to optimise layout, improve crop protection and integrate with their centralised nursery and irrigation system. This enabled faster crop cycles and a 20% increase in productivity. These developments give us confidence to enhance the Fund to support our farms further.
Today, I am announcing a new tranche of funding of $70 million under the ACT Fund 2. This will be made available from April 2026, over five years, and it represents our largest industry scheme to date to support technology adoption and local agriculture capability and capacity building.
At the same time, it will introduce a new funding component – the Industry Partnerships for Capability Transformation Grant. This is in response to feedback from the industry on the need for collaborative approaches to tackle common challenges, such as limited economies of scale and supply chain inefficiencies.
This new scheme will co-fund strategic partnerships between farms and ecosystem players on the development and deployment of industry-wide solutions that can support multiple farms. Examples will include farms and industry players collaborating on integrated delivery systems which streamlines the process from farm-to-market, reducing transportation cost and improving product freshness.
For the aquaculture sector, we will also support both sea-based and land-based farms to adopt newer technologies to improve productivity and consistency of output through demonstration projects. One example is the automated vaccination of fingerlings which can reduce labour intensity. Successfully demonstrated technologies can subsequently be adopted by the industry via the ACT Fund 2.
Beyond technology, quality agri-inputs, such as eggs, fingerlings and feed, are fundamental to success for aquaculture. Today, farms source a majority of their fry and fingerling from overseas sources with less consistent quality and lower survival rates due to the long transport stress.
In November 2024, we introduced the National Broodstock Centre and Hatchery Development and Recognition Programme to supply our farms with high quality eggs and fingerlings, with higher survival and grow-out rates. The National Broodstock Centre produces disease-free broodstock that commercial hatcheries then develop into high quality fingerlings under strict biosecurity standards.
For farms, this translates directly into better profitability. These premium fingerlings grow faster, survive better and they convert feed more efficiently. That means that farms reach market quicker with lower feed costs and fewer losses.
We started out with Asian Seabass and have since successfully expanded into Marine Tilapia. Five hatcheries have been recognised under the Hatchery Development and Recognition Programme and can now access quality seabass eggs and marine tilapia brooder fingerlings from the National Broodstock Centre. This year, we will expand our national breeding programme to include Red Snapper and work towards industry-led efforts to increase the supply of Whiteleg shrimp larvae and grouper fingerlings.
High-quality eggs and fingerlings set the foundation, but health and nutrition inputs determine whether farms achieve optimal growth and disease resistance. SFA's new Integrated Hatchery Support Programme will help local hatcheries adopt specialised feeds and quality vaccines that maximise the growth potential of the high quality fries or fingerlings. And this will be done through demonstration trials to build farm's confidence in investing in better quality input.
Together, the National Broodstock Centre, Hatchery Development and Recognition Programme and Integrated Hatchery Support Programme create a reinforced aquaculture value chain for both sea-based and land-based farms that improve fry quality, increase yields and sharpen competitiveness.
Our offtake programmes have been making progress for the food types that matter most to Singapore's food resilience – and we aim to do better. Central to this effort is the Singapore Agro-Food Enterprises Federation (SAFEF), which has become the critical demand aggregation engine that matches our farms' production capacity with local needs.
Ms Nadia Ahmad Samdin asked about the effectiveness of SAFEF's demand aggregation efforts. SAFEF has created sustainable brands like \"The Straits Fish\" and \"SG Farmers' Market\" now stocked in major supermarkets – FairPrice, Sheng Siong, Cold Storage and Giant, bringing local produce closer to the community. Public response has been encouraging. For example, the sales for xiao bai cai under the \"SG Farmers' Market\" brand have increased about sevenfold since its launch in May 2024.
We are expanding the demand aggregation model in 2026 with more product varieties and The Straits Fish marine tilapia ready-to-eat products. SAFEF will also partner more food and beverage (F&B) players to integrate SG Farmers' Market® product range in their menus. This effort aims to facilitate farms’ mainstream market penetration by connecting retail demands with a fragmented local farm supply chain. And this is just due to our small agriculture sector. In aggregated offtake programmes, we give farms the sales certainty they need to scale production. At the same time, supermarkets, hotels and caterers are given the confidence in a guaranteed reliable local supply for them to commit shelf space and marketing support.
The effectiveness of our Singapore Food Story also depends on our readiness to respond swiftly to disruptions. SFA is strengthening early warning systems to provide greater lead time for action. Our new risk monitoring dashboard and food supply visibility tool, developed with PSA BDP, provides early warnings of developments that may affect food imports and strengthens Singapore's upstream food supply chain visibility. This tool has already proven its value – it expedited our risk assessments during Brazil's Avian Influenza outbreaks in May last year and the recent conflict in the Middle East.
For aquaculture, we are upgrading our Harmful Algal Bloom Prediction Model to integrate forecasted weather conditions for more accurate environmental predictions. This will alert farms ahead of anticipated events so that they can implement mitigation measures like aeration or emergency harvests to minimise stock losses.
Together, these initiatives strengthen SFA's ability to assess, plan and mitigate supply disruption risks before they impact Singapore's food resilience. I thank Mr Foo Cexiang for his suggestions on our food pillars. Strong supply chain logistics are indeed a critical backbone for resilience. We will continue to work closely with relevant agencies and industry, including to consider your suggestions.
Chairman, building Singapore's food resilience requires all of us to move beyond individual interests and act with collective urgency. The Government will continue doing our part – be it investing in the ACT Fund 2, expanding the National Broodstock Centre, creating offtake programmes with SAFEF and strengthening early warning systems. But we cannot secure our food future alone.
I hope that businesses do more to support our local food production and our overall Singapore Food Story 2 efforts. Diversify your supply sources and commit to local production as a strategic buffer. Supermarkets should expand local produce shelf space, restaurants should join our Farm-to-Table Recognition Programme and food manufacturers should partner with SAFEF to develop local supply chains.
When you choose local suppliers, you are helping to invest in Singapore's food resilience that will protect your business during the next major disruption or major pandemic scenario. For consumers, your choices shape our collective resilience. Choose local produce even if it costs slightly more and be more flexible with our food choices during crises and shortages. That premium we pay for our local produce is our insurance for reliable food supply when things fail.
Chairman, our founding fathers understood that Singapore's survival depends on collective action over individual interests. As our founding Prime Minister often said, we must leave nothing to chance when it comes to Singapore's survival. Today, we apply that same principle to food resilience with the Singapore Food Story 2 – building comprehensive resilience through collective action, because our food future is too important to leave to chance alone.
The Chairman: Senior Parliamentary Secretary Goh Hanyan.
The Senior Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Sustainability and the Environment (Ms Goh Hanyan): Mr Chairman, climate adaptation can sound distant – something handled somewhere else by someone else. But in truth, it shows up in everyday life through the sudden downpour that disrupts your commute or the heat that lingers in your flat a little too long after sunset. These small but growing inconveniences tell us something important: the environment around us is changing and how we respond will shape how we live.
In simple terms, climate adaptation means getting ready for disruptions we know are coming. How can we help ourselves stay comfortable and stay safe as the climate shifts. For Singapore, this work is becoming more urgent. Yesterday, Minister Grace Fu announced, we are designating 2026 as our Year of Climate Adaptation. A year to increase awareness and bring everyone into the action.
At MSE, this reflects our unified approach to \"we first\". Everyone has a stake in how Singapore adapts and everyone has a role in making it work. Over the next few minutes, I will share how we are bringing this approach to life along our coasts, across our communities and in our daily action.
First, as a land scarce country, Singapore is vulnerable to rising seas. In simple terms, if we do nothing, each rise in sea level means less land for us.
We are already seeing some effects today. In January this year, spring tides flooded parts of East Coast Park, even without rain. This shows us that coastal flooding is not a distant future problem, it is happening now.
The Government has committed billions through the Coastal and Flood Protection Fund and this is a long-term investment measured in generations. At its core, coastal protection is about safeguarding land while supporting the way people and nature share our coasts. We see this in Singapore, where steel and concrete abut wilderness. I saw it myself when I joined a few nature group volunteers on an intertidal walk. Sea creatures like nudibranchs and sand dollars, right next to Tanah Merah ferry terminal.
We are speaking to communities about coastal protection measures and how they could be designed. This includes residents, businesses, researchers and nature groups, who all interact with our coast differently, yet care about it deeply.
I attended one of these sessions at Sungei Buloh Wetland Reserve, discussing coastal protection around mangrove habitats. The conversation was rich of perspectives, discussing trade-offs and exploring how we might combine coastal protection measures with public spaces.
One suggestion that emerged was transforming the Kranji Tidal Gatehouse into a viewing deck. We are listening and we are onboarding these views as we develop our coastal protection measures across Singapore. Because when people help shapes what protects them, protection becomes something shared rather than something imposed.
Second, with extreme weather events happening more often, I am very sure everyone has been caught in unexpected heavy storms. We continue upgrading our drains and infrastructure, but no city can plan and build its way out of every possible storm. For true resilience, we must all be empowered to protect ourselves. As Ms Poh Li San highlighted, businesses can take a step to protect their premises from flooding.
To help them understand what those steps may be, PUB worked with industry through an Alliance-for-Action to develop a Flood Resilient Developments Guidebook. The Guidebook will be launched in mid-2026 on PUB's website. It will help business owners assess their flood exposure through a Do-It-Yourself (DIY) Flood Risk Matrix and decide what protection measures they need for their properties. The guidance is practical and draws directly from industry experience.
Beyond what businesses can do, preparedness starts with each one of us. Look out for PUB's \"Get Flood-wise in a F.L.A.S.H.\" campaign or join their outreach events. Learn simple actions to keep yourself and your family safe during heavy rains or floods.
Ms Nadia would be glad that we are bringing preparedness to your doorstep. Our teams are visiting flood-prone areas, distributing portable flood barriers that you can set up quickly. We have already distributed over 16,000 of these barriers and are continuing throughout this year. Join us and act now by subscribing to PUB's flood alerts on Telegram, X or on the MyENV app.
Next, coastal and flood protection are important to keeping Singapore safe and liveable. An engaged community is what truly makes the difference. We are encouraged to see communities across Singapore coming forward, coming together with solutions to protect our environment and promote sustainability.
We are supporting your efforts through the SG Eco Fund. Since 2020, the SG Eco Fund has awarded over $21 million to support close to 500 initiatives, engaging over 700,000 individuals.
I am particularly excited about an SG Eco Fund project tackling indoor heat for seniors, a topic less understood and not talked about enough. HeatAware SG by Sustainable Living Lab puts sensors in homes to help seniors understand temperature build-up and gives timely cooling advice.
One senior who they worked with had never used fans, even on hot days, a habit brought over from kampong days. But imagine, with rising temperatures, this risks heat stroke. With simple monitoring and gentle prompts, seniors are now empowered with the information they need to stay safe when it gets too hot.
Ultimately, to adapt, we must first see clearly. When we understand what is changing around us, we can prepare. That is how societies successfully weather change.
Ms Hany Soh asked about expanding the SG Eco Fund's scope to support more ground-up action. As climate risks grow, we need more focussed action. So, we are aligned on that.
That is why I am announcing the Climate Adaptation Package under the SG Eco Fund. Starting 1 May 2026, we will commit up to $5 million over two years to fund projects, like HeatAware SG, that build awareness and inspire action on climate adaptation topics. These topics, include heat resilience, as Mr Ng Shi Xuan, Mr David Hoe and Ms Valerie Lee highlighted; flood protection, water conservation and supporting local produce. We will open applications all year-round and increase funding for supportable project costs from 80% to 90%.
Climate change can feel overwhelming. But we believe you can make a difference. If you have ideas, take advantage of the SG Eco Fund. We want to hear from you and we are here to support you to turn your ideas into reality. To our young people, your energy and your ideas are exactly what we need to build a resilient Singapore, one that you can inherit with confidence.
Mr Lee Hong Chuang would be heartened to know that we are also committed to empowering our young people in building resilience beyond our shores. The National Youth Council's Singapore-Association of Southeast Asia Nations (ASEAN) Youth Fund supports youth sustainability projects across Southeast Asia. They can also volunteer in sustainability projects overseas through the Youth Corps Expedition Project.
Finally, climate adaptation is also about daily behaviour – the habits we form, the choices we make and the responsibilities we all carry as individuals.
Let me now say a few words in Mandarin about the Beverage Container Return Scheme and how daily actions can drive sustainability.
(In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] Singapore is facing severe challenges brought about by climate change. We must seek better solutions to adapt to these changes. MSE hopes to encourage all sectors of society to work together with us to make sustainability a part of our daily lives.
The Beverage Container Return Scheme that Dr Janil Puthucheary mentioned yesterday is a good example. Starting next month, supermarkets, hawker centres, coffee shops and some retail outlets will gradually begin selling bottled and canned beverages that are printed or attached with the scheme's deposit mark.
To help consumers adapt to the scheme, local major supermarkets will uniformly adopt the following practices. The prices displayed on shelves will not include the 10-cent deposit. Supermarkets will clearly inform consumers that they need to pay an additional 10-cent deposit at checkout. Smaller retailers may adopt different pricing methods. We will continue to work with them to ensure that pricing for bottled and canned beverages remain clear and transparent.
After finishing the drinks, consumers can put the marked containers into reverse vending machines to retrieve the 10-cent deposit. SimplyGo EZ-Link cards and concession cards or DBS PayLah! can be used to retrieve the deposit. The new scheme will not only increase the recycling rates of beverage containers but also encourage Singaporeans to develop good recycling habits.
Before launching BCRS, we consulted F&B operators extensively and identified two feasible approaches for recycling containers. The first approach is to pour canned beverages into cups for customers to enjoy or to collect the container after consumers finish their drinks. In such cases, F&B operators will not charge customers the 10-cent deposit.
We will classify this category of operators as \"Return Right F&B\" merchants. These F&B operators will display notices in their stores to inform customers that they will not be charged a deposit. We understand that operators who choose to collect the containers themselves need to put in more effort to modify their work processes. To assist these operators, we will provide a one-time subsidy of $500 for each \"Return Right F&B\" outlet. Operators can submit their applications to the National Environment Agency (NEA).
The second approach is to charge customers who purchase canned beverages a 10-cent deposit. After finishing their drinks, customers can put the container into any reverse vending machine to retrieve their 10-cent deposit. This model will be more practical for most coffee shop and hawker centre stall owners.
Implementing and perfecting a new policy takes time. During this transition period, we seek the public's support and understanding. At the same time, we also welcome feedback and suggestions for our reference and improvement.
As long as we work together, we can all do our part to protect the environment.
(In English): Mr Chairman, climate adaptation is about preparing early and acting together. From coasts to floods to community action, each effort depends on all of us. This is how nations endure, by adapting together, preparing early and building for generations. The Government will continue investing for the long-term and we invite every Singaporean to be part of this effort. Because that is what \"we first\" means – a shared responsibility for a shared future. [Applause.]
The Chairman: Ms Poh Li San.
Ms Poh Li San (Sembawang West): Thank you, Speaker, and I thank the Minister, Senior Minister of State and also the Senior Parliamentary Secretary. I have a question for Senior Minister of State Dr Janil. I highlighted the expensive irony of food waste in Singapore and asked for MSE's plans and efforts to reduce food waste, and in his reply, Dr Janil mentioned only the Good Samaritan Food Donation Act. I would like to highlight that this Act was a Private Members' Bill led by former Member of Parliament Mr Louis Ng, Ms Hany Soh, Mr Edward Chia and myself, together with a large committee of green activists and stakeholders, through five years of consultation and ground-up efforts.
At an average of 128 kilogrammes of food waste per capita per year, and this is an increasing trend, Singapore ranks amongst the top 15 countries worldwide with highest food waste per capita. The restaurants and hotels alone are responsible for about 28% of food waste and that is a substantial proportion for a small group. I would like to ask Dr Janil, will there be further plans and efforts by MSE to reduce food waste and will there be more targeted collaboration with the restaurants and hotel sector to reverse the growing trend of food waste?
The Senior Minister of State for Sustainability and the Environment (Dr Janil Puthucheary): Sir, the short answer is, yes. We do indeed want to improve our food waste management and encourage all the stakeholders involved to participate. We have, as Ms Poh has highlighted, a number of mechanisms and platforms, as well as legislation in place. We would like to make sure those are fully utilised and continue to work with stakeholders to then study how we can improve the processes.
At the moment, we are focusing, in the news and in the House on other waste streams – plastics and packaging – but indeed, food waste is something that we do need to think very seriously about because of the opportunity that it presents in terms of reducing our wastage, improving our resource recycling and reducing the amount that is diverted towards waste and landfill.
The Chairman: Ms Hany Soh.
Ms Hany Soh (Marsiling-Yew Tee): Thank you, Chairman. I have two clarifications. The first is in relation to the Beverage Container Return Scheme. I understand from Senior Minister of State Dr Janil's speech yesterday that the \"Return Right\" F&B outlets will be given a specific decal to inform consumers about their plans. In this regard, I wish to ask whether the decals have already been distributed to all of these stakeholders and are we looking at implementing it by 1 April as well? And to further avoid any confusion among the patrons in the F&B outlets, can we explore having a centralised compiled list of these vendors and perhaps put it on MyENV app?
The second clarification is in relation to the SG Eco Fund. It is heartening to hear from the Minister that $50 million granted since November 2020 has engaged more than 700,000 people on sustainability related efforts. In this aspect, can I check whether we have also been keeping track in terms of the amount of the waste or energy and water resources that we have conserved through rolling out of this initiative through the SG Eco Funds? As I mentioned in my speech, it is important to actually measure to manage the outcomes.
Dr Janil Puthucheary: Sir, I thank Ms Hany Soh for her questions. The decals are available if the F&B outlets sign up to be part of the \"Return Right\" F&B scheme. I would not want Members to think that this has to be done by 1 April. Even after 1 April, an F&B outlet can choose to sign up.
But if it has not yet signed up and is not on the list as a \"Return Right\" F&B outlet, then they have an obligation to charge the 10-cent deposit for the 10-cent deposit to follow the container with the customer. Whoever has the container then has the responsibility to deal with it. So, the decals are available. We will be distributing them to outlets that sign up, either before 1 April or after.
The idea of a centralised list is something we can certainly look at and consider.
The Chairman: The clarifications are getting longer. The guillotine time is 11.30 am. Yes, Senior Parliamentary Secretary Goh.
Ms Goh Hanyan: To Ms Hany Soh's question about whether we measure the outcomes of SG Eco Fund. Today, we do not measure the outcomes in terms of the way that the Member has described, in terms of waste reduced or energy saved. However, we do track in terms of the number of applicants that come forward, the profile of the applicants and the quality of the projects that we get. This is mainly because the SG Eco Fund was started with the objective of empowering and to increase awareness of sustainability objectives. However, over time, as the fund evolves and matures, we could consider.
The Chairman: Mr David Hoe, for your two cuts and seven minutes.
Mr David Hoe (Jurong East-Bukit Batok): Thank you, Chairman. I have two clusters of question. The first is regarding the how of the climate adaptation plan, and second is about the Beverage Container Return Scheme.
The Minister mentioned yesterday that heat advisories will be sent out through the myENV app. I think that is really useful because most of us have a smart phone today. Yesterday, what I did was, after Parliament, I went to meet my grassroot leaders, in a room of more than 40 grassroot leaders, and I shared this with my grassroot leaders. Then, I asked, \"With a show of hands, how many of us actually have the myENV app?\" It was only a handful of grassroot leaders who downloaded this myENV app. So, I would like to ask, whether from MSE's point of view, do we know what is the current number of people who downloaded this app? What is our view to that?
After that, in my head, I was, \"Oh no, for those uncles and aunties 不认英文字怎么办?\" So, I started scrolling through the app and I tried to change the language setting to Mandarin —
The Chairman: Mr Hoe, can you get to your clarification? I just asked that everyone be precise.
Mr David Hoe: Okay. My question is whether the app itself has a multilingual feature so that our seniors or those who are not fully competent in English will be able to use this app.
On the second question regarding the Beverage Container Return Scheme, I am supportive of the recycling efforts and the deployment of 1,000 reverse vending machines (RVMs). I would like to clarify whether in areas in Clementi such as Faber Hills Estate, where it is a mixture of landed and densely populated condominiums with no large supermarkets, will there be a deployment of an RVM there? If the answer is not yet, would we consider prioritising condominiums that are densely populated such as The Trilinq and Parc Clematis in Clementi?
Dr Janil Puthucheary: Sir, if I could address the question on the RVMs first. Certainly, and I would ask Mr Hoe and all Members if there are specific locations that they think would be better served by an RVM, we do have a plan to double the number from the initial deployment and we are looking at feedback to decide where those RVMs should be placed.
We will also be looking at the usage patterns of the first 1,000 to help us understand where we would locate them. But if there are specific locations, we would be more than happy to consider them.
The Minister for Sustainability and the Environment (Ms Grace Fu Hai Yien): Thank you, Mr Chairman. I would like to respond to Member David Hoe's comment on heat advisories.
We have about one million subscribers who have downloaded the myENV app. Obviously, I think that is a lot more that we can do and we should encourage more Singaporeans to download it. The issues that Mr Hoe has mentioned about language accessibility is precisely what we like to hear from you during this engagement over the Year of Climate Adaptation.
Also, I would like to put on record my thanks to many Members who have given us very well thought-through, considered suggestions on how we should improve the heat resilience of the country. I think that these will be gold nuggets that we could incorporate into our adaptation plan.
The Chairman: Ms Lee Hui Ying, your three cuts in six minutes.
Ms Lee Hui Ying (Nee Soon): Thank you, Mr Chair. I just have two quick clarifications for Senior Minister of State Janil.
First, regarding the pilot that NEA is going through with the Town Councils on the surveillance camera deployments. Can I get further granular details in terms of the length of this pilot that is ongoing? How long would it be taking? How are these locations being identified for surveillance camera deployment?
Second, on second-hand smoke. I note the additional smoking prohibitions that are in place. I am just wondering whether NEA could consider AI-enabled technology to be used, especially on smoke detection as well.
Dr Janil Puthucheary: Sir, the nature of the pilot is that we are trying to empower the Town Councils to make some of those decisions about the location and the enforcement action that they would like NEA's assistance to support. It is a pilot to see how well this can work, but the intent is to make sure that, in working in partnership with the Town Councils, we increase the responsiveness to ground feedback and shorten the time cycle, increase the speed of the deployment and the potential enforcement action.
So, we are still studying and certainly we would be happy to work with Ms Lee and everyone else in terms of improving the responsiveness of NEA to the Town Councils' intelligence or sense-making, in order to do this better.
Certainly, AI-enabled technology is already being piloted together with some visual recognition technology for the purposes of detection of offences, such as Ms Lee had described.
The Chairman: Mr Ng Shi Xuan.
Mr Ng Shi Xuan (Sembawang): Thank you, Chairman. Just two quick remarks on my food resilience points.
The first being that I thank Senior Minister of State Zaqy for framing it from global partnerships to trusted partnerships. Will the Ministry consider giving us a report card on how these global partnerships have been different from our diversifying imports strategy besides going into specific details.
Point two is, while I made quite a pitch for plant-based and alternative proteins, I also note that 25% of Asia Pacific's alternative proteins are already based in Singapore. Can the Ministry make a commitment to make sure that our plant-based protein and alternative protein scene will somehow make its way back into the Singapore Food Story in the future, as I note that the National University of Singapore has some successful cases where they have created viable products for us?
Mr Zaqy Mohamad: I thank the Member for his questions. On alternative proteins, that is still in play. Although today, the market demand is not where one would have thought it would be, so there is a bit of challenge for those who are producing alternative proteins. But the Member is also right, that there are some who have pivoted to providing alternative proteins in other forms. We are still continuing to fund research and development (R&D) costs for a number of these outfits out here in Singapore.
We are seeing companies increasingly adopting, for example, business-to-business (B2B) partnership models rather than going to just market independently their own product. To give some examples, they work with food corporates to allow some of these startups to leverage existing manufacturing, distribution and brand capabilities. For example, they also provide cell-based seafood cultivation platforms like Umami Bioworks. They developed a joint-production agreement with the Japanese seafood producer Maruha Nichiro to develop and commercialise cell-cultivated tuna.
So, it is not that they are not viable or not feasible, just that cost-wise, I think the market is not yet ready for this at full scale. But I think there is certainly potential and we will continue to support.
On the Member's other question, which was on global partnerships, this is at a very nascent stage. As I have shared, we have only started signing some of these agreements last year. So, it is an evolution beyond just what we used to call \"grow overseas\".
Right now, with partnerships, you have a variety of things that you can do: government-to-government agreements. Some parts of it, like with Brunei, we are exploring how we could look at growing aquaculture, for example, as I mentioned in my speech; and with New Zealand, there are other types of agreements that we put in place. So, I think the global partnerships today allow us to do different things with different like-minded economies that will help us build our food resilience in times of crisis.
But do give us a bit of time because this is fairly nascent and new, but certainly, we will make a report when the time comes.
The Chairman: Mr Foo Cexiang, for your six-minute cut.
Mr Foo Cexiang (Tanjong Pagar): Mr Chairman, I just seek a response from the Ministry on my cut on supporting our Pioneer hawkers.
Ms Goh Hanyan: Mr Chairman, I thank Mr Foo for his clarification and I appreciate his engagement with our Pioneer hawkers in his constituency, which is an extremely important segment of our culture.
He raised questions and concerns about rental transition when family members take over pioneer hawker stalls. So, when a subsidised stall is transferred to an immediate family member of the first-generation subsidised rent-holder, we have a special provision to allow him or her to pay subsidised rental rate. However, for transfers to other family members and relatives, for example, third-generation relatives, we provide a reasonable timeframe of three years for the rent to be staggered from subsidised rent to market rent.
Mr Foo also raised a second point on allowing Work Permit holders as stall assistance for stalls operating over 10 years and this was somewhat addressed yesterday during Question Time as well. We recently expanded the pool to include Long-Term Visit Pass (LTVP) and LTVP+ holders who are already in Singapore and can contribute to our economy. This move was carefully considered to help ease manpower challenges while also preserving the local identity and heritage, and the complexion of our hawker centre and our hawker culture. We will monitor the impact because this is a very recent move and we will contemplate further moves if necessary.
The Chairman: Ms Nadia Samdin.
Ms Nadia Ahmad Samdin (Ang Mo Kio): Thank you, Chairman. I have three follow-up questions. The first is regarding food resilience and the initial plans for the Lim Chu Kang Agri-District. Could the Minister of State please elaborate on that.
The second, I am very glad to hear of the top-up to the ACT Fund. Does the Ministry track progress and utility of the funds dispersed and are there details of project closures or unsuccessful projects once disbursed?
The last one is on flood resilience. I am glad to hear about the plans to build community resilience. Could the Senior Parliamentary Secretary please elaborate, beyond the PUB SMS alert service, are there emergency rescue and evacuation drills that the PUB intends to carry out?
Mr Zaqy Mohamad: Thank you to the Member. Sir, I just want to assure the Member that the Lim Chu Kang masterplan, though I have not mentioned it in my speech, is pretty much still central to our master-planning – just that it is a bit more longer term and we were just focusing on what we are planning to do today. Nonetheless, we are still hard at work on it, with inter-agency planning, to look at how we can better optimise the land use, infrastructure needs as well as environmental considerations of how we can get this done a lot better.
At the same time, it is important that as we do master-planning, it is not just about infrastructure. There are also market aspects that we need to consider, such as market-sensing, technical studies, developing new concepts and ideas. You do not want just to build farms as you see them today, but farms of tomorrow. We are looking at, for example, multi-tenanted facilities that can make better use of shared services to help our farms survive, build more climate resilient facilities. This puts us on the map for new developments in future that we can also consolidate.
Also, I spoke about how we are looking at integrating some of the things like logistics, supply chain management. That, I think helps optimise land use and certainly facilities and shared services for our companies.
So, these are a bit more longer-term. In the meantime, I assure Members that our plans are still in play. For farms that need land, we are still providing our land use tenders, so, those will still continue.
Our ACT Fund, as I have announced, has just been expanded and enhanced. In short, we do track. In fact, as I announced earlier, we have funded about $55 million in the last few years under ACT 1, and that covers about 150 projects across 60 companies. Thus far, the numbers that have folded are very small – I think only about two out of 60, so that is about a 3% failure rate. For the most of it, we are seeing most of these farms providing higher yields, better production levels and producing what we need locally.
I assure Members that we are constantly tracking and doing our best to support our local farms.
Ms Goh Hanyan: Sir, to the Member's question, before that, I should also highlight that apart from the alerts that happen through the myENV app, we have also expanded our reach through new collaborations to ensure flood information reaches Singaporeans through multiple touch points such as, currently, the Electronic Road Pricing On-Board Units to disseminate flood alerts. This brings the information directly to our citizens.
In terms of emergency evacuation drills, PUB has been partnering with different communities. For example, I attended a session together with one of the Residents' Networks and Community Emergency and Engagement, that they organised to bring together citizens or their residents to understand what kind of plans should they put in place for their unique locales' needs; and from there, to generate and to create their own way of supporting their own neighbours and friends during a flood incident.
We are hoping to go out there and partner with more communities to activate them and to get them thinking about what to do during an emergency.
Finally, I should also add that we have then enhanced our flood monitoring capabilities through water level sensors and closed-circuit televisions so that PUB ourselves can deploy quick response teams as fast as possible in times of flood.
The Chairman: Mr Pritam Singh, even though you filed a very short cut, you have been putting up your hand persistently. You can ask the last clarification.
Mr Pritam Singh (Aljunied): Much obliged, Chairman. It is a quick one. In my cut, I asked about the metrics NEA uses to determine whether appointed public waste collectors should increase the frequency of collection from the larger recycling bins. I do not believe I heard a reply from Senior Minister of State Janil on that.
In concert with that, there was a trial that was announced in Parliament which NEA was undertaking with a public waste collector to evaluate the setting up of a recycling bin sensor system that would trigger when there is bin overflow. I understand that was delayed arising from COVID-19. I would be obliged if the Senior Minister of State could share what has been the result of that pilot.
Dr Janil Puthucheary: Sir, NEA specifies a minimum collection frequency of three times a week for the smaller blue bins and once a week for the larger-capacity 2,200-litre side-loader recycling bins in HDB estates. We also require our public waste collectors to clear the recyclables from the blue bins on a regular schedule, specifically so that the bins do not overflow and to attend to feedback within 24 hours. So, those are the metrics that we track.
We would also like to take this opportunity to ask all of us to play our part. If we use the blue bins correctly, do not discard rubbish there, then the likelihood of them overflowing and becoming an eyesore or a problem within our estates would reduce. The need for increased collections for what should be recyclables rather than waste would also reduce, and then the ability to recover the material for useable feedstock for recycling streams would also improve.
Mr Singh also asked a question about AI technology. The issue is to increase the specificity and sensitivity, so that we are not generating too many false positives or false negatives through this, and so that work is in progress.
The Chairman: Ms Poh Li San, could I invite you to withdraw your amendment?
Ms Poh Li San: Mr Chairman, on behalf of all hon Members who have participated in the MSE Committee of Supply, I would like to extend my heartfelt thanks to Minister Grace Fu, Senior Minister of State Zaqy, Senior Minister of State Janil, Senior Parliamentary Secretary Goh and all members of MSE, PUB, NEA, SFA.
Mr Chairman, I seek leave to withdraw my amendment.
[(proc text) Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. (proc text)]
[(proc text) The sum of $2,890,738,400 for Head L ordered to stand part of the Main Estimates. (proc text)]
[(proc text) The sum of $820,076,600 for Head L 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 T (Ministry of National Development)","subTitle":"A vibrant and sustainable home","sectionType":"OS","content":"The Chairman: Head T, the Ministry of National Development (MND). Mr Henry Kwek.
Mr Kwek Hian Chuan Henry (Kebun Baru): Chairman, I move, \"That the total sum to be allocated for Head T of the Estimates be reduced by $100.\"
Mr Chairman, in preparing for the Committee of Supply (COS), because MND touches on the lives of many Singaporeans, our Government Parliamentary Committee (GPC) has consulted widely with our people, with industry experts, with housing experts and we have come today to put forward some of our ideas. Let me start by providing an overview of what our GPC will say.
Deputy Chair Xie Yao Quan will share some ideas around the design of the Voluntary Early Redevelopment Scheme (VERS) programme. Member Liang Eng Hwa will call for MND to scale up on the Age Well neighborhoods and Community Care Apartments, and for added support for Town Councils as Town Councils cope with rising cost. Member Ang Wei Neng will talk about improving Build-To-Order (BTO) housing accessibility for singles, private estate residents and raising the income ceiling beyond $14,000.
Member Foo Cexiang will advocate for relaxing Housing and Development Board (HDB) flat purchase restrictions for Singaporeans with non-resident spouses and introducing a flexible short-lease scheme for seniors. Member Nadia Samdin will provide suggestions on how to improve the diversity of our housing topology and how we can improve our city in nature. Member Cai Yinzhou will speak about creating third spaces in communities, how we can reimagine homeownership for all, and how we can adapt HDBs to last longer beyond 99 years.
As for myself, I will speak on three areas. How we can make housing more accessible and affordable, ensuring we have enough homes and land to meet rising demand and how we can strengthen our built sector.
My first point is on increasing accessibility and affordability. Our aggressive housing build since COVID-19 has enabled first-time buyers, especially those with young families to get a new flat. Now that this critical group has their needs well met, it is time for us to consider how we can improve accessibility and affordability for others.
First, singles. I look forward to a timely policy move to lower the BTO flat eligibility age to, hopefully, 33 for singles.
Second, sandwiched-class families facing loan ineligibility issues. I have mentioned several times that these families earn too much for public rental, but they cannot secure loans due to a divorce or through past financial difficulties. They end up renting rooms in others' flats, paying near-mortgage sums or even more, building no asset and no security for their children.
I understand that if you unpack the needs of this group, actually it is driven by different factors. But I hope that MND can consider creating a targeted programme, like they did for fresh starts, where they can use a combination of policy instruments, whether it is structured HDB loans, Government-backed mortgage guarantees or long-term affordable rentals without requiring a waiting BTO?
The next group is multi-generational families who are downsizing from private estates. Some of these families want to stay together but can no longer afford private property due to family fragmentation, business failures or financial difficulty. If their net worth is comparable to typical HDB-dwelling families, can MND consider giving them access to 5-room BTOs immediately?
And fourth, large families. The recent BTO ramp-up has focused rightfully on smaller type flats. But with supply recovering, can MND ensure that the 5-room pipeline keeps pace with this demand?
Fifth, income ceiling. The income ceiling has not kept pace with rising wages and property, especially condominium prices. Many capable Singaporeans who do well might want to have a reasonable cost of living, especially against a backdrop of uncertainty in employment in the future, and they want a HDB rather than a condominium. Can MND conduct a timely review?
Sixth, more executive condominiums (ECs) and more affordable ECs. ECs currently receive a housing grant of up to $30,000. I hope we can do more, but simply upping the grant may not help if the developers simply adjust the prices upward. Therefore, if the Government is prepared to do more, I hope we can also include other measures like extending our minimum occupation period (MOP) or introducing profit-sharing mechanisms upon resale before MOP.
Moving beyond HDB, we should also pay attention to the many ageing private condominiums. Many of these older development condominiums face insufficient sinking funds and outdated infrastructure. I hope MND can consider providing targeted support where there is funding assistance for lift replacements, upgrading or maintenance, or providing funds for senior-friendly upgrades. MND should also ensure Management Corporations Strata Title (MCSTs), moving forward, set adequate reserves early and review how MCSTs are governed.
My second point is to ensure that we build enough homes, but more importantly, we must find enough land. I am delighted that MND intends to sustain aggressive build schedules that has continued since COVID-19. Because if we relaxed BTO criteria, as what I have argued, demand will rise. And beyond this policy-driven demand, our underlying demand is also rising. Just look around, you are seeing more family fragmentations, more Singaporeans living longer, more singles.
And critically, supply confidence matters as much as supply itself. During COVID-19, fear of waiting triggered more panic-buying. Ample, visible supply is therefore self-stabilising. I support MND's commitment to maintain a ready stock of flats.
But the harder question is land. Where are we going to find the land? Today, we already devoted 15% of our land to housing, and this is against other competing demands for our small island state. And this 15% does not even include the infrastructure, the parks, the roads and the shops within the housing estates. So, finding new land is not trivial. And there is only, I think, three answers.
One is to build higher, beyond 40 and 50 storeys. But this is also a significant shift. It means more lift lobbies, higher-specification lifts, more stringent fire safety requirements, higher lift maintenance that Town Councils must bear, and I certainly hope that MND can help with that cost. So, building higher has its consequences. It cannot be rolled out too fast, too aggressively.
The second way is beyond building higher is that we must find more land to be freed up, and we must be very candid with this trade-off. If we are determined to keep housing accessible and affordable, then that same determination must also be matched by our willingness to identify and release suitable greenfield and brownfield sites in a timely manner.
As a Member of Kebun Baru, bordering the Central Nature Reserve, I have seen, in person, how carefully MND engages conservation groups and residents when land, greenfield sites is being freed. For example, when I first became a Member of Parliament (MP), there was this area within my estate, Teachers Estate, it is a whole greenfield site, that was being transformed to the Lentor Hills development area today.
The MND officers and I went on 23 engagements. We consulted experts, we talked to different groups of people and got everybody's comfort before we proceeded with development. And my personal experience showed that MND has struck the right balance. So, I hope we have the determination to find more land to build more.
But at the same time, as we free up more land, we must also actively replace the lost greenery through new parks, ecological corridors and sustained tree-planting. I recall that the Million Trees campaign, I believe during COVID-19, former-MND Minister Desmond planted the first tree in Botanic Gardens, and then the first row of trees started in Kebun Baru in Avenue 4, just in front of our Community Centre. So, I hope that this Million Trees campaign showed what is possible, and as we build more homes, I hope MND and the National Parks Board (NParks) can consider a follow-up effort, maybe the next Million Trees campaign, so that housing growth and greenery growth can continue together.
Finally, future land supply must also come from VERS. For VERS to succeed, fair compensation and accessible financing are essential. Speaking to residents recently, one suggestion came up consistently. HDB should offer residents, especially those above 50, the option of a same room-type replacement flat with perhaps a shorter lease, so they do not need to find cash to top-up for a new flat. This would increase support for VERS so that we can free up more land.
My final part is about the built sector and MND being pro-enterprise. Over the next few years, construction spending is projected to exceed $50 billion. We are powering ahead with Terminal 5, I think we are expanding on the Marina Bay Sands, there is a lot of underground and Mass Rapid Transit (MRT) construction and more HDBs. And this $50 billion will be for two years before tapering to around $40 billion.
This coincides with continued tightening of foreign manpower policies. A challenging combination, especially if we want to keep manpower and construction costs manageable. Therefore, I welcome an update from MND on how our digitisation and productivity efforts, particularly building information modelling adoption and pre-fabrication are progressing.
Lastly, let me talk about MND being pro-enterprise. At the Building and Construction Authority (BCA) Conference in January this year which I attended, Minister Chee signalled that MND would work with the industry to streamline its processes and be more pro-enterprise. Among the participants, I noted that his remark was very well received. So, can MND give a preview of this plan about how MND can be more pro-enterprise?
In conclusion, MND oversees a wide and diverse portfolio, from housing to greenery, animal welfare to construction to urban planning. What unites these responsibilities is that they shape the daily lives of Singaporeans – the homes we return to, the parks we walk in and the neighbourhoods we build our future in.\tI thank the officers of MND and its agencies for their dedication and for making Singapore the best home today and tomorrow.
[(proc text) Question proposed. (proc text)]
The Chairman: Mr Pritam Singh, you may take your three cuts together.
Mr Pritam Singh (Aljunied): Members of the House would have come across many young Singaporean couples looking forward to starting a family and buying their first HDB BTO flat, but for one reason or another are unable to do so or unable to secure a flat of their choice.
For some, they are unable to do so arising from the income ceiling imposed by HDB, currently set at $14,000 for a couple looking for a BTO flat, with $16,000 set as the ceiling for ECs.
While the HDB resale market does not impose any income ceiling, Singaporeans, in general, and young families in particular, remain concerned about lease decay, retirement adequacy and, in many cases, missing out on the taxpayer subsidies that come with BTO flat purchases. At the same time, for the new generation of Singaporeans, the property escalator of their parents' generation has become a Singapore story of the past. Many wage earners cannot aspire like their parents did in the context of moving from a HDB flat to a condominium and to a landed property.
HDB flats will continue to house the majority of Singaporeans, with the financial commitment of new private homes, in particular, including ECs, representing a more significant financial outlay than ever before. Significantly though, a new reality is setting in for newer generations of Singaporeans. The jobs environment for young people and middle-aged workers is increasingly unpredictable and uncertain.
Today, younger and middle-aged, Singaporeans are concerned about being made redundant by the rapid advance of technology and job redesign. For those who seek to purchase HDB BTO flats, these realities factor into their thinking when they consider property purchases, which have to be financed for the long term. A couple's combined income may be on the higher end or even surpassed the income ceiling threshold to varying degrees today, but that may not be so tomorrow. This is especially so if a spouse loses their job or decides to dedicate his or her life to raising children or looking after aged parents.
In the last few years, HDB has introduced a number of policy levers to make BTO flats more affordable, partly arising from galloping resale prices. One example is the subsidy clawback regime which started at around 6% and is now at 14% for some BTO developments. The other is the extension of the MOP. There is at least one HDB scheme that imposes an MOP of 20 years although this scheme is one that transits rental home dwellers to a HDB flat on a longer lease.
In view of these levers, would HDB consider allowing a first-timer couple who exceed the income eligibility threshold to, nonetheless, be given the option of purchasing a BTO flat? Even as the income eligibility criteria would be adjusted regularly for the majority of buyers, this would effectively remove the income eligibility ceiling for a small category of buyers. To ensure fairness, should this first-timer couple seek to purchase such a BTO flat, these flats can be encumbered with one or more additional requirements, such as: the purchase ought to be restricted to the first matrimonial home, requiring an age cap of either spouse to be 35 years and below; including a longer MOP than that set out for that particular category of BTO flats be they Plus, Prime or Standard; and/or include an additional subsidy clawback mechanism.
To this end, Sir, can the Minister also share how many appeals it has received from first-time applicants who sought to purchase a BTO flat but could not do so because of the income eligibility ceiling for each year from 2020 to 2025? With eight out of 10 Singaporean households covered by the existing income ceiling, the provision of an additional option to buy a new BTO flat with encumbrances to first-time young Singaporeans is unlikely to require the construction of a significantly larger number of BTO flats than it is already planned. However, it can give significant peace of mind to some Singaporeans for whom the jobs environment of the future is less certain that it was for previous generations of Singaporeans.
In 2004, the HDB introduced the Facade Repairs Co-payment Scheme where HDB would fund facade-related repairs and reimburse Town Councils for repair works done to damaged facade of HDB blocks. This was increased to 75% for blocks with brick cladding and some metal fixtures under a special enhancement programme that runs from 2023 to 2028 for blocks with a higher risk of facade failure.
However, water seepage that emanates from the block facade into a resident's unit is not covered by any co-funding scheme. As the HDB stock continues to age, the prospect of water seepage, especially from the facade of older blocks, anecdotally appears to be on the rise. Would HDB reach out to assist Town Councils through the Facade Repairs Co-payment Scheme to allow for the inclusion of claims to be made for water seepage cases that originate from the block facade?
On 10 January 2026, on the back of public concerns about rising commercial rents, HDB announced, amongst other things, that successful bidders for any HDB shops would have to commit to their tendered rates for over two tenancy terms totalling six years instead of one three-year term to encourage prudent bidding.
Taken together, these moves may contribute to more prudent bidding although it remains open to question what impact it would have on shops located in areas of high footfall.
The majority of HDB shops are in private hands, 8,500 compared to 7,000 rented out by the HDB. For a subset of the shops, namely coffee shops, HDB acknowledges that some lessees may impose high mark-up rentals on individual stallholders even as the rent paid by these operators to HDB have remained largely unchanged or stable.
I called on HDB to make public sublet rental information in October 2025. The HDB's announcement of 10 January 2026 indicates that the HDB has committed to collect data on stall rents charged by operators before it determines how the data can be made available publicly.
I would suggest that all HDB commercial rentals, including, if sublet, ought to be made reportable and published on an easily accessible central portal or platform. While the majority of HDB commercial properties are in private hands with the basic details of current rental rates available elsewhere, it would not be difficult for HDB to provide this information on the same centralised portal. This would give market players and new entrants, particularly small businesses an easy reference point and a clear-eyed perspective on their rental-related business decisions in the HDB commercial space, regardless of whether the landlord is HDB or a private owner.
Mr Azhar Othman (Nominated Member): In light of recent incidents regarding dissatisfaction with rising rental prices, I propose that a council, like the Public Transport Council, an independent regulatory Statutory Board and in this case, under MND, be established to monitor rental rates in the market. This initiative will provide the public with assurance that effective measures are being taken to address rental issues faced by fellow Singaporeans.
Additionally, council members will be positioned to identify potential money laundering activities, particularly in cases of unusually high rental payments. Currently, it is generally acceptable for rental prices to increase between 3% and 15%. Any growth beyond this range should be reviewed closely and carefully before a decision being made to approve or disallow to proceed.
The Chairman: Mr Louis Chua, you may take your two cuts together.
Mr Chua Kheng Wee Louis (Sengkang): Chairman, at the COS debates back in 2023 and the debate on the HDB (Amendment) Bill in the same year, I raised my concerns about the uneven distribution of hawker centres and coffee shops across Singapore. Fast forward to 2026, Sengkang finally had its own hawker centres, with Buangkok opening in 2023 and Anchorvale Village in 2024. With the completion of Rivervale Shores, the entire Rivervale division with 18,000 or so households finally had more than one coffee shop.
The MND shared in an earlier COS response that most residents can access commercial facilities with a food court or an eating house within 400 metres from their homes or an approximately five to 10 minutes' walk. The question then is, what is the percentage of residents that have to travel more than 400 metres to access a food court or an eating house?
While I appreciate that new BTO projects do contain retail and F&B options, there remains spanning neighbourhoods within and outside that do not. A case in point is the value meals at Southwest Project that was launched in March 2025 which aimed to place 80 vending machines in heartland locations for residents to purchase. Subsequently, such vending machines were also installed in Punggol and to quote Deputy Prime Minister Gan, he hoped to deploy more such vending machines across Punggol for the convenience of our residents.
In Sengkang, after the projected period of working with the HDB and external vendors, we finally have hot-food vending machines, cafes, across three locations: at 108 Rivervale Walk, 188C Rivervale Drive and 288B Compassvale Crescent. I am grateful for the vendor, which is a replacement vendor after the initial vendor pulled out, for the commitment to the project despite the various challenges faced, chief of which is uncertainty around demand and the high fixed and overhead cost incurred.
Rather than the ad hoc projects being introduced in Punngol, Sengkang or any other town, I hope the HDB can consider a large-scale tender of multiple sites across HDB towns to ensure that affordable and accessible meals are available to all residents across Singapore, especially those which currently do not have a food court or an eating house within 400 metres from their homes. This would then provide for sufficient economies of scale for would-be operators, allowing them to have greater business sustainability and visibility. Moreover, any incremental rental revenue derived by HDB should not be a primary consideration, given that the physical footprint of a vending machine is small and the vacant void deck space would not have been revenue-generating in the first place. Hence, there is no issue of opportunity cost for HDB.
I urge the MMD to consider extending similar initiatives island-wide, similar to how it has piloted the Pick Locker Network island wide across HDB void decks for the convenience of all residents. Affordable food access should not depend on which district one lives in.
Chairman, the price of ECs in Singapore has skyrocketed in the past 10 years. ECs are touted as a more affordable option for young couples who desire to purchase a private condo but not have the means to do so. Understandably, the price per square foot for an EC will be higher than a resale HDB flat. Well, I will argue that the prices today have become too expensive to service the original intention.
As ECs were slated as a more premium yet affordable public-private hybrid for prospective buyers, its premiums can be compared to the resale market for HDB flats. In 2016, the average per square foot price for a resale HDB flat stood at approximately $424, and approximately $782 for an EC in 2016. This is roughly an 84% difference. In 2021, the resale HDB flat per square foot price stands at $488 versus $1,176 for an EC, a 141% difference. Coming to 2024, a resale HDB flat is approximately $603 per square foot and $1,531 for an EC, a 154 % difference. These numbers would differ, of course, based on the type of neighbourhood that the HDB flats and ECs are located. Well, for the sake of comparison, they do serve as a useful broad basis for comparison.
The difference is even more stark in absolute terms. If we look at the average price of a new EC in 2016, this stood at around $860,000 versus $439,000 for a resale HDB flat, a difference of around $421,000. Fast forward to 2025, the average price of a new EC is $1.7 million compared to $652,000 for a resale HDB flat, a difference of more than $1 million.
When the EC housing scheme was introduced in 1996, then-MND Minister Mr Lim Hng Kiang stated that the sharp increases in private property prices in the last few years had again created a sandwiched class of young people who are beyond HDB's income ceiling, but who cannot afford private property.
Firstly, I do not know of many young people who can afford an EC, especially when the average price stands at a whopping $1.7 million and the statistics show for it. From 2021 to 2025, only four in 10 EC purchases were first-timers. Even so, I reckon one has to have access to the deep pockets of one's parents if one is lucky, without which a first-timer will find it very challenging to fork out the downpayment required to afford the EC in the first place.
Moreover, the irony is that based on current financing rules, young people who are currently unable to afford an EC are deemed to be able to afford and purchase and even higher price private condominium. This is because the ECs are subject to a 30% mortgage servicing ratio while private condominiums are only subject to the 55% total debt servicing ratio.
At a prevailing household income ceiling of $16,000 per month, prospective EC buyers will be able to secure a loan of close to $1 million based on an mortgage servicing ratio of 30%. This would mean a shortfall of just over $700,000 based on the price of an average EC today. However, the same household will be able to secure a loan of close to $1.28 million, leaving a smaller shortfall of just over $400,000 should they choose to purchase a private condominium instead.
Other than simply giving more grants, two other simple solutions are to raise the mortgage servicing ratio, which would enable households to take on higher mortgage to finance a property and to increase the monthly household income ceiling to allow more buyers into the market. However, it does not address the fundamental issue of affordability since the price of the EC itself will not be impacted. Perversely, these may even result in an even higher increase in EC prices, given the wider pool of buyers now available.
Chairman, given the increasing unaffordability of ECs in the markets today, I urge the MND to seriously re-think the current EC model and to consider upstream policies to bring the price of ECs into a range that will suit their original intentions. With affordability and equitable access being key tenets to underpin the new EC model.
Ms Sylvia Lim (Aljunied): Sir, HDB's mission is stated as providing affordable quality housing and a great living environment where communities thrive. That mission has become increasingly complicated as Singaporean households take on different structures and HDB needs to assess how to apportion taxpayer subsidies and grants in a myriad of different situations. Some form families later in life, others prioritise multi-generational caregiving, all while following life and career paths that are not always linear.
One area that I wish to raise for review is the imposition of the MOP on non-owners that is on the listed occupiers of a flat. Such a policy can cause hardship to families in certain situations. For instance, a widowed or divorced middle-aged parent may want to downsize and decides to purchase a subsidised 3-room flat, listing an unmarried adult child as an essential occupier. Under HDB's policies, the MOP period will apply to both owners and occupiers alike. In the case of standard flats, the MOP is five years, while for the Plus and Prime flats, it is 10 years.
Such a restriction on the unmarried adult children who are only occupiers will restrict their life choice. If they later meet a life partner but defer marriage for another five to 10 years, this could take them out of their critical child-bearing years. Singapore is facing a critically low total fertility rate of 0.87, way below the replacement level of 2.1. Our housing policy should not inadvertently discourage younger Singaporeans who wish to start families.
Sir, the policy objective of the MOP to reduce speculation in the public housing market is an entirely understandable and laudable one. But as family structures and life courses of Singaporeans become more diverse, our public housing policies need to be responsive to such lived realities. I urge the Ministry to continue to consider how existing rules and frameworks can be better refined to align with these diverse aspirations of Singaporeans.
Mr Cai Yinzhou (Bishan-Toa Payoh): We stand at an inflection point. As HDB supply ramps up to meet demand, we must move beyond merely providing \"roofs over heads\" to refining the inclusivity of our social compact. I ask the Ministry for clarity on how it will prioritise five key areas.
First, the middle-income squeeze. With median households crossing $12,000, many young couples are trapped – ineligible for BTO or Parenthood Provisional Housing Scheme (PPHS) support, yet priced out of the resale market. Is it time to recalibrate income ceilings to reflect today's wage realities?
Second, on mobility for right-sizers. The 15-month wait-out period was a necessary cooling measure, but for families and citizens in life transitions, it remains a blunt instrument. Can we move toward a more nuanced, case-based approach to facilitate downsizing?
Third, on the aspirations of singles. Many young Singaporeans are pursuing non-traditional life paths. Will the Government weigh the call to lower the BTO eligibility age from 35, allowing them to anchor their futures earlier?
Fourth, Singaporeans with foreign spouses often face more restrictive pathways to home ownership. Housing stability for these families in a globalised environment is a matter of long-term domestic stability for our own citizens.
Finally, our single unwed parents face the steepest climbs, longest waits and fewer grants. I ask the Ministry to consider a more sympathetic prioritisation based on the child's age and to equalise subsidies so that every child, regardless of family structure, starts life in a secure environment. Let us dare to imagine a Singapore where affordable housing is not just available to some, but truly accessible, at the right price and the right size, for all.
The Chairman: Mr Fadli Fawzi, please take your two cuts together.
Mr Fadli Fawzi (Aljunied): Mr Chairman, I want to propose improving pathways for home ownership for households currently living in rental flats. The Prime Minister, in his Budget debate round-up speech, mentioned the importance of enabling Singaporeans to accumulate assets. As he said, asset ownership gives families a concrete stake in our nation's success and allows them to share directly in Singapore's progress.
Imagine a family of five in a rental flat. The parents work multiple jobs. The children study diligently. Month after month, they pay subsidised rent but build nothing – no home equity, no assets to pass down. This is a reality for thousands of families in Singapore. In 2020, Parliament heard that only 2% of public rental households transition to home ownership at each year. For a nation where 90% own their homes and home equity makes up over half of household wealth, families living in rental flats need a leg-up on the ladder of opportunity.
Apart from rental flat to home ownership, from shelter to security and from surviving to thriving. First, I am proposing that the Ministry focus on helping more rental households achieve home ownership.
In May 2021, then-Minister Desmond Lee shared in a Parliamentary response that only 2% of rental households transition to home ownership each year. For those who do make this transition, this journey takes considerable time. Over a third takes more than 10 years. Another third, take between five and 10 years. A further third managed it in under five years, while fewer than one in 10 succeed within three years.
I am hopeful that these numbers have improved since then, thanks to enhancements made to programmes like the Enhanced Housing Grant, the Step Up CPF Housing Grant and the Fresh Start Housing Scheme. I also recognise the dedicated efforts of the HDB Home Ownership Support Team and the coordinated support provided through ComLink+ across multiple agencies.
In this regard, I would like to ask the Minister: what targets has the Minister set to increase the number of rental households transitioning to home ownership for each year, up to 2030? And what strategies is the Ministry pursuing to shorten the time it takes for families to move from public rental housing into their own homes?
My second proposal is a shared equity pilot programme to help families achieve home ownership sooner. Right now, families may want to buy a home and may meet key social agency assessments, but they are stuck because they cannot afford the cash or Central Provident Fund (CPF) down payment. Even with HDB grants, it takes years of steady work and savings to build up that initial sum for down payment. During this time, families miss out getting on the home ownership ladder and building equity.
The pilot will target young families, 35 and under, currently in rental housing, as well as young adults in public rental flats who apply for another rental unit when they start their own families. The Government would step in as co-owner, holding perhaps 20% equity in the flat, and instead of the standard down payment, the buyer would only need to put down 2% in cash or CPF, a much lower barrier to entry. This will reduce both the upfront cost and the loan needed.
The family still pays monthly mortgage instalments, just like any homeowner. Over time, as their finances improve, they can buy back the Government's share in stages. If they eventually sell the flat, the Government receives its percentage of the sale price.
Unlike rent-to-purchase models, this approach lets families own a new home and build assets early. Alternatively, can HDB consider redirecting the rental payments of these households towards offsetting the cost of the new flat if they want to buy it?
Sir, my goal is simple. We must help yet more young families from challenging backgrounds break the cycle of rental housing and participate actively in building stable home ownership, valuable equity and long-term wealth alongside Singapore's growth.
A study conducted, between October 2023 and April 2024, found that senior households where the decision-maker is aged 65 and above now form one-third of all HDB households, up from one quarter in 2018.
This is a significant demographic shift. At the same time, 85.9% of senior households wish to continue living in their existing flats rather than move. They want to age in place. The number of single person households is increasing. In 2023, 15.6% of the 1.1 million households living in HDB flats were single person households, up from 12.6% in 2018.
In absolute terms, this is more than 30,000 additional solo households in just five years. Many of these are seniors living alone. We must understand what this means in practical terms.
Most of today's seniors are baby boomers born between 1946 and 1964. They would have married in their mid-20s and moved into new flats in the 1970s. These flats are now close to 50 years old.
Entire towns, such as Bedok, Ang Mo Kio and Marine Parade, reflect this reality – mature estates with ageing flats and ageing residents with more and more living alone. As these seniors age alongside their homes, they must cope with ageing electrical systems, plumbing issues, worn fittings and outdated appliances. This is something that I have seen first-hand during house visits in my constituency.
While the Enhancement for Active Seniors (EASE) programme and the Home Improvement Programme (HIP) exist to help seniors stay safe and mobile at home, the programme only provide subsidies rather than cash support to help seniors continue living safely and comfortably in their older flats.
Moreover, even if the repairs might not be a major cost from our perspectives, it can be a moderate burden that weighs heavy on the minds of our seniors living alone.
Some may argue that if seniors wish to continue ageing-in-place, but do not have the cash to afford the renovations needed, they can monetise their flats through renting out rooms or through the Lease Buyback Scheme (LBS), but these schemes are primarily meant to supplement retirement income and medical expenses.
In particular, the LBS is irreversible. Seniors should not be put in a position where they need to consider monetising their homes just to afford basic repairs.
I would like to ask the Government to consider providing targeted cash support for any seniors living in older, smaller flats who may face difficulties paying for repairs under EASE or HIP. This will help seniors ageing-in-place, especially those who are living alone, without any next of kin to support them financially or mentally – to do so with dignity, safety and basic comfort.
The Chairman: Mr Liang Eng Hwa, you may take your two cuts together.
Mr Liang Eng Hwa (Bukit Panjang): Sir, Singapore will be a \"super-aged\" country this year. The key challenge before us is not simply longevity, but quality of life, ensuring that our seniors can age well, age with active social life and healthy living within their own communities.
The Prime Minister announced the \"Aged Well Neighbourhoods\" at last year's National Day Rally to support seniors who prefers to age at home, where there are high senior populations. The aim is to enable seniors to age with dignity within their communities, offering services like home fixes, health checks, social activities while staying integrated, not isolated.
Features, such as barrier-free access, therapeutic gardens, senior-friendly wayfinding, fitness corners with low-impact equipment and co-location of health and social services are meaningful improvements. I welcome MND's plans to redesign our older estates so that seniors can age comfortably in place and to remain active and socially connected.
Toa Payoh will be among the first town to have Age Well Neighbourhood and I look forward to Minister sharing the broader implementation plan across the island. Can I also ask the Minister to share how is MND working with the Ministry of Health and the Ministry of Social and Family Development (MSF) to integrate community care, active ageing centres and primary care services within these neighbourhoods?
Beyond physical infrastructure, ageing-in-place also depends on social infrastructure. Seniors who remain socially connected tend to enjoy better health outcomes. I hope MND can elaborate on how town design will facilitate inter-generational interactions, for example, through shared community spaces, programming nodes and proximity to childcare centres or schools.
Second, on Community Care Apartments. Community Care Apartments are an important innovation in public housing. They integrate senior-friendly design with care services, communal spaces and emergency response systems. Demand has been encouraging and many seniors appreciate the combination of independence and support.
In Bukit Panjang, we are seeing growing interest among seniors who wish to right-size from larger flats while remaining near their children and social networks. Many value the familiar environment and established amenities. So, may I ask the Minister: what is the projected supply of Community Care Apartments over the next five years? How does MND assess demand across different towns and how quickly can supply be ramped up, if take-up remains strong? Will future Community Care Apartments explore more flexible care packages to cater to seniors with differing levels of needs?
As our population ages, housing policy must evolve alongside healthcare and community care systems. The goal should be to create neighbourhoods where seniors can transition seamlessly across stages of ageing – from independent living, to supported living, to higher levels of care – without needing to uproot themselves from their familiar surroundings.
In this regard, the integration of Age Well Neighbourhoods and Community Care Apartments presents a holistic model. One strengthens the broader environment; the other provides targeted housing solutions. Together, they can anchor a comprehensive ecosystem for ageing-in-place. I look forward to the Minister's responses.
Sir, I wish to declare my interest as the Coordinating Chairman for the PAP Town Councils.
Even as we continue building new BTO flats, a growing proportion of our HDB stock is ageing. In the coming years, more flats will cross the 30-year mark. With ageing estates come higher maintenance demands, not just more frequent repairs, but more complex and costly rectification works.
Town Councils are facing sustained cost pressures on multiple fronts.
First, municipal contract costs have risen sharply. Tender prices for conservancy services have increased significantly. In one recent renewal, bids were up to 86% higher than the previous contract. Contractors have cited higher labour costs from the Progressive Wage Model, higher foreign worker accommodation costs and tighter operating conditions.
Other essential services have also seen steep increases. For example, pest control costs for crows, pigeons and rodents have trended upwards. Horticulture contracts have risen by as much as 60% and seepage repair costs by up to 32%.
Sir, these are not discretionary works. They are core services necessary to keep estates safe, clean and liveable.
Second, beyond the rising cost trend, ageing infrastructure also requires heavier intervention. While programmes by MND, such as the HIP and Neighbourhood Renewal Programme, have been extremely helpful, the bulk of day-to-day estate maintenance remains the responsibility of Town Councils. Works, such as external wall seepage repairs, lift maintenance and upgrading, re-roofing, external rewiring, replacement of lighting systems and structural and façade rectification, are becoming more frequent and more intensive. Town Councils are also concerned about the long-term maintenance implications of the Pneumatic Waste Conveyance System.
While there was initial subsidy support, this is not intended to be permanent. So, over time, operating and maintenance costs will have to be absorbed within Town Council's budgets. These cumulative pressures inevitably impact Town Councils' finances and, in turn, will have a bearing on the service and conservancy charges (S&CC) paid by residents.
The Government has been providing substantial support, about $240 million annually, through grants, such as the S&CC Operating Grant, the Lift Maintenance Grant and the Lift Replacement Fund Matching Grant. In 2023, MND also introduced a time-limited special funding to help cushion cost increases and moderate S&CC adjustments. That support was very helpful, but it has since expired.
So, on behalf of the People's Action Party (PAP) Town Councils, I thank MND and HDB for this significant support. Without which, S&CC would have been higher. But notwithstanding that, I would still like to appeal for further review of the funding framework.
First, because given that the cost increases arising from the Progressive Wage Model and regulatory changes are structural rather than cyclical, will MND consider reviewing the baseline quantum of S&CC Operating Grant to reflect new cost realities? Second, can MND study whether additional support can be provided for estates with a higher proportion of ageing blocks, where maintenance intensity is clearly higher? Third, regarding the Progressive Wage Credit Scheme, can MND provide clarity on the long-term cost-sharing model and whether transitional funding will be available?
Chairman, Town Councils are committed to maintaining clean, safe and well-managed estates. Residents rightly expect high standards, but S&CC must also remain affordable, especially for lower- and middle-income households.
Sir, before I end, can I also ask the Minister something that he spoke about last August, about HIP II? He mentioned that HIP II would be more extensive. So, could I ask the Minister to share more details on the scope, the scale and the implementation timeline of HIP II?
Mr Xie Yao Quan (Jurong Central): The Minister said recently, in response to Parliamentary Questions, that VERS should not create a \"lottery effect\" nor end up becoming a wealth-generating programme for affected homeowners.
Today, I would like to advocate for an opposite point. While VERS should not create a windfall for affected homeowners, it should also not short-change them. All affected homeowners should get a fair deal, fair compensation, from VERS.
Flats acquired under VERS will be 70 years or older generally. In other words, with leases of 29 years or less remaining. The market value of these leases will be modest and may well turn out to be insufficient to match the price or market value of a replacement flat that is completely new, of similar type and with lease covering the affected homeowner until at least 95 years old.
In such a scenario, affected homeowners would ordinarily have to make a cash top-up. But this is hardly ideal for affected homeowners who are most probably senior, no longer working and decumulating wealth to fund retirement life.
So, I urge the Ministry to consider making the baseline VERS deal, the baseline VERS compensation package, one in which an affected homeowner will not need to top up cash for a new replacement flat. This, in turn, effectively means that the Government may have to come in and subsidise the cash top-up for affected homeowners instead. And obviously, such a subsidy, such a scheme, will require the Government to utilise more fiscal resources than what is needed to simply acquire property leases at market value. The Government will effectively have to pay a premium beyond market value to achieve fairness for current, affected homeowners.
What would be a fair size to this subsidy? What would be a fair valuation of fairness to current, affected homeowners? The Government will need to use sound and consistent principles for such an exercise, to justify the higher public spending that this implies.
One plausible principle, to my mind, is that there is simply a fair cost to orderly urban renewal, beyond the cost of property. There is a cost to relocating lives, resettling lives, especially because it may well be involuntary for some even if it is voluntary for most. The Government is already paying market value for leases under the Lease Buyback Scheme to homeowners who remain in situ, in their current properties. It stands to reason that there should be additional costs crystalised and compensated for relocation, for resettlement. In this way, the Government will be fair to all homeowners.
Mr Cai Yinzhou: Diminishing lease is a genuine concern for many Singaporeans. I urge the Ministry to shift the narrative from flats of stored value depreciating. They must be Homes for Life. This means ensuring every Singaporean, regardless of age or ability, to live in the same home through every life stage of changing needs, with dignity and security.
I have four proposals to make in this reality.
First, reimagining HIP I and II. Has the Ministry studied increasing the list of modification options during upgrading? For multi-generational families, this could include space partitioning and soundproofing. And extending EASE to supporting families with persons with special needs.
Second, tech-enabled eldercare. Can we expand HIP to include built-in for fall-detection sensors, fire sprinklers and emergency alert buttons?
Third, for the most vulnerable in our society. In response to a Parliamentary Question I filed in October, I note only 7,000 of more than 50,000 public rental flats have air-conditioning. Will Ministry consider resources for public rental flats to be more climate resilient, noting that they are space constrained and structurally disadvantaged for natural ventilation.
Fourth, creating spaces for success. If education is the great social leveler, then study space is essential equitable infrastructure. In a cramped two-room rental flat with six children, there is no quiet corner or dedicated desk for one, let alone six children. We already have the EASE programme for seniors. I propose a new ACCESS scheme under ComLink+. ACCESS would provide a milestone incentive for modular, space-saving furniture for families with young children in rental flats. As suggested during the Budget debate, it could stand for Adaptable, Compact, Child-centric, Enhancements for Small Spaces.
If we truly believe in social mobility, we must prioritise the design of the space where that mobility begins. Homes for Life is more than a slogan, but about ensuring our residents feel secure in the longevity of their community, where they do not just have a roof over their heads, but a place where their roots can grow with confidence.
My late grandmother lived at Old Airport Road, where her life and friendships were deeply rooted. In 2014, when nearby Dakota Crescent residents were told to move, I founded Dakota Adventures, co-guiding tours with senior residents for over 1,500 Singaporeans, including hon Minister Grace Fu.
In 2017, then-Minister Lawrence Wong announced the conservation of six blocks, out of 15, to allow future generations to build their memories.
We need a more robust and local framework for urban renewal. Will the Ministry implement a formal Social and Heritage Impact Assessment? This would allow us to proactively reimagine existing spaces rather than retrospectively conserving them. And also, to account for the heritage and social impact that potential relocation might have towards, especially, the seniors living in those estates.
Furthermore, our ABC Waterways network spans 8,000 kilometres through our homes and communities. I hope the Ministry can move beyond aesthetic \"water views\" as a mode of promotion and instead, incorporate active \"blue spaces\" for recreational activities, like water sports and fishing, and even consider exploring water-based transportation.
Chairman, I look forward to a vision for a more social- and heritage-conscious urban landscape that truly reflects the social value of landmarks, like Dakota Crescent, which remains hoarded up today.
The Chairman: Mr Dennis Tan. You may take your two cuts together.
Mr Dennis Tan Lip Fong (Hougang): During my Adjournment Motion in January, I spoke about the urgent need to rethink our approach to green preservation. In response, the Minister of State characterised the Serangoon River Forest site as a former landfill, regenerated vegetation and comprising of, \"young, exotic-dominated secondary forest, scrubland, grassland and ponds.\"
I have since received feedback from a resident, Ms Han Sai Por, who articulated a point at the heart of this policy gap. She said that the disagreement is not about the intent to be sustainable. It is about the valuation of our land, the problem with static planning. Our current planning system is heavily anchored in the past. If a site was a landfill in 1998 or zoned as a reserve site decades ago, that historical classification seems to override the biological reality of 2026.
Yet, over the last 25 years, nature has reclaimed these spaces. The secondary forest, while not primary, now provide frontline climate resilience, riverbank stabilisation, run-off filtration and significant urban cooling for dense neighbourhoods.
The case for dynamic planning. We must move away from a purely species-centric lands that dismisses young forests to a resident worried about the urban heat island effect. The cooling services are not lesser because the trees are non-native. Some countries are starting to put the revitalisation of brownfield sites as a nature-based solution strategy high on their policy agenda. Is it time we start doing the same? Does our current planning framework sufficiently value these re-generated ecosystems? How is the ecosystem service value, such as flood regulation and heat mitigation, quantified when deciding whether to clear a site?
Firm commitments on transparency and assessment. The determination of ecological sensitivity remains opaque. Currently, the public often only sees the results of an environmental impact assessments (EIA) once a project is decided. We rarely see the screening process that concludes that an EIA is unnecessary. However, even back in 1990, Prof Tommy Koh had, in the forward for the Nature Society of Singapore's Master Plan for the Conservation of Nature in Singapore, expressed hope that, \"All development projects in Singapore will require an environmental impact assessment.\"
I call on MND to consolidate its assessment framework into two mandatory commitments.
One, integrated baseline and functional assessments, where the Ministry commit to conducting a baseline study for all forested plots, regardless of zoning, that evaluate both biodiversity and functional climate roles, including heat mitigation and flood absorption, before any development decision is finalised.
Two, institutionalising EIA transparency. Will the Ministry mandate an EIA and include clearer thresholds for duration of fallow status and site size? For a start, studies have shown that a brownfield site can become ecologically important within five to 10 years and become significant mature ecosystems after another 10 years. Even small sites between point-one and point-five hectares can become ecologically meaningful in the same time period, depending on their function and location. Crucially, if the Government decides an EIA is not needed, can the Ministry publish the assessment and scientific rationale?
In conclusion, the avoid-minimise-mitigate hierarchy is a cornerstone of environmental policy. Yet too often, we jump straight to mitigate, for example, using noise barriers or phased clearing while avoid is treated as a foregone conclusion.
A case in point is the current bus depot construction at the Serangoon River Forest. We must exhaustively evaluate alternatives, such as multi-storey industrial depots and existing transport nodes before touching our remaining green buffers.
The lift upgrading programme was launched by HDB in 2001 to provide residents with lift access to every floor. In this year's COS, I am asking once again for same floor lift access for all residents. This is not merely about convenience. It is a fundamental issue of equity, safety and dignity.
As our population ages, a few steps become a daily insurmountable wall, separating seniors and those with mobility challenges from their community and essential services.
HDB's common reply to my many appeal letters to HDB, on behalf of residents, without same floor lift access in the past few years, was that such blocks are not eligible for Lift Upgrading Programme (LUP) due to high cost and/or technical constraints.
In Hougang, recent breakthroughs are both welcome and puzzling. In 2023, HDB started work on offering LUP for Block 833 Hougang Central. In September 2025, HDB offered LUP to the remaining units at Block 363 Hougang Avenue 5. On 6 September 2024, HDB replied in writing to my appeal for a Block 363 resident, stating explicitly that the cost per flat had, I quote, \"exceeded the LUP cost cap substantially, hence, we are unable to implement LUP\", unquote. Yet, barely 12 months later, HDB changed their minds.
Affected residents at the remaining Blocks 830, 831, 832 and 835 have wondered why did HDB offered LUP to remaining units of Blocks 833 and 363, but not their blocks. No reasons have been offered by HDB for their change of minds.
The Minister for National Development's reply to my Parliamentary Question of 3 February 2026 revealed that of the 140 blocks in Singapore with no full same floor lift access, 100 blocks remain unfeasible, because cost of LUP exceeds $200,000 per unit. The Minister also said that LUP will be extended to the other 40 more blocks progressively. May we know which are these blocks and how soon will LUP be awarded? With a clear roadmap, residents in the remaining blocks will not be in a state of anxious limbo.
Notwithstanding increase of the value of the lift access housing grant to $80,000, many affected residents have told me that they do not want to be uprooted and they want to stay in their homes with dignity. These architectural barriers result from an outdated design before the mid-90s. Residents did not choose them. In fact, during a recent house visit, one affected Block 832 resident told me that at the time of choosing the unit, they were not told that it did not come with same floor lift access, unlike other units in the same block.
Whether it is a historical architectural debt or an HDB debt, providing same floor lift access is only fair to all HDB homeowners.
I would therefore like to ask the Minister: one, please define a clear timeline for LUP for the 40 blocks. Let the residents know as soon as possible HDB's LUP plans for them. Two, please consider removing the proposed hard cap for the remaining 100 blocks and set aside a dedicated final amount to fund for LUP.
Former Hougang MP Mr Png Eng Huat, had said in this House previously, to the effect that why were the affected blocks not combined with other neighbouring blocks in previous bulk LUP projects in the earlier days, instead of tendering difficult blocks for LUP by themselves later on? The former could have been more cost effective, not to mention that LUP costs would have been lower, say, 10 to 15 years ago or definitely before COVID?
Mr Chairman, we must not let the remaining residents without same floor lift access, be defined by the technical limits of a bygone era. I urge the Government to bridge this final mile and ensure that every HDB homeowner can edge in place with the dignity of same floor lift access.
The Chairman: Mr Ang Wei Neng, please take your two cuts together.
Mr Ang Wei Neng (West Coast-Jurong West): Chairman, we note that about 100 HDB blocks are unable to benefit from the LUP, mainly because the estimated cost exceeds $200,000 per flat. While we understand the cost constraints, we hope HDB will continue to study new engineering solutions and emerging technologies to extend lift access to these remaining blocks.
A significant number of affected blocks are in Nanyang and many residents continue to face daily accessibility challenges. Many households in these segmented units bought their flats more than 30 years ago, when direct lift access on every floor was not the norm. In their younger days, they were mobile and valued the added privacy due to the design of the flat. But today, as they age, climbing stairs several times a day before they can take the lift has become increasingly difficult and, for some, unsafe. This is ultimately about ageing in place, dignity and inclusive public housing.
If LUP remains unfeasible for these blocks, I respectfully suggest that HDB consider several policy adjustments.
First, on eligibility for lift access support. Today, households typically need medical certification that an occupier is wheelchair-bound or has serious mobility limitations. However, many seniors aged 70 and above may not yet be severely immobile, but face progressive decline and rising fall risk.
We hope HDB can consider extending the Lift Access Housing Grant to households where at least one occupier is aged 70 and above, similar to the criteria to qualify for a personal mobility aid. Earlier intervention can prevent hardship, rather than respond only after mobility has significantly deteriorated.
Second, on long-term housing outcomes. Where owners of segmented flats wish to sell, HDB could study the feasibility of buy-back at market value and engage JTC or other agencies to lease out to tenants who are better able to manage walk-up access. This may help avoid a recurring cycle where future elderly residents face the same accessibility constraints.
Third, on market transparency. If buy-back is not viable, HDB may wish to require clear disclosure to prospective buyers that these flats are unlikely to benefit from LUP in the foreseeable future. This ensures buyers make informed decisions and avoid unrealistic expectations.
Chairman, residents in these 100 blocks are not asking for special treatment. They are asking for a fair chance to age safely and independently in their own homes, just like what majority of HDB households would now enjoy the direct lift access. I hope HDB and MND will continue to review policy options and work towards a more inclusive and age-friendly public housing system.
Chairman, every year, MND receives about 22,000 cases of public feedback on pest birds. This is not a small number. Behind each case is a resident whose daily life has been affected. Sleepless nights from constant noise. Homes and common areas fouled by droppings and in some worrying cases, residents being attacked. In Nanyang, we have witnessed such incidents first-hand.
Singaporeans support our vision of a City in Nature. But coexistence must not come at the expense of public safety, hygiene and livability. When disamenities persist, we must act more decisively.
May I ask the Minister: what is the current manpower strength of the NParks team managing pest bird feedback and whether existing resources are adequate given the sustained volume of cases year after year.
Under NParks' pigeon management plan, efforts remain largely focused on pigeons. I urge NParks, within MND's broader human-wildlife management framework, to evolve towards a comprehensive Pest Bird Management approach, one that also addresses other urban-adapted species, such as mynas and crows, where they cause persistent disamenities to residents.
This requires a system-wide approach: stronger enforcement against illegal bird feeding, tighter food waste control around eateries and markets, estate-level habitat management and where necessary, science-based population control. In this respect, I welcome NParks' decision to resume shooting of crows.
Chairman, I propose that MND strengthen dedicated funding and manpower for pest bird management and develop a clear national strategy with measurable outcomes to reduce cases, attacks and environmental nuisance over the next few years.
Mr Pritam Singh: Sir, I filed my cut on 19 February and before the Minister's public comments on 23 February, on how MND intends to manage the crow population. As his comments set out the direction forward, I will make a narrow point about culling. NParks has been helpful to town councils, assisting in the removal of nests and the installation of temporary traps to manage the crow population. Can the Ministry share its protocols with regard to culling, or specifically shooting, as a means of reducing the crow population in Singapore?
When and how does it determine that the population in a given area has exceeded acceptable levels or is overpopulated with crows?
I understand MND has in recent months been working with the Singapore Police Force with a view to restart the shooting of crows. What has been the result of this collaboration? Can the Minister update when such measures will be implemented across all Town Councils? And with what frequency and what measures will also be imposed to ensure public safety?
Mr Abdul Muhaimin Abdul Malik (Sengkang): Sir, while I acknowledge the encouraging 50% reduction in pigeon population across the Town Councils undergoing the NParks pilot, I must emphasise the urgency of this issue. Pigeons are not merely a nuisance, they pose genuine health risk. Their droppings carry dangerous diseases, such as cryptococcosis, histoplasmosis and psittacosis. When dried droppings turn to dust, residents inhale contaminated particles that can cause severe respiratory infections, particularly affecting our elderly and immuno-compromised individuals. Beyond health concerns, residents bear the financial cost. A constituent shared that he had to engage an air-conditioning specialist to clean his compressor unit because pigeons had defecated on it repeatedly. He paid out of pocket for a problem not of his making.
How many more residents are silently suffering similar inconveniences and expenses? I am concerned about the pace of the roll-out. The NParks pilot began in July, 2024, with three Town Councils and only expanded to three more in June 2025 nearly a year later. With many estates still experiencing persistent pigeon problems, can the Minister provide a clear timeline for extending this programme to all remaining Town Councils? Residents in affected areas cannot wait indefinitely for relief.
Regarding the 35-unit netting trial, I propose that the Ministry consider reducing the trial duration to gather sufficient data more quickly. This would allow effective solutions to be rolled out to affected estates sooner, providing residents with much needed relief. Effective pigeon management requires Government leadership, community cooperation and adequate resources. Our residents deserve clean, safe and hygienic living environments free from preventable health hazards and unnecessary financial burdens.
The Chairman: Ms Lee Hui, you can take your two cuts together.
Ms Lee Hui Ying (Nee Soon): Mr Chair, animals are integral to our shared environment. The steady stream of feedback we receive on animal welfare proves that residents envision a society that is not just efficient, but harmonious and gracious.
We have come a long way, but more must be done. The recent viral incident of a man cutting a community cat's whiskers reminds us that cruelty still lurks in the estates. What are the Ministry's specific plans for 2026 regarding animal welfare legislation?
As our spaces become greener, urban bird populations have risen and we have been playing a cat-and-mouse game with mother nature to manage with ecologically sensitive solutions. While pigeon population control has seen some success, we continue to face a spike in house crow populations and it affects all our residents.
With crow shooting as the latest control measure, I would like to ask: on the protocols, particularly on the use of shooting in residential areas; what safeguards are in place to minimise public exposure, especially to young children, during such operations in estates. Can the operations be scheduled outside school commuting hours and avoiding areas near schools and playgrounds, where young children are present?
Effective enforcement is key. Beyond reactive measures, how will enforcement against illegal feeding be strengthened? Are there plans for stepped-up surveillance in hotspots, higher penalties for repeat offenders, regular tree pruning or enhanced public education? Does NParks have sufficient enforcement resources?
Can upstream measures – better waste management and environmental design – can these be strengthened to reduce reliance on shooting over time? Will the Ministry consider conducting a Ecological Impact Assessment to study how culling efforts could affect our broader local biodiversity?
Let us act upstream, so that problems do not spiral into a full-blown \"crow-sis\".
With major infrastructure projects such as Terminal 5 underway, our construction sector continues to face significant cost and manpower pressures. Policies must be carefully calibrated to support both workforce transformation and business sustainability.
The builders I have met, including some of my residents, have welcomed the New Action Team chaired by the Minister and they are encouraged by the strong leadership and attention placed on the sector. What are the Ministry's long-term plans to grow infrastructure, manpower and talent pipeline to ensure supply can meet demand?
I have the following suggestions.
First, on foreign manpower costs. The periodic raising of S Pass qualifying salaries creates a \"domino effect\", jacking up business costs unnecessarily. Instead of raising the salary, which permanently inflates the wage bill, not just on the foreign worker per se, the salary of other workers in the company will have to be increased accordingly. Contractors are suggesting the increase of the workers levy instead. This will still generate revenue for the Government without overpaying what workers ask for.
Second, contractors are facing growing volatility. Has MND planned adequately to avoid supply chain disruptions? For example, is there sufficient staging and dumping grounds, adequate capacity at Jurong Port to handle cement imports, and enough workers' dormitories to support projected demand?
Third, local talent is a matter of national resilience. Young Singaporeans shy away from the sector due to perceptions of harsh working hours and site conditions, and our local core is ageing. We cannot rely solely on a transient workforce. How will MND redesign construction careers to attract and anchor a sizable local talent pool?
Fourth, liability framework for contractors. This also deters locals from entering the industry. The fear of excessive liability falling on individuals can be paralysing, but safety is non-negotiable. Are penalties under the Building and Construction Authority Act calibrated so they uphold standards without creating a climate of fear that deters capable leaders?
Third, as we push digitalisation, are regulations keeping pace? If expect transformation, policy regulation and support must move in tandem —
The Chairman: Ms Nadia Ahmad Samdin, you can take your two cuts together.
Ms Nadia Ahmad Samdin (Ang Mo Kio): Thank you, Chairman. Sir, Singapore has been recognised globally for being one of the greenest cities in the world. Despite extensive urbanisation, our green cover spans a remarkable 40% of land area. This is only possible through the commitment and intentionality of each generation.
In 2020, MND launched their vision to transform Singapore into a city in nature. Nature is not about aesthetics. We have learnt since young that nature is functional. Different species play respective roles and in the ecosystem they work together. As climate infrastructure, tree canopies and green buffer zones mitigate the urban heat island effect, lowering cooling demand and making active mobility possible. Socially, nature serves as recreational and exercise spaces, supporting mental well-being and as restorative spaces. Economically, tourists are drawn to our city in nature identity right from the time they leave the airport.
Nature is the only infrastructure that cools, protects, filters and regenerates simultaneously. Many see urbanisation as the opposite of nature, but Singapore's lived experience of how we have balanced the two offers a different perspective. It is part of what makes us exceptional. If we plan it well, nature will not compete with our urban future development plans, it will secure it.
In this regard, could MND share how it has weighed trade-offs and integrated nature, including preservation of existing flora and fauna into design principles for newer and upcoming housing estates towards improving heat resilience and tackling rising sea level challenges?
Under MND's push for city nature, several 2030 targets have been laid out, including animal and plant species recovery plans, as well as forest, marine and coastal habitat restoration. I commend these efforts. Could NParks update on the initiatives it has undertaken to strengthen ecological connectivity and biodiversity-sensitive designs across green and blue spaces in the last five years, as well as any future plans?
At the same time, we recognise that our people are joint inhabitants in our city in nature. Part of our national vision is the goal that every household is 10 minutes away from a park. This also means that wildlife is 10 minutes away from us, increasing the number of wildlife human interactions and sometimes clashes – from monkeys to otters, wild boars to snakes, hornbills to tapirs, sambar deer to migrating storks.
I would like to ask, has MND observed any trend lines in incidents in the past five years, including of migratory animals? And has MND assessed if the current plans, response teams and protocols remain adequate? How does MND see the long-term approach balance between containment, deterrence and co-existence? Finally, are we investing enough in public education such that city in nature is understood as a shared goal and responsibility beyond tree planting?
Singapore's public housing system has also been globally recognised for delivering accessible quality housing at scale. Our homes not only provide shelter but also build communities and encourage social cohesion in estates. While home ownership rates remain fairly high compared to other cities, the focus has typically been on supporting young couples and first timers with the rising cost, which is of course, net crucial for nation building.
But population and family planning dynamics today are changing. Given our ageing society, total fertility rate, marriage and divorce rates. We have more singles, second timers and seniors who strongly desire to age in place. Have our public housing offerings fully adapted to these changes?
Perhaps a re-diversifying of housing typologies might need to follow to support the needs and aspirations of a changing Singapore over Singaporeans' life course. A wider spectrum of options would allow citizens to find housing that matches not just income, but also life stage and aspirations.
In my earlier speeches, I have spoken on the need to better support couples and families who want to stay near or with family members. In the earlier days, a young couple who first purchases a 3-room BTO can aspire to other versions of home over the years, such as a jumbo flat, maisonette, executive apartment, or even low rise and terrace public housing. These options provide more configurations and variety of life one can look forward to beyond hacking and expanding rooms or moving from public housing to private dwellings, which can increasingly feel unattainable.
Today, flat typologies have largely remained the same, and in fact become even more similar as we optimise for speed and scale. How has MND reviewed the housing aspirations of Singaporeans, and can MND consider exploring some unique typologies in upcoming projects, for example, dual key or modular layout suitable for caregiving?
I would like to speak briefly for three other segments.
First, for a divorcee trying to re-establish a roof over his or her head. Many experience long waiting times, high temporary rental costs and uncertainty. Beyond schemes like Assistance Scheme for Second-Timers (ASSIST), can MND consider other forms of support for this segment to find new beginnings?
Second, singles up till now can typically only purchase 2-room, Flexi or resale flats, given that two-room flexi flats are highly sought after by both singles and seniors, can the Ministry consider expanding the options? After all, many also support elderly parents who stay with them if there are emergencies or help with nieces and nephews on the weekend.
Finally, for those who want a space of their own, but cannot afford it yet, the Ministry trialed two housing typologies in recent years, the Single Room Shared Facilities (SRSF) and the Joint Singles Scheme Operator-Run. As both models were well subscribed, what are the plans to expand the scope of these programmes? How many rental families has the home ownership support team served over the years? What are the success rates so far and are there plans to integrate —
The Chairman: Mr Foo Cexiang.
Mr Foo Cexiang (Tanjong Pagar): Chairman, housing in Singapore has never been just about putting a roof over one's head. It has also been about giving every Singaporean a stake in the nation.
Sir, I want to acknowledge the work of MND and HDB officers over the years in working towards this mission while having to deal with changing demographics and preferences.
Between 1980 and 2025, the resident population has grown from 2.4 million to 4.2 million. At the same time, the average household size has decreased from about five in 1980 to three in 2025. So, in this period, HDB has had to more than triple the number of flats from 330,000 to more than 1.2 million, all these while also meeting expectations to improve quality and design.
In this context, the directive by the Minister for National Development to build more and build faster is apt and timely.
In its addendum to the President's address last year, MND announced that HDB would review the income ceiling for BTO flats and study more housing options for singles, seniors, as well as larger families. It also said that it would provide assistance for more rental households to transit into home ownership. I would like to seek an update from the Ministry.
In addition, I would like to further champion the case for two categories of Singaporeans.
First, Singaporeans with non-resident spouses with no Singaporean or permanent resident child. Currently, this group of Singaporeans can only purchase a 2-room Flexi flat from HDB if the Singaporean is a first-timer aged 35 and above. I seek MND's consideration to relax this requirement and allow Singaporeans with non-resident spouses and no children to purchase flats of all sizes from HDB with no minimum age for the Singaporean.
Sir, as highlighted by the Deputy Prime Minister Gan in this House, Singapore is facing an existential challenge as the fertility rate plunged to a historic low of 0.87. We need to support all couples on their parenthood journey.
In this regard, there has been an increasing trend of transnational citizen marriages. In the past three years, one in four citizen marriages were with a non-resident. This is a significant proportion, and as other Members of the House have raised, having a large enough home to raise a family is one of the key considerations that young couples have today when deciding whether to have a child.
By restricting our Singaporean with non-resident spouses to a 2-room Flexi flat, we are constraining 25% of would-be parents from having a child. Given our existential challenge, this is too high a proportion to risk. We need to support all couples in their parenthood journey, including those made up of a Singaporean and a non-resident.
Second, seniors above 55 years old seeking to purchase a short lease, 2-room Flexi flat. Last month in Parliament, I asked if MND would consider lowering the home for life condition to require the remaining lease to cover the youngest owner till 83.5 years, which is the life expectancy age, instead of 95 years. This would enable these seniors to purchase more affordable short lease, 2-room Flexi homes, given the shorter remaining lease. And it could be the difference between them renting their homes forever or making the transition to home ownership.
MND shared that many seniors would live longer than the average lifespan of 83.5 years, and this would compromise the home for life policy. I understand the policy rationale behind setting the age at 95 to cover most Singaporeans. However, there will be many Singaporeans who do not live to 95 years, perhaps even more so than those who do.
So, my question is, will MND consider a scheme for these seniors, which allows them to purchase a short-term 2-room Flexi flat with minimum lease term that covers the youngest owner up to age 85? And a key condition for this being that if the owners want to move out or pass away before this lease expires, the flat will be returned back to HDB with no refund or compensation to the owner or their next of kin.
These early return flats with remaining leases can then be used to house other seniors on the same scheme who live beyond 85 years and outlive their leases. And therefore at the overall scheme level, this will be in keeping with our home for life principle.
Mr Ang Wei Neng: Chairman, we are encouraged that HDB has cleared the BTO backlog from the COVID-19 pandemic. About 13,000 flats will reach their five-year MOP in 2026, nearly double that of last year.
At the same time, HDB resale price growth has moderated to 2.9% last year, the slowest since 2019. With supply improving and price pressure easing, this is the right moment to finetune the eligibility policy so more Singaporeans can access affordable housing while keeping the market stable and fiscally responsible.
First, I urge the HDB to review the BTO eligibility age for singles, with consideration to lower to 30 years old. So, 30 years old, we let the singles buy a BTO flat. Many singles today seek stability earlier, shoulder family responsibilities and want to build their own future. A home gives not just a shelter but dignity, security and a stake in the society.
Second, we could update the BTO income ceiling for first-timer families. The $14,000 cap has not changed since 2019 even though nominal wages have risen by more than 25%. More young couples are now squeezed above the BTO income ceiling, yet are unable to afford private housing or executive condominiums. Raising the ceiling to $16,000 keeps public housing accessible to the broad middle group of Singaporeans, in line with economic realities.
Third, I hope MND can waive the 15-month wait-out period to buy a HDB 4-room or smaller resale flat after a private property owner sells the private property due to difficult life transitions such as divorce or financial strain. This provides stability without overheating demand.
Chairman, when supply improves, policy needs to keep pace. Housing is not just about markets, it is about people.
The Chairman: Minister Chee.
The Minister for National Development (Mr Chee Hong Tat): Mr Chairman, I thank Members for their questions and suggestions.
Over the past 60 years, we have worked hard to build Singapore together. We provided Singaporeans with affordable and accessible public housing and achieved one of the highest homeownership rates in the world. We developed a strong built environment sector, which can plan, construct and maintain large-scale projects efficiently in our dense urban setting. We have carefully balanced the needs of current and future generations through long-term planning, integrating different uses and maximising the overall value of our limited land.
We need to build on these strong foundations and go further. At this year's COS, I would like to present three key priorities that MND will focus on for the next few years.
First, we will continue to uphold our housing commitments and sustain a robust supply. We will build more and build faster to meet the evolving housing needs of Singaporeans. Senior Minister of State Sun and Senior Parliamentary Secretary Harun will elaborate on our efforts to enhance the liveability of HDB estates. Minister Indranee and Minister of State Tan will talk about our plans to enhance the liveability of private residential estates and our City in Nature.
Second, we will continue transforming our built environment sector to achieve greater productivity, sustainability and resilience and create more good jobs for our people. Minister Indranee will speak about this.
Third, Minister of State Tan will round up by sharing more about our longer-term plans for Singapore's development, balancing the different land use requirements and navigating trade-offs within the limited space we have.
Sir, over the past few years, we have focused on improving affordability and accessibility for Singaporeans looking to buy their first home. This remains a key priority for MND.
We provided a strong supply of HDB flats and set aside more units for first-timer families. The median application rates for first-timer families applying for 3-room and bigger BTO flats fell from a high of almost seven times in 2020 to between 1.1 and 1.9 times in 2025. In the most recent BTO sales exercise last month, the median application rate for first-timer families was 0.9 times.
This is good news, but the overall application rate for 3-room and bigger BTO flats was 2.6 times, if we include second-timer families. The application rates for singles and seniors for 2-room Flexi flats were also higher.
These numbers reflect the continued strong demand for public housing and why we need to sustain a robust supply in the years ahead.
We now have some capacity to meet additional housing needs of different groups of Singaporeans. Many Members, including Mr Henry Kwek, Mr Foo Cexiang and Ms Nadia Ahmad Samdin, have asked about this.
We will support our seniors by offering different right-sizing and monetisation options and making our neighbourhoods more elderly-friendly. For lower-income households, we will continue to improve our public rental options. We are also reviewing our schemes to better meet the needs of families who need to move or switch to a bigger flat when they have more children. Senior Minister of State Sun and Senior Parliamentary Secretary Harun will share more.
Members have also asked for updates on our plans to support another group of Singaporeans – our singles. We have made some moves to improve the housing options for singles in recent years. With the introduction of the new flat classification framework in 2024, first-timer singles can now buy BTO flats island-wide and not only in non-mature estates. Since then, singles have booked flats in towns like Clementi, Bedok, Ang Mo Kio and Kallang-Whampoa for the first time. Last year, we also extended priority access under the Family Care Scheme to singles when they apply for a new flat to live with or near their parents.
The Government is looking at increasing the income ceiling for all buyers and lowering the eligibility age for singles to buy HDB flats. We are also reviewing our schemes to better meet the needs of other groups of singles, such as those who may wish to buy a bigger flat together with their family members.
But to do more for our singles and also for other groups of flat buyers, HDB will need to build more flats to ensure supply is adequate to meet higher demand.
Hence, a priority for the Ministry, which I have been emphasising since taking on the MND portfolio, is to build more homes and to build them faster.
This year, HDB will launch around 19,600 BTO flats. Of these, more than 4,000 will be Shorter Waiting Time flats, with a waiting time of less than three years. We will also increase the 2-room Flexi supply by almost 50% from 2026 to 2028 to meet growing demand from seniors and singles. This includes pressing on with the efforts to inject new housing in older towns. Let me share two examples.
The first is the Pearl's Hill neighbourhood in Outram, close to the central business district. With the additional subsidies for Plus and Prime flats under the new flat classification framework, we are able to offer different groups of buyers affordable public housing in very attractive locations. We also provide housing grants of up to $120,000 for eligible first-timer families, which further reduces the amount they need to pay for their flats.
After more than 40 years, we will be building public housing at Pearl's Hill. The new public housing development will be located right next to Outram Park MRT station, at the foothills of Pearl's Hill City Park. It will comprise 2-room Flexi, 3-room and 4-room BTO flats as well as public rental flats.
Drawing from the nearby Chinatown heritage, the design concept is inspired by \"山水画\", like a Chinese painting depicting mountains and flowing rivers. Our vision is for residents to live amidst the tranquillity of Pearl's Hill, while remaining connected to the dynamic energy of the city.
At the base level of this new development, residents and the public can enjoy green communal spaces, akin to river plains. Moving up, a cascading water feature will serve to manage stormwater during heavy downpours. A green canopy of trees will provide shade, flowing seamlessly from the nearby park. These features will also benefit the wider Pearl's Hill neighbourhood by having seamless barrier-free access from the park to the MRT.
The residential blocks will be built with varying heights like the mountain ridges in a painting. Within the blocks, sky gardens and terraces will offer views from different levels, allowing residents to experience the surrounding landscape from multiple vantage points.
In line with our urban design guidelines, we will preserve a view corridor, a 40-metre-wide unobstructed line of sight between the new buildings. Air and light will be able to flow through, ensuring that the tall buildings do not overwhelm the landscape and allowing the public to enjoy views to and from Pearl's Hill City Park.
The development will include Singapore's tallest ever public housing project, rising above 60 storeys.
Sir, 60 storeys is not the first of its kind as there are other taller residential buildings in Singapore and overseas cities. But 60 storeys will be more than 10 storeys taller than The Pinnacle@Duxton, which is our current tallest public housing project.
This is part of our efforts to find ways to build more public housing by intensifying land usage and building taller where possible. A 60-storey block can provide 50% more flats compared to a 40-storey block, the height of most of our tallest HDB blocks today.
Currently, most tall buildings are in the central region due to aviation height restriction requirements around our airports, such as those at Changi and Seletar. These requirements have been in place since the 1950s and were set by the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO). Over the last decade, Singapore worked with ICAO to change these requirements and taller buildings can now be built near airports. This change frees up more airspace for non-aviation purposes and presents opportunities for us to intensify development in different parts of Singapore.
With these regulatory changes and our experience in Pearl's Hill, HDB will find more opportunities to build taller flats across Singapore.
We will proceed carefully and sensitively, building taller only when conditions allow. We will also pay close attention to design and liveability. These efforts will contribute to increasing land productivity and support our plans to continue providing a robust supply of HDB flats to meet the housing needs of Singaporeans.
Another area where we will develop a large number of new flats is Toa Payoh. Toa Payoh was the first town to be comprehensively planned and built from scratch in the mid-1960s. The town has evolved over the years through efforts such as the Remaking Our Heartland programme, Neighbourhood Renewal Programme and the Silver Upgrading Programme. We have improved connectivity and invested in major infrastructure in the area, such as the Caldecott MRT station, which is an interchange for the Thomson-East Coast and Circle Lines.
Over the past 10 years, we have added 4,500 new homes in Toa Payoh, which have brought in more younger families. To maintain Toa Payoh's unique character, we have kept iconic features like the dragon playground and the pedestrian mall at the town centre.
This year, HDB will be launching another BTO parcel right next to Caldecott MRT station. The parcel will feature around 1,600 units, including public rental flats, 2-room Flexi and 4-room flats, and also, the first Community Care Apartments in Toa Payoh.
The development will include a new neighbourhood park with spaces for residents to exercise, play, rest and enjoy therapeutic activities as well as commercial facilities such as a food court and fast-food restaurant, a supermarket, retail shops and a childcare centre. An Active Ageing Centre will be established to cater to our Community Care Apartment residents and other seniors from the community.
As residents move in a few years later, other major developments in the vicinity will be completed. This includes the North-South Corridor underground works, which will allow us to progressively transform the surface streets and strengthen the connections between Toa Payoh West and its surrounding areas.
To the west, wider footpaths across Thomson Road and Lornie Road will create safer and more pleasant crossings for pedestrians. Residents will be able to cycle or walk and enjoy nature at MacRitchie Reservoir just a short distance away.
To the east, residents will be able to easily access the rest of Toa Payoh, including the upcoming Toa Payoh Integrated Development (Sports and Lifestyle Hub), which is expected to be completed by 2030, hopefully earlier. Residents can enjoy Toa Payoh Integrated Development's sport facilities as well as a rejuvenated Toa Payoh town park, library and polyclinic.
A new mixed-use development with private residential units, retail and community uses will also be built at the Caldecott site. This will include a shopping centre, which will provide residents with more retail and dining options. It will be similar in scale as Woodleigh Mall in Bidadari.
Over the next decade, we will launch more than 10,000 additional homes across Toa Payoh West and Mount Pleasant. These will be mostly for public housing as well as some private condominiums, including the mixed-use development that I just mentioned. In Toa Payoh West, these homes will be integrated into the lush, hilly terrain, some with views of MacRitchie Reservoir. We will build more neighbourhood parks, so residents can enjoy urban living integrated with nature. We will also ensure sufficient amenities, such as schools, community spaces and transport options.
Sir, MND will continue to develop and rejuvenate Toa Payoh and other older estates, as part of our efforts to provide a robust housing supply for Singaporeans.
Mr Chairman, Mr Pritam Singh has suggested to remove the income ceiling for HDB BTO flats entirely and impose additional restrictions on the buyers who exceed the income threshold.
Our current income ceiling covers around eight in 10 Singaporean households. With the New Flat Classification framework, the income ceiling is still necessary to ensure that highly subsidised BTO flats are prioritised for those who are earning below the income ceiling. This is because higher income earners can have access to other housing options.
And as Mr Ang Wei Neng and Mr Cai Yinzhou noted, we are reviewing the income ceiling for BTO flats. As a higher income ceiling will result in more people applying, we will need to ensure that the supply is adequate before we make these changes.
Sir, I do not have the data on the number of appeals for people who have exceeded the income thresholds on hand. So, I would like to invite Mr Singh to perhaps file a Parliamentary Question and we will provide him with the information.
But, Sir, allow me to clarify that the number of appeals may not fully represent the potential increase in the demand for BTO flats if we were to remove the income ceiling entirely. So, this is something that I think we will need to study carefully. We need to understand what are the trade-offs, including that after you remove the income ceiling, there will be additional competition coming from those who have higher income, who have exceeded the income thresholds, for the buyers whose income fall below the income eligibility threshold.
So, this is something that I think we need to study carefully. I understand where Mr Singh is coming from and there are some trade-offs and I think it is a move that we will have to look at the trade-offs carefully.
Over the next few decades, we will progressively redevelop older HDB towns and estates through the VERS. Our plan is to start with a few sites in the first half of the next decade, before scaling up the programme from late-2030s.
I thank Mr Henry Kwek and Mr Xie Yao Quan for their suggestions, which we will consider carefully.
I have said previously that the VERS package should be fair to existing flat owners and also sustainable for future generations. I have also shared that we aim to flesh out as much of the VERS policy framework as possible in this term of Government. When we are ready with our initial proposals, MND and HDB will engage Singaporeans to take in further views and feedback before we firm up the policy. In the meantime, residents in our older public estates can continue to benefit from existing upgrading programmes, like the Neighbourhood Renewal Programme and the Silver Upgrading Programme.
Mr Liang Eng Hwa and Mr Cai Yinzhou asked about HIP and if we can share more details about how HIP II will meet residents’ changing needs as their estates age. Flat owners can look forward to a second round of upgrading works via HIP II when their flats reach the 60- to 70-year mark. HIP II will be more extensive than the current HIP, and will make use of new technologies, like microwave scanning, to ensure that our ageing estates are well maintained and liveable. We will share more about the scheme in due course.
Mr Liang also asked for more funding support for Town Councils to cope with rising costs and the challenges posed by ageing infrastructure, such as water seepage. Mr Singh asked about expanding the facade repairs co-payment scheme, so that the Government and Town Councils co-fund repairs for water seepage from block facades.
The Government provides funding support to assist Town Councils with their various areas of responsibility. Mr Liang spoke about some of these earlier. These include estate maintenance and improvement projects, lift maintenance and building façade repairs to ensure public safety. Such funding support is extended to all Town Councils.
For water seepage-related cases which require façade repairs to address public safety concerns, HDB currently co-funds repairs under the Façade Repairs Co-Payment Scheme. HDB also works closely with Town Councils to deal with more complex cases of water seepage by providing technical guidance. We will review Mr Singh’s suggestion, but as different cases may have their unique considerations, we will need to assess each case on its own merits.
Sir, maintaining our estates is a shared responsibility. Residents contribute through their S&CC, and Town Councils play an important role to ensure that maintenance and other services are delivered in a cost-efficient manner, with Government providing grants and technical support to complement these efforts.
I think this is the approach that we will continue to take. It is a shared responsibility and therefore, all the different parties will need to contribute to achieving the positive outcomes for our residents.
Beyond public housing, we have also been ramping up private housing supply. We expect about 12,000 units of private housing, including ECs, to be launched for sale by developers this year. And this is more than 50% higher than the number of units launched for sale in 2024 and broadly similar to 2025.
We are also studying how to enhance the liveability of private residential estates. Many private estate residents, including our seniors, have shared their concerns about rising maintenance costs and ageing facilities, especially in older estates. We are looking into how the Government can provide some co-funding support for our private estate in key upgrading works, particularly where it concerns safety and liveability. It will require a combination of carrots and sticks. Minister Indranee will share more about our plans.
We have seen moderation in the HDB resale and private housing markets in recent months. Growth in resale flat prices has slowed from 12.7% in 2021, to 2.9% in 2025. In the fourth quarter 2025, resale prices remained flat compared to the previous quarter, and this is the first time it has happened since first quarter 2020.
As at mid-February, HDB resale prices for 2026 have shown a slight decline of 0.1%. This follows from our strong pipeline of BTO flats as well as the four rounds of cooling measures we rolled out over the last few years. The measures have taken time to work their way through the market, and we are starting to see some initial results.
We are watching the market closely and stand ready to adjust our measures, bearing in mind that more flats will reach their MOP in the next few years, thereby increasing the supply of resale flats.
Mr Ang Wei Neng and Mr Cai Yinzhou asked about the 15-month wait-out period for private property owners to purchase resale flats. This applies to the private property owners who are below the age of 55 or for those who are above the age of 55 if they were to buy 5-room and larger flats.
Sir, while the recent data looks promising, as I shared earlier, it is prudent to monitor for a while more before making any adjustments. I want to assure the Members that we will remove this restriction when conditions allow. In the meantime, HDB will continue to consider appeals from households facing their own set of circumstances, and this will be done on a case-by-case basis.
In the private residential property market, for 2025, we similarly saw the smallest increase in prices since 2020.
Mr Louis Chua asked about how we can continue to ensure affordability for ECs. Similar points have been raised by others in this House previously, including Mr Henry Kwek and Mr Murali Pillai.
ECs were introduced to provide an option for higher-income Singaporeans who aspire to own private housing. EC developments are strata-titled and have design features and facilities similar to private condominium developments. ECs are therefore more comparable to private condominiums than resale flats, because resale flats are still part of public housing. While ECs are priced by private developers, the prices are lower than private housing as we impose initial eligibility and ownership restrictions, such as an income ceiling and a minimum occupation period. EC new sale prices are about 20% to 30% lower than comparable private condominiums. Eligible EC buyers can also benefit from a CPF Housing Grant of up to $30,000.
Sir, I understand the concerns which various Members have raised about ECs. We are reviewing the policy and will consider your suggestions as part of the review.
The second priority for MND is to transform our Built Environment (BE) sector to improve productivity and to reduce costs, time and manpower. This is not a new priority, but we need to give it a renewed focus and stronger push.
We have set out ambitious plans for Singapore’s development as an endearing home and global city; from providing a robust supply of public and private housing to laying the foundations for Singapore’s next bound of economic development – constructing Changi Airport Terminal 5 and Tuas Port, building new economic districts, expanding our rail network, and many more. These are long-term projects that will benefit many generations of Singaporeans and have lasting impact for decades to come.
To turn these plans into reality, our BE sector needs to be ready for the challenge. Mr Henry Kwek and Ms Lee Hui Ying spoke about this.
For example, how do we benefit from advances in technology to save time, costs and manpower? AI and robotics can transform construction into a fast, smart and highly automated process, where software systems help designers to optimise sub-components that can be constructed by 3D printers in days rather than months. Autonomous robots could be used to construct buildings, monitored in real-time for delays and safety by drones. And we can have safer worksites, lower costs, reduced wastage and better-quality buildings delivered faster than before, at better value to the owners and occupants.
This will also open up more exciting and meaningful job opportunities for Singaporeans, jobs which are no longer perceived to be “dusty, dirty and dangerous” but “dynamic, decarbonised and digitalised”. So, it is still three “Ds”, but a different set of three “Ds”, with\tstrong growth\tprospects\tand\tcareer development pathways.
To achieve this, I announced last month that we have set up an Action Team to improve BE productivity. The team comprises representatives from Government agencies and the industry and will develop measures to help the industry achieve savings in time, costs and manpower. It will focus on three areas: scaling up the adoption of productive technologies and progressive practices; reviewing our regulatory approach to reduce regulatory compliance burden, support innovation and improve procurement and contracting practices; and supporting an enabling ecosystem for the industry to reap system-level synergies and address industry-wide challenges.
We will also continue to focus on upskilling and investing in our architects, engineers, quantity surveyors, project managers and many more, because people are at the heart of the BE sector.
On our part, the Government will continue to review our policies, rules and processes to keep regulatory burden and compliance costs as low as possible. Minister Indranee will share more in her speech.
The third priority for MND is to ensure that we continue developing Singapore sustainably for generations to come, by balancing different land use requirements and navigating trade-offs within the limited space we have.
We plan to build more homes, new economic districts, more transport connections and nodes. But as a small island city-state, our land supply is constrained. So, we have to be creative and think hard about how to optimise the use of every parcel of land.
One way is to rejuvenate our older estates to ensure that they remain liveable and vibrant, and at the same time we can intensify how the land is used. Outram and Toa Payoh, which I spoke about earlier, are some examples.
We will continue to study how we can harness new technologies, such as by building taller flats in other parts of Singapore and through the use of systems like the Pneumatic Waste Conveyance System, which frees up land for other uses. We will also look at other ways of optimising land use, such as making better use of under-utilised spaces like the area under flyovers and MRT viaducts.
As we develop and grow, we will keep an eye on conservation – preserving key green and blue spaces, and valuable pieces of our heritage. We will have to navigate these trade-offs carefully, to develop Singapore sustainably for future generations. Minister of State Alvin Tan will share more about how we are doing so.
Mr Chairman, over the past six decades, Singaporeans have transformed our small island into a thriving global city and endearing home. But we are not done building Singapore. We must continue to build on our fundamentals, while looking ahead to the future with confidence and optimism.
For our homebuyers and residents, we will keep up a robust supply of private and public housing, and we will create common spaces where we can build strong communities. To our industry partners, we will work with you to grow a stronger, more productive and more resilient BE sector. One which can also provide many good jobs for our people. And for younger Singaporeans and our future generations, we will continue to plan boldly and build sustainably for the longer term, so that we leave behind a better future for you than what we have inherited from our forefathers.
The Chairman: Minister Indranee Rajah.
The Second Minister for National Development (Ms Indranee Rajah): Mr Chairman, I thank Members for their cuts. My speech will cover three broad areas. Transforming the BE sector and strengthening the pipeline of BE professionals, governance, liveability and maintenance of strata developments, and improving accessibility of buildings.
We have many exciting plans for our city. Last December, we gazetted our Master Plan, which lays out the blueprint for the development of Singapore over the next 10 to 15 years. We will construct Changi Airport Terminal 5, redevelop Paya Lebar Air Base into a new-generation town, unlock the potential of the Greater Southern Waterfront and create Long Island to build homes and enhance coastal protection along the East Coast.
We will build at least 80,000 new homes across more than 10 new housing areas island-wide over the next 10 to 15 years. We will expand our rail network by over 100 kilometres and lay out over 50 kilometres of new park connectors by the 2030s, to create a more connected, sustainable and liveable Singapore.
To accomplish our ambitious development plans, we will need many more architects, engineers, quantity surveyors, project managers, builders and other skilled professionals. We estimate that over the next decade, we will need at least 1,000 new architects and engineers per year to join the sector and contribute towards Singapore's development. Hence, young people who are looking for future careers with strong growth prospects and rewarding career development pathways with meaning and purpose should consider the BE sector.
Our distinctive city skyline, our iconic buildings like Jewel and the Marina Bay Sands, every HDB flat housing a family, every MRT station connecting communities, every school nurturing the next generation – are all legacies of the BE professionals whose work has left a lasting impact on our people's lives. And in a time of climate change, it is the BE professionals who will be the vanguard in the battle for sustainability.
In 2024, we set up the Taskforce for Architectural and Engineering Consultants, co-chaired by Mr Chaly Mah, Chairman of the Surbana Jurong Group and myself. Last year, the Taskforce completed its work and launched a suite of 11 recommendations to strengthen the BE pipeline and its transformation. Today, I am pleased to share the strong industry response and tangible progress achieved to date.
To deepen the on-the-job learning, improve mentorship, and enable higher starting salaries, we have launched an enhanced internship programme called \"INSPIRE\". Its key features include Interactive Mentorship, Structured Learning, Purposeful Tasks, Innovative Solutions and Rewarding Experience – hence, \"INSPIRE\".
Under INSPIRE, the internships will be extended to minimally 30 weeks and are structured to help interns develop key technical and soft skills. The internship can be done over multiple stints with the same firm without delaying graduation timelines.
Dedicated mentors will guide interns and provide advice in areas such as career development and excelling in the workplace. Firms will also offer a higher internship allowance of at least $1,500, and a higher starting salary above market rate if the intern joins them after graduation. The industry has responded positively. Firms like PH Consulting, DCA Architects, and Aedas, have committed to the programme.
The Surbana Jurong Group has onboarded six interns who have started their internships since January 2026. Among them is Charlotte Chan, a third-year civil engineering student from the Nanyang Technological University. She opted for the 30-week INSPIRE internship rather than the standard 20-week internship. Charlotte was motivated by the opportunity to contribute more to projects and deepen her learning experience. She has expressed appreciation for her supervisor's dedicated mentorship and the higher allowance that INSPIRE interns receive.
The number of participating firms is expected to grow as more industry players recognise the value of nurturing interns with strong workforce readiness. As the INSPIRE internship will deepen skills acquisition, the Professional Engineers Board (PEB) and the Board of Architects (BOA) will recognise this pre-graduation experience as qualifying practical experience towards professional registration.
Beyond fresh graduates, the PEB and BOA will recognise relevant business and leadership related courses as part of the Continuing Professional Development framework to encourage our practising professionals to strengthen business capabilities and acumen.
Industry branding efforts are also showing early results. Through the BuildSG Marketing Campaign, we worked closely with industry leaders, trade association and chambers, working professionals, students, and the public to position the sector as a career of choice. Over the past academic year, there has been an increase in students applying for and enrolling in architecture and civil engineering courses. We will press on with efforts to attract our fair share of the best and brightest to join the BE sector.
For our next phase, we will work on uplifting the quantity surveying profession. Quantity surveyors (QSes), sit at the intersection of engineering, finance and law, and they play critical roles in the smooth delivery of projects. Their expertise lies in managing contracts and project costs within the consultant team.
As QSes' work will be increasingly automated with technology, the QS profession will need to redefine its role and provide more value-added services to stay relevant. This requires the QS profession to build new competencies, master new technologies and strengthen the talent pipeline.
We have established a workgroup to look into this, comprising QS representatives, service buyers, the institutes of higher learning (IHL), and relevant agencies. The QS workgroup will consult stakeholders widely and make recommendations to uplift and future-proof the QS profession. I encourage everyone to share your feedback and suggestions with us.
Mr Henry Kwek asked how we intend to increase productivity and be more pro-enterprise for the BE sector, and Ms Lee Hui Ying asked about our long-term plans to support the growth of the construction industry through infrastructure, manpower and talent. These are pertinent questions that highlight the need for the continued transformation of the BE sector.
The Members also raised valid concerns regarding growing cost pressures and supply chain volatility. We hear your concerns and are taking several steps to address them.
First, we recognise that contractors need greater visibility of key cost drivers to plan effectively. The Government is working closely across agencies to improve forward projections and coordination for critical resources, including soil disposal capacity and dormitory supply. Additionally, we will explore how to provide the industry with more regular updates on the timeline of major infrastructure projects to support more informed project planning decisions.
Minister Chee earlier shared about our plans to help the wider BE sector save time, cost and manpower through the Action Team to improve BE productivity. Let me build on this with a few examples by various stakeholders that complement these initiatives.
First, we have enhanced our procurement and regulatory frameworks.
Following the successful pilot of the \"Reduced Fee Score\", BCA has expanded the Reduced Fee Score to cover public sector projects up to $100 million since December 2025, to discourage fee-diving and put greater emphasis on quality-based procurement. The early results are promising – out of 11 tenders using the Reduced Fee Score since 2024, 10 were awarded to bids with the highest quality scores.
The Limitation of Liability clause is now a default provision in the Standard Consultancy Agreement between Government Procuring Entities and consultants. This enables fairer risk allocations and allows consultants to be better insured against professional liabilities.
We hear Ms Lee Hui Ying's suggestion to review the liability framework for contractors, to ensure robust safety standards while allowing the industry to operate productively. BCA will continue to work closely with contractors and refresh our policies taking into consideration industry feedback.
Second, we have launched the Built Environment Culture of Appreciation, Respect and Empathy (BE CARE) Charter. The Charter outlines best practices to develop more collaborative relationships amongst project teams and strengthen workplace well-being. Over 50 firms and service buyers have committed to it since September 2025.
Arup Singapore is a good example of how the BE CARE spirit can be translated in practical actions. Arup promotes a culture where employees feel safe to speak up and raise concerns. It has put in place frameworks for staff to escalate issues or seek support from the leadership and people team, including anonymous hotline and whistleblower channels.
For project meetings, Arup practises smart communication by planning clear meeting agendas and involving only relevant participants. Staff also respect one another's rest periods by scheduling after-hours emails and having structured handovers before leave days. These are simple practices but make a difference in creating a culture that supports staff well-being.
I encourage more firms to come onboard to collectively improve the BE workplace culture.
Third, we are making progress in leveraging technology. Architectural firms are embracing AI to transform work processes. DP Architects has founded a technology startup, Spatial Intelligence for Design, which is developing AI solutions for the industry.
We encourage more firms to seize the new opportunities that arise as more technologies mature. Interested firms may tap on the Productivity Solutions Grant or the Built Environment Technology and Capability Grant for support.
The new Productivity Solutions Grant tranche will expand support to more solutions, including AI and advanced equipment, such as robotics and automation, including remote-controlled machineries and inspection and imaging equipment, which have shown encouraging productivity gains.
Fourth, trade associations and chambers have ramped up efforts to support their member firms and drive industry transformation in various areas. For example, the Singapore Institute of Architects will be developing an employment resource guide, which includes structured courseware and practical workshops for Singapore Institute of Architects member firms. This initiative equips human resource officers with the skills to better define job roles and chart career progression pathways across the firm. This will enable firms to attract suitable talent and better craft employment contracts as well as support employees in their career development.
These are some of the efforts to implement the taskforce's recommendations to transform the BE sector. Our work does not end here. Moving ahead, we look forward to higher participation by even more stakeholders and greater momentum. The Government will also continue to review our policies in partnership with the industry to further improve BE efficiency and productivity.
Next, let me turn to our plans to improve governance, liveability and maintenance in condominiums and other strata developments.
As strata developments age, MCSTs and unit owners have expressed concerns about rising maintenance costs, ageing facilities and the challenges of collective decision-making to make improvements. We must address these to ensure that these developments continue to be liveable and meet residents' needs, especially for our seniors.
We are undertaking a comprehensive review to strengthen the Building (Strata Management) Act. We will focus on four key areas: first, helping MCSTs work towards accumulating adequate sinking funds for essential maintenance, repairs or upgrades; second, reducing consent thresholds for essential works; third, strengthening self-governance frameworks to promote fair and efficient management of estates; and fourth, clarifying the responsibilities of strata-titled stakeholders.
Let me elaborate on our proposed enhancements to steer MCSTs to maintain adequate sinking funds.
Today, many MCSTs only start collecting funds for lift replacement when the ageing lifts start to experience wear and tear and parts become obsolete. If the MCSTs do not have sufficient sinking funds, they will need to collect special levies from unit owners, which may not be an insignificant sum and for which the owners may not be prepared. This can be avoided if the MCSTs start building up the funds earlier.
To have some oversight over MCSTs' financial planning, we are exploring requiring MCSTs to submit and publish key information about their budgets and finances in a standard format. This would make it easier for unit owners and prospective buyers to understand and track the financial health and sinking fund adequacy of the MCSTs.
On strengthening governance, we are studying measures to prevent gaming of voting systems. We have received feedback on situations where a small group collects many proxy votes and controls decisions in the development. This may not necessarily reflect the best interests of the majority of owners. We are therefore considering limiting the percentage of total proxies which can be held by each household and ensuring that council members undergo proper training.
These changes aim to make estate management fairer and more efficient.
BCA has been engaging strata stakeholders on some of these proposed amendments since June 2025 through platforms such as focus group discussions. To build on this, we will conduct public consultations from 9 March to 8 April 2026. We strongly encourage residents of strata developments to provide your feedback. This review will strengthen our strata management framework to ensure that private residential developments remain well-maintained, accessible and liveable.
We are studying measures to improve the safety and accessibility of our buildings and infrastructure.
One area that we are looking into is enhancing the safety of older lifts and escalators. We are reviewing measures to ensure that ageing lifts and escalators keep pace with modern safety standards such as through the inclusion of features that regulate their speed and movement. We are also exploring providing co-funding support for select essential safety features to eligible private building owners and operators. We will share more details when ready.
As our population ages, our accessibility needs will increase. Many buildings were built in the earlier years when accessibility standards were less well developed.
Introduced in 2007, the Accessibility Fund provides co-funding to encourage private building owners to upgrade their properties with accessibility and universal design features. MND is reviewing potential enhancements to the Accessibility Fund to better support our seniors, persons with disabilities and families to navigate their living environment more safely, including in private developments.
Currently, active ageing and dementia-friendly features are not eligible for funding under the Accessibility Fund. Under the review, we will consider expanding Accessibility Fund funding to cover senior-related features such as senior-friendly fitness stations and dementia-friendly signages. These enhancements aim to create living spaces that enable seniors to stay mobile and physically active and continue living comfortably in familiar surroundings as they age.
To encourage more buildings to pursue upgrades in line with the latest accessibility codes, we are also exploring expanding the Accessibility Fund eligibility to include more private buildings beyond those built before the implementation of the 1990 and 2013 Code on Accessibility.
To boost participation and reduce the cost for private developments, we are also reviewing the amount of co-funding support. Details will be announced in due course.
The initiatives I have outlined today reflect our unwavering commitment to build a better Singapore for all generations, present and future. As we build tomorrow's Singapore together, we do so with confidence that our investments today will create a built environment that is world-class in standards and deeply rooted in our values of inclusivity, safety and excellence. This is how we ensure that Singapore remains a place every citizen will be proud to call home.
The Chairman: Senior Minister of State Sun Xueling.
The Senior Minister of State for National Development (Ms Sun Xueling): Mr Chairman, I thank Members for their questions and suggestions.
Housing is a deeply personal issue because housing needs vary across households and life stages. For example, couples thinking about settling down and starting a family will have different needs from seniors planning ahead for retirement and independent living. We want to ensure that our housing policies and options cater to the diverse needs of various groups across different life stages.
Many young couples apply for a BTO flat as their first home. As Mr Foo Cexiang pointed out, affordability and accessibility are top concerns for these young couples. This is understandable since housing is likely one of their most significant financial commitments at this stage of their life journey.
Securing a home may feel daunting for those who have just started working or if you have heard stories of people who applied many times but were unable to secure a flat. We understand these concerns, which is why we will continue to support our young couples in your homeownership journey.
First, as Minister Chee mentioned in his speech, we will maintain a strong supply of BTO flats.
The majority of these flats – at least 90% of 4-room and bigger flats – are set aside for first-timer families. About two-thirds of first-timer families who applied in 2023 and 2024 were able to book a flat. Since then, application rates have fallen further. In the most recent BTO sales exercise just last month, the median application rate for first-timer families applying for 3-room and bigger flats was 0.9 times.
For young couples who want to secure a flat earlier, we encourage you to consider applying for a less competitive project. Your chances of success will be higher.
Second, we continue to keep flats affordable.
Our BTO flats are priced with significant market discounts. Even for young couples just starting out in your careers, it is likely that you will be able to make your monthly HDB housing repayments with little or no cash outlay. This was the case for nine out of 10 first-timer families who collected keys to their BTO flats in 2025.
For first-timer young couples, the Staggered Downpayment Scheme reduces the initial downpayment to as low as 5% of the flat price. Couples where one party is in or freshly out of school or National Service can apply to defer their income assessment for the Enhanced CPF Housing Grant and an HDB housing loan until just before key collection and potentially have their initial downpayment further reduced to 2.5% of the flat price.
Third, for eligible families who have booked a flat and require temporary housing while awaiting flat completion, we support them through subsidised rental via the Parenthood Provisional Housing Scheme (PPHS). Since 2021, we have significantly ramped up PPHS supply from about 800 units to more than 4,000 today.
Mr Cai Yinzhou asked about raising the PPHS income ceiling. Today, the PPHS income ceiling is set at $7,000 to better target support at families who are less able to afford renting a flat from the open market.
Collectively, these measures demonstrate our commitment to support young couples in purchasing their first home.
As families settle in and grow, their housing needs may change. Mr Foo Cexiang and Ms Nadia Ahmad Samdin asked how we are supporting the needs of larger families.
Today, families with three or more children can benefit from the Third Child Priority Scheme (TCPS). The scheme is open to both first- and second-timer households. Eligible families receive priority allocation for up to 5% of flats sold in the BTO and Sale of Balance Flats (SBF) exercises.
TCPS has been quite popular with application rates of around five times for 5-room and bigger flats. I am pleased to share that we will enhance the TCPS.
First, we will double the current TCPS quota from 5% of the BTO and SBF flat supply to 10% of the BTO and SBF flat supply. This will allow more eligible families to secure a flat.
Second, we will expand the eligibility criteria so that families can qualify for TCPS from the time when the mother is expecting her third child.
These changes will take effect from the June 2026 sales exercise.
Furthermore, to support larger families, we will work towards increasing the supply of bigger flats in the longer term. This is part of our strategy to sustain a robust supply of HDB flats.
We recognise that there will be applicants who face specific and unique challenges, such as single unwed parents, as mentioned by Mr Cai Yinzhou and Mr Foo Cexiang or those with widowed or divorced parents, as mentioned by Ms Sylvia Lim. Mr David Hoe also earlier suggested greater flexibility on the Minimum Occupation Period for families who have grown and need bigger flats with more space.
For such cases, we will consider their extenuating circumstances and are prepared to exercise flexibility on a case-by-case basis.
Beyond flat affordability and accessibility, we are also doing more to support residents' move-in and living experience.
For residents moving into new large-scale BTO estates, new amenities may take some time to become fully operational. To improve the move-in experience, MND and HDB set up the BTO Coordination Committee comprising partner agencies like the Land Transport Authority (LTA), National Environment Agency (NEA), Early Childhood Development Agency (ECDA), Infocomm Media Development Authority (IMDA) and People's Association (PA). In the past eight months, we have had intensive discussions with grassroots advisers and identified five key areas where agencies will better support residents moving into new large-scale BTO estates.
First, bus operations in new housing estates are usually introduced when there is a critical mass of residents, about three months after the first residents have collected their keys. We have heard feedback that the first batch of residents need earlier transport connectivity to help in their moving-in.
To support transport connectivity, HDB and LTA will plan for at least one bus service to be operational in tandem with the first batch of key collection in new large-scale BTO estates. These bus services will be accessible from a bus stop within walking distance of the BTOs and connect residents to amenities and transport nodes such as bus interchanges or MRT stations.
In cases where a regular service cannot commence immediately, agencies will look at interim shuttle bus services.
Second, residents want some access to cooked food and groceries when they move in. Currently, shop operators who rent from HDB commence operations about nine months after the first batch of residents collect their keys, as this is when they assess that there are enough residents to support their business viability. HDB will introduce three initiatives to support shop operators so that residents can enjoy earlier access to cooked food and groceries.
First, HDB has relooked construction timelines and will bring forward the completion of shops as close as possible to the first batch of key collection. HDB will also pre-build outdoor refreshment areas, instead of coffee shop operators having to do so themselves. This will reap time savings of up to eight months and provide cost savings for operators.
Next, HDB will increase the rent-free period for HDB shops in new BTO projects from two months to a maximum of six months. Similarly, for coffee shops, their rent-free period will increase from the current three months to a maximum of six months. This will apply to shop tenders from March 2026, and shops will need to start operations early to enjoy the maximum six-month rent-free period.
For the first two years of operations, HDB also staggers rents, with rent set at 80% and 90% for the first and second year respectively. To enhance support for shop operators, HDB will further lower the rent paid in the first year to 70%. Shop operators can start with a smaller offering of groceries and cooked food, before ramping up to the full offering when a critical mass of residents move in.
Finally, subject to market interest, HDB will consider deploying ready-to-eat, value meals in some HDB blocks that are further away from the coffee shops.
Third, the timelines for childcare centres starting operations can vary. We found that some childcare centres are ready seven months after the first batch of residents collect their keys, while others can take more than a year to be ready. This can be problematic for families who have young children at the point of moving in. Moving forward, we will work closely with ECDA to better support residents with young children moving into new large-scale BTO estates.
First, HDB will aim to site childcare centres in the first blocks to be completed. This better aligns the timeline for childcare centre readiness and the first batch of residents moving in. Second, HDB and ECDA will also streamline construction and handover processes. Potential childcare centre operators will be invited to view the premises as early as possible, to facilitate planning for renovation works. Taken together, childcare centres in new large-scale BTO estates will be up and running earlier. We will plan for them to commence operations within six months after the first batch of residents collect their keys.
The fourth area is with regard to sheltered linkways. Today, HDB plans new BTO estates with a network of sheltered linkways to support residents' daily movements from within the precinct to key transport nodes nearby, such as bus stops. Where practical, linkways are also built to connect residents to amenities adjacent to the BTO estate, such as schools or neighbourhood centres. Moving forward, HDB will enhance the standard for the provision of sheltered linkways in new BTOs where there are clear benefits to residents' safety and convenience, and these linkways will be built before residents move in.
However, not all linkways will be built prior to key collection as residents' walking patterns and accessibility needs may evolve after they move in. Town Councils and other agencies may also add or extend linkways progressively, factoring in residents' walking patterns and new amenities which may be introduced over time. This ensures that estates remain connected in service of residents' needs over time.
Finally, we have also heard feedback about indiscriminate dumping of bulky waste for a small number of new BTO projects, especially during the initial move-in period. HDB is working with the NEA and Town Councils to step up the provision of skip tanks, which are large bins for disposing of bulky items and receptacles, such as metal cages or recycling bins, to provide convenience to residents during the initial move-in period.
Since August 2025, HDB has been providing 50% co-funding to Town Councils that wish to deploy skip tanks at newly completed projects within the first year of the project's completion. We will continue to do so for projects in new large-scale BTO estates. In addition, HDB will strengthen enforcement against indiscriminate dumping by renovation contractors. This includes reviewing the penalty framework to implement stiffer penalties for errant contractors.
Every estate is different and there can be project-specific issues that cause some variation. However, with the basic principles established, we can strive towards achieving these standards for new large-scale BTO estates and can improve the move-in experience for our residents.
We are also improving the liveability of our estates through stakeholder and resident engagement. We recognise that our HDB homes are not only a roof above our heads but also a place to grow and to improve our well-being.
In December last year, we introduced the Play Values Framework. This recognises that our playgrounds are an important infrastructure and community space for our young families with children. With this in mind, we actively consulted early childhood and health professionals, playground specialists and parents.
The published framework emphasises three key aspects of play – physical, social and creative – to address the developmental needs of younger children aged two to five, and older children aged five to 12. We will apply the framework as we build new playgrounds in BTO projects from 2026, and we will work with Town Councils to refresh existing ones in other developed estates. More will be shared in the coming months.
Another aspect of a good living environment is convenient access to essential goods and services. Mr Louis Chua asked about how we ensure good supply and diversity of our neighbourhood shops. Our usual approach is to have a Town Centre at the heart of every HDB town, to serve as the key commercial hub and provide a broad range of goods and services, such as supermarkets, food and beverage outlets and retail shops. The town centre is complemented by neighbourhood centres that are distributed across the town.
In selected precincts that are located further away from the town centre and neighbourhood centres, HDB will also build precinct shops which generally include an eating house, supermarket or minimart and a few shops. Most residents will be able to access commercial facilities with a food court or eating house within 400 metres from their homes.
I thank Mr Louis Chua for his suggestion on having large-scale tenders for hot food vending machine cafes. Most residents would prefer commercial facilities, such as a food court or eating houses. When Members have identified specific HDB estates that need vending machines or hot food and which is supported by market demand and supply, HDB will discuss with Members to facilitate the process.
Mr Azhar Othman and Mr Pritam Singh raised suggestions on rental rates and transparency. Several Members including Mr Henry Kwek, Mr Ang Wei Neng, Ms Mariam Jaafar and Mr Louis Chua have made similar points in this House on 24 September 2025. Mr Azhar suggested that rents be monitored and adjusted by a committee, like the Public Transport Council.
I would like to highlight that shop rentals are fundamentally different from public transport fares. Shops can have a variety of attributes, like location, layout, trade use and branding, which leads to different service offerings and therefore command different rental rates. Also, unlike public transport, each rental transaction is a distinct contractual agreement between willing landlords and tenants, where landlords and tenants take into account market dynamics before making their decision. Public transport, on the other hand, serves the mass public and allows for fare-setting to ensure affordability and financial sustainability.
Mr Azhar Othman and Mr Pritam Singh, like the Members before them, including Mr Henry Kwek, Mr Ang Wei Neng and Ms Mariam Jaafar, want to see reasonable and sustainable HDB shop rental rates. At MND, we have the same objectives. Let me share what HDB is doing to keep HDB rental rates reasonable and competitive.
First, HDB ensures a good supply of shops in every HDB estate and town. When there is adequate supply, tenants have a choice of where to rent, and customers have a choice of where to buy. If rents and product prices are too expensive, both tenants and customers have a choice to go elsewhere.
Second, for shops rented out by HDB, we have introduced new measures to keep rents stable. To encourage prudent bids, successful bidders of all new shop tenders from January 2026 are required to maintain their tendered rent for two tenancy terms instead of one tenancy term of three years. Tenderers are thus encouraged to strike a balance between competitiveness and business sustainability when submitting their tender bids.
For HDB shop tenants facing financial difficulties, HDB will work closely to provide targeted support, where feasible, so that residents can continue to have access to affordable goods and services in their neighbourhood.
In terms of stall rents in HDB coffee shops, it is HDB's intent to enhance transparency and support a well-functioning market by making available relevant rental data to members of the public so that potential stall holders can make prudent business decisions. HDB has announced in January 2026 that we will start collecting data on stall rents charged by rental coffee shop operators and we will look at how this data can be presented in an accessible way to the public. We are exploring the feasibility of collecting and publishing other relevant rental data for HDB coffee shops, such as the rent charged by HDB for outdoor refreshment areas.
For HDB sold shops which are in private hands, the Inland Revenue Authority of Singapore (IRAS) maintains records on lease and tenancy transactions of privately-owned HDB shops that are submitted to IRAS for the payment of stamp duty. This rental data collected by IRAS is made available by geographical location and property type on URA's Real Estate Information System (REALIS). We are committed to publishing accurate data which will help potential shop or stall holders make their decisions. And we will consider a dedicated portal if that is necessary.
More broadly, we are also taking a whole-of-Government approach to prevent, detect and penalise money laundering activities, including through strengthening our monitoring and sensemaking mechanisms. This helps to safeguard our markets, including public and private rental markets, guarding against the impact of such illicit activities.
Taken together, these measures help to ensure that our residents continue to have convenient access to an affordable and diverse selection of heartland shops and services. Mr Chairman, I will now say a few words in Mandarin, please.
(In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] To help the residents access quality and affordable goods and services, as well as to maintain reasonable and stable rentals, HDB will ensure that each housing estate and town has sufficient supply of shops.
For shops under HDB, we have other measures to maintain the stability of shop rentals. Since 2018, HDB has evaluated tender submissions for new coffee shops and new supermarkets based on the “price-quality” method.
HDB not only considers the tender price but also conducts a more comprehensive evaluation of the tender proposals. In addition, HDB has also launched the following measures in January this year.
First, to encourage rational bidding, successful bidders are required to maintain their tendered rent for two tenancy terms instead of one tenancy term of three years. Second, to protect stall holders’ interests, HDB has begun collecting data on stall rents charged by coffee shop operators under its management in order to provide stall holders with more comprehensive and transparent rental information.
The above policies ensure the reasonableness and stability of rental rates for shops under HDB, allowing residents to continue enjoying reasonably priced goods and services.
(In English): Mr Chairman, we will update our housing policies to support the diverse needs of different groups, including young couples, larger families and seniors. In recent years, we have stepped up our efforts to make our HDB towns more liveable, inclusive and responsive to residents' needs.
We will continue to work with Singaporeans to build flats and neighbourhoods that they are proud to call home.
The Chairman: Senior Parliamentary Secretary Dr Syed Harun Alhabsyi.
The Senior Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for National Development (Dr Syed Harun Alhabsyi): Mr Chairman, I thank Members for their questions and cuts.
Building an inclusive and cohesive society has always been at the heart of Singapore's public housing story. As Minister Chee mentioned, I will share how we have been and will continue to strengthen housing support for the more vulnerable Singaporeans.
Let me start with the Public Rental Scheme, a vital social safety net for our lower-income and vulnerable households.
Over the years, we have been improving HDB flat designs, including for our public rental flats. Newer rental blocks have better ventilation and natural lighting. We have improved the layout of each unit to maximise usable space. Rental blocks are also better integrated within each estate to facilitate access to precinct facilities.
In fact, today we have rental flats in the same blocks as sold flats. We call these integrated blocks. They create more opportunities for families living in rental flats and sold flats to interact and contribute to our broader vision of building a more inclusive society. HDB has completed eight such integrated blocks and another 36 are under construction.
Integrated blocks will form part of the approximately 6,300 public rental flats that will be completed over the next five years. This will increase our total supply of rental flats while also helping to refresh some of our existing rental stock. It will also further bring down waiting times for rental flats, which has already improved from a high of 11 months during COVID-19 to an average of three months today.
For many of our vulnerable families, the public rental scheme has been an important source of support. Take Mr Nazri's family for instance. Mr Nazri Zakaria, Ms Nurfitrah Yahya and their four young children moved into a 2-room public rental flat in 2020. Back then, home ownership felt unattainable. But agencies stepped in to lend a hand. Their family benefitted from the ComLink+ programme, where MSF works with agencies, including HDB, to provide integrated support to families with children under 21. Alongside this, HDB's Home Ownership Support Team reached out to Mr Nazri and Ms Nurfitrah to help them along their journey towards home ownership.
Mr Nazri and Ms Nurfitrah shared that the assistance from the Home Ownership Support Team has been invaluable. While Mr Nazri had secured stable full-time employment as a bus driver to help his family regain their financial footing, home ownership still felt like a distant possibility initially. This was because the decision to purchase a home is indeed a big one.
The Home Ownership Support Team worked through the purchase price of their possible flat options, explaining how much downpayment would be required as well as the anticipated monthly mortgage repayments. By breaking down the cost, the couple had better awareness of how this could fit within their budget. Home ownership started to seem more attainable. The Home Ownership Support Team then guided Mr Nazri and Ms Nurfitrah in their flat selection process and remained an important resource for the family all the way until they collected the keys to their new 4-room flat in Yishun recently.
Today, Mr Nazri and Ms Nurfitrah are happy homeowners and I was privileged enough to meet their family at their new home.
I am heartened by Mr Fadli Fawzi's support for the Government's efforts in helping lower-income families accelerate their transition to home ownership. Indeed, Mr Nazri and Ms Nurfitrah's story is one of many. In 2025, more than 2,000 of our existing rental households have booked a flat and are awaiting its completion.
We have been doing even more to support rental households. Last year, we increased the Fresh Start Housing Grant for eligible second-timer ComLink+ rental families from $50,000 to $75,000. Sixty thousand dollars will be dispersed upfront to help the family reduce the mortgage loan required for the flat purchase and the remaining $15,000 will be dispersed over five years after key collection to support their mortgage payments.
We also extended the Fresh Start Housing Scheme to first-timer ComLink+ rental families. They are now allowed to buy a 2-room Flexi or 3-room Standard flat on a shorter lease, which will be more affordable compared to those on a 99-year lease. As first-timers, they are eligible for the Enhanced CPF Housing Grant up to $120,000 in lieu of the Fresh Start Housing Grant.
These enhancements will help empower even more households to achieve home ownership. HDB will also continue to work with rental households individually as home ownership is a long-term financial undertaking that is best informed by understanding each family's unique circumstances. Mr Chairman, in Malay, please.
(In Malay): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] For many vulnerable families, HDB's rental flat scheme has been an important source of support that provides protection and relief when they face hardship.
Take Mr Nazri and his family for instance. I met them recently when they were making preparations to celebrate Hari Raya.
In 2020, Mr Nazri Zakaria, his wife Ms Nurfitrah Yahya and their four young children moved into a 2-room HDB rental flat. They benefitted from the ComLink+ programme, where MSF works with agencies, including HDB, to provide integrated support to families with children under 21 years old. It encompasses assistance, such as in employment, education and housing.
Things improved further when HDB's Home Ownership Support Team reached out to them. The Home Ownership Support Team guided them to examine their home purchase budget and flat options and prepared a clear plan towards home ownership. Through stable employment, joint efforts and consistent savings, Mr Nazri and Ms Nurfitrah, are now proud owners of a new 4-room flat in Yishun.
Their journey was not easy, but it was made easier with strong and continuous support.
Many other families experience similar life struggles. Throughout 2025, more than 2,000 HDB rental households have already booked HDB flats and are waiting for their completion. We are expanding our efforts to support HDB rental households.
Last year, the Fresh Start Housing Grant for eligible Second-Timer ComLink+ rental families was increased from $50,000 to $75,000. Additionally, the Fresh Start Housing Scheme was also extended to First-Timer ComLink+ rental families, enabling them to buy a 2-room Flexi or 3-room Standard flat on a shorter lease.
These measures will give opportunities to more HDB rental families to achieve their dream of owning a home and therefore improve their family's well-being.
(In English): While most of our rental households are families, a substantial 40% are singles. Under the Joint Singles Scheme, single applicants must find co-applicants before they apply. We recognise that this can be challenging.
That is why we introduced the Joint Singles Scheme Operator Run (JSS-OR) pilot in 2021. Under the JSS-OR, applicants can apply individually and the social service agency that is appointed as the operator will help them to identify a suitable flatmate.
Mr Lee Chwee San is one such applicant. He applied alone back in 2022 and New Hope Community Services, the operator for the Bukit Batok JSS-OR site, helped him to find a suitable flatmate.
The operator also helps to manage tenancy matters, mediates among tenants where necessary and organises activities to bring tenants together. This has made a difference for Mr Lee, whom I met recently. He had attended a lohei session organised by New Hope and shared that such activities, which also include games sessions and other festive celebrations, were welcome opportunities to interact and bond with other tenants in the block.
We further expanded options with the Single Room Shared Facilities (SRSF) pilot in 2024. Under SRSF, tenants have individual bedrooms but access to shared facilities.
Both pilots cater to different preferences and both have received positive feedback. That is why we launched the first purpose-built SRSF block in October last year and will scale up both typologies in the coming years. More details will be shared when ready.
Another group that we are paying increasingly close attention to is our seniors. As Ms Nadia Ahmad Samdin highlighted, your housing needs will evolve as you age. Some seniors want to monetise their flat, either by renting their flat out or by selling part of the remaining lease of their flat back to HDB. Others may prefer right-sizing to a smaller flat, notwithstanding the good memories of their current home. With a smaller flat, maintenance is easier and the proceeds can supplement their retirement needs.
These are personal decisions and we will support Singaporeans regardless of the option they choose.
For those who prefer to age in place, you can sell part of your flat's remaining lease to HDB under the LBS. The proceeds will be used to top up your CPF Retirement Account and provide you with monthly lifelong payouts under CPF LIFE. LBS also provides owners with up to $30,000 in cash bonus. From 2021 to 2025, for a 4-room flat, the average LBS proceeds, including the portion used to top up the CPF Retirement Account, plus the LBS bonus received was over $200,000.
Alternatively, you can right-size to a smaller flat and use the sales proceeds to support your retirement. Seniors who right-size to a 3-room or smaller flat can qualify for the Silver Housing Bonus of up to $40,000. For instance, seniors can consider applying for a new 2-room Flexi flat from HDB or right-sizing to a Community Care Apartment. A Community Care Apartment integrates housing with care services and comes with preinstalled fittings and senior-friendly designs. Activities are regularly organised for seniors to interact and seniors receive custodial support through a community manager, providing a peace of mind.
We have launched five Community Care Apartments since 2021. The next one is in Toa Payoh later this year. We will continue launching more Community Care Apartments across various towns, depending on the need.
But there is a limit to how many Community Care Apartments we can build. That is why we are also doing more to make our living environment more senior-friendly and ensure that our seniors can age in place comfortably. Mr Henry Kwek and Mr Liang Eng Hwa will be pleased to hear that agencies are working together to roll out Age Well Neighbourhoods, starting with the first one in Toa Payoh. In each Age Well Neighbourhood, we will improve access to healthcare services and upgrade senior-friendly amenities. This will add to the housing and care options available for seniors. We will continue to review and refine these options for seniors as we go along.
We are also heartened to hear Mr Cai Yinzhou's interest in senior-friendly fittings for residents to age in place.
Even if you are not in an Age Well Neighbourhood, you can still benefit from the many improvements through our upgrading programmes. These include the Neighbourhood Renewal Programme and Silver Upgrading Programme for HDB precincts and our Estate Upgrading Programme for private estates. Four precincts in Chong Boon will be the first to benefit from the Silver Upgrading Programme when the works are complete later this year. By next year, works will complete for another 12 precincts in Ang Mo Kio, Bukit Merah and Toa Payoh.
Mr Fadli Fawzi asked about schemes for improvements within the flat to enable seniors to live more comfortably and securely. Seniors can tap on the EASE to receive subsidies to install items that improve mobility and safety. This is offered as part of HIP and EASE (Direct Application). From April this year, private estates can also benefit from EASE (Private).
Mr Cai Yinzhou also mentioned technologies, such as fire and fall detection. We have installed Home Fire Alarm Devices in over 80% of our public rental flats, with the remainder being progressively equipped at no cost to tenants. Home Fire Alarm Device installation is also offered under EASE and in flats that have fire-rated doors installed under HIP.
On fall detection, HDB partners commercial vendors to offer optional fall detection packages that residents living in sold flats may subscribe to. The Ministry of Health will also roll out the enhanced Home Personal Care service, which includes 24/7 technology-enabled monitoring to detect falls and incidents.
Mr Ang Wei Neng and Mr Dennis Tan asked about our LUP. Since 2001, the LUP has brought direct lift access to 99% of our HDB blocks. Over the years, HDB has piloted and adopted various solutions to bring direct lift access to more blocks. These include machine-room-less lifts and bubble lifts. In 2025, LUP was announced for six blocks and there are plans for LUP to be extended to about 40 more blocks progressively. Residents living in these blocks will be informed in due course.
For residents living in blocks without direct lift access, including those in segmented flats, we have enhanced the Lift Access Housing Grant last year. Eligible families and singles can receive up to $80,000 and $40,000 respectively, to move to a flat with direct lift services. HDB continues to explore new ways to bring direct life access to the remaining blocks, such as working with research institutes to develop and test out new solutions.
Earlier this year, HDB also called for proposals under the HDB Cool Ideas Enterprise. This is a platform that provides enterprises with funding support, mentorship and access to testbed facilities to co-develop solutions that improve the HDB living environment and residents' quality of life.
I would also like to address Mr Dennis Tan's point that his resident at Block 832 did not know that their flat did not have the same floor direct lift access at the point of purchase. If the resident bought the flat directly from HDB, the relevant information would have been provided in the HDB sales brochure at the time. If the resident bought the flat from the resale market, whether a flat has direct lift access is an observable physical feature of the property.
On offering LUP to all blocks, regardless of cost, I hope Mr Tan appreciates that the Government needs to ensure public funds are spent prudently. HDB will continue to explore new technologies to provide direct lift access to remaining blocks where feasible.
We will do our best to cover as many blocks as possible. However, where the cost of providing direct lift access is too high, it is more prudent for the flat owner to move to another unit in the neighbourhood with lift access, using the Lift Access Housing Grant, which we enhanced last year to $80,000.
Mr Chairman, Singapore's public housing landscape is constantly evolving and we will do our best to meet the diverse needs of every Singaporean. Whether you need a place to stay as you navigate life's difficult challenges, or whether you have retired and want to age gracefully in place, we are here to support you.
The Chairman: Minister of State Alvin Tan.
The Minister of State for National Development (Mr Alvin Tan): Mr Chairman, I have spoken in this Chamber about how we must thoughtfully steward the little we have been endowed with. And this means being aware and upfront of the trade-offs with our people as we build homes, schools and hospitals, connectivity nodes for them, and also safeguard our green and blue spaces. It also means taking care of our animals, while managing human animal conflicts when they arise.
Let me start with our animals. Ms Lee Hui Ying called for stronger legislative levers to deter animal cruelty. We are indeed strengthening our animal health and welfare ecosystems. First, we will establish a Veterinary Council as a professional regulatory body to uplift standards for veterinary professionals. The council will register veterinarians, accredit veterinary training programmes and set continuing education requirements. It will also investigate cases of misconduct, where needed. I will introduce the Veterinary Practice Bill to establish the proposed Council this week and I thank our veterinary sector and other stakeholders who have worked with us since 2021 to shape this Bill together.
Second, we are reviewing legislation and codes to improve animal health and welfare, and strengthen safeguards against animal cruelty and abuse. Since 2022, we have consulted widely on the Animals and Birds Act review, to better understand how we can strengthen powers for animal disease prevention and control. We are also studying how to better deter acts of animal cruelty and abuse. That includes reviewing imprisonment terms, fines and disqualification orders for animal welfare offences. I have also met with Animal Concerns Research and Education Society (ACRES) and Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (SPCA) to discuss their White Paper on this issue. We will review all suggestions carefully before engaging the wider public later this year.
Sir, this year, we are also reviewing the Code of Animal Welfare, focusing on groomers and adding a new chapter for dog trainers. There is currently no licensing scheme for these sectors and standards vary. We will consult stakeholders and the public, as we continue to raise standards and professionalism across these sectors.
Meanwhile, we must also manage pest bird species to protect public health and public safety. Mr Abdul Muhaimin Abdul Malik asked how we can better manage pigeon roosting and defecation at air-conditioner ledges. Ms Lee Hui Ying, Mr Liang Eng Hwa, Mr Ang Wei Neng and Mr Pritam Singh asked also how we can manage pigeon, myna and crow populations more effectively.
To keep pest bird populations under control, we must tackle the root cause, which is food. We therefore work with partners to improve food waste management, enforce against illegal bird feeding and, very importantly, educate the public.
In June 2025, we expanded our Pigeon Management Plan to Jalan Besar, Marsiling-Yew Tee and Nee Soon. We will roll this out across Singapore in phases. HDB is also trialling half-height netting in Punggol and Toa Payoh to prevent pigeon nesting at the air-conditioner ledges of HDB blocks. We will share HDB's findings with all Town Councils after this trial.
Mr Pritam Singh and Ms Lee Hui Ying also asked about the safety protocols for crow shooting. NParks has worked with the Ministry of Home Affairs and its relevant agencies to develop strict shooting protocols. This includes ensuring the shooting trajectory is always directed upwards, cordoning safety zones with the appropriate signages and deploying personnel to manage public access and restrict unauthorised movement during crow shooting operations.
NParks will resume crow shooting progressively from the second half of this month. We will select locations based on a range of factors, including public feedback and technical feasibility of the crow shooting operations. But ultimately, in spite of everything that we are doing, we need everyone to work together, a shared responsibility. Please do not feed the birds. Keep our environment clean. These small things will help keep our living environment all the more liveable for all of us.
Sir, just as we carefully steward and manage the animals in our midst, we must also steward and manage our green and blue spaces. I agree with Ms Nadia Samdin that nature is important to our long-term resilience as a city. That is why we are expanding our green spaces as part of our City in Nature vision. And we are on track to building more than 25 new parks and 50 kilometres of park connectors in the next five years.
We are also enhancing ecological connectivity across our island. We are planting more native trees and shrubs along roads that mimic the multi-tiered structure of forests. These Nature Ways help animals, like birds and butterflies, move between our nature reserves, parks and gardens. Together with park connectors and parks, they will form broader Nature Corridors that connect habitats across our most biodiverse areas.
We are also making our parks even more welcoming and accessible, like our iconic Gardens by the Bay. Today, I am pleased to announce that Gardens by the Bay will welcome an all-new Wetlands by the Bay. We will expand our current Kingfisher Wetlands precinct, with over 600 mangrove and coastal plants that you can kayak through. It will be three times the current area, three times the number of plants.
We will also build a new canopy boardwalk over the wetlands, connecting Gardens by the Bay MRT station to key attractions within Bay South Garden. We will also build Glade Lawn, a new community green space that will host events and activities, and also serve as a place for visitors to relax and unwind.
We are also starting work on a new pedestrian bridge that directly connects Bay South and Bay East Garden and we expect to complete the bridge by 2028 – so visitors do not need to go all the way across Marina Barrage to the other side.
Beyond the Gardens, we are also rejuvenating and linking 13 parks in southwestern Singapore, including three destination parks. Today, I am happy to share some key ideas from about 2,500 responses that will shape these parks.
Many of you who joined this consultation asked for better accessibility and amenities along key stretches, such as more recreation options, restrooms and shaded areas. At the same time, you also told us that you wanted us to preserve the greenery and the tranquility of the parks, while adding experiences for different users
So, we will explore inclusive nature-based trails connecting the southwestern parks to bring the community closer together through discovery and play.
We will enhance West Coast Park's coastal charm by integrating maritime and cultural heritage elements across the park. We will also introduce new amenities, thoughtfully taking care to protect West Coast Park's tranquil nature.
For Hort Park, we will make Hort Park an even more inclusive, welcoming gardening hub, where the community can gather and participate in hands-on programmes. We will keep Labrador Nature Park serene and natural, while adding new features to showcase its heritage and biodiversity.
So, I thank park users, the community and residents for their valuable feedback, and look forward to enhancing these parks and more.
Let me next move from our parks and our green spaces to our blue spaces. In 2014, we established Sisters' Islands Marine Park, which has become a safe haven for turtle conservation and a living gene bank for our corals. In fact, I visited the Marine Park last year to release 76 baby hawksbill turtles that NParks had uncovered at East Coast Park. The Marine Park is a popular nesting site, with the turtle hatchery there, keeping baby turtles safe from human traffic, from predators and high tides.
This year, we will formally designate a second marine park at Lazarus South and Kusu Reef to provide more opportunities for recreation, conservation, research and education. Sir, protecting our waters also means understanding them better. We will therefore invest $60 million in a new marine science research centre of excellence. This Centre will be hosted by the National University of Singapore and supported by Research, Innovation and Enterprise 2030 funds.
The centre will bring together expertise across disciplines to develop local capabilities and talent, working with institutions like St John's Island National Marine Laboratory and partners across the marine community. NParks is partnering the National University of Singapore on the Centre and will share more details later this year.
Chairman, we face many competing needs as we develop Singapore and we balance these needs through careful master planning, taking a long-term view informed by Singaporean's aspirations. Minister Chee Hong Tat shared how one of MNDs key priorities is to ensure that we develop Singapore sustainably and balance our land use requirements. But some trade-offs will always be with us because of our limited land size and land constraints.
Even as we steward our green and blue spaces, we must also carefully steward this balance between nature and development, as Ms Nadia Samdin has urged. I want to assure her that we take the ecological impact of planned developments seriously.
Mr Dennis Tan again raised concerns over Serangoon Forest and the Lorong Halus bus depot and asked for baseline studies for all forested plots. I have already addressed this in response to its Adjournment Motion in January, but I will briefly reiterate because these are important points.
We have to balance many competing needs, including for housing, education, green spaces, within our constraints, our limited land. Mr Tan spoke also how other countries are safeguarding and revitalising brown field sites with nature-based solutions. As I have said, we do not have the luxury of land and space that other countries have. Instead, we must make do with what little we have.
But I want to assure him at the same time that we already have a robust framework in place to balance developmental needs against conserving green spaces that all of us enjoy. This is not a binary approach.
Under our Planning Act, no development can take place without planning permission. And as part of the planning approval process, we assess a site's potential ecological and biodiversity value. This is based on the site's current state, not its zoning. Projects in, or near sensitive areas or that have potential transboundary impact, must undergo in-depth consultation with technical agencies, and we require an EIA if there is potential significant environmental impact from the development. Where an EIA is not required, agencies may still impose measures to mitigate impact.
So, it is not just mitigate, as Mr Tan has said. In many instances, it is also avoid and adapt. Through our EIAs, we consider needs for housing, jobs and others, alongside the ecological and biodiversity impact of the proposed development. Decisions are made only after carefully weighing these very difficult trade-offs. Mr Henry Kwek's example of how MND officers engaged him and his residents 22, 23 times is a case in point. This approach protects our most ecologically sensitive sites while balancing against our pressing developmental needs.
[Deputy Speaker (Mr Christopher de Souza) in the Chair]
Sir, we are also stewarding places which hold our collective shared memories. Mr Cai Yinzhou asked if we will consider a social and heritage assessment framework for urban development projects. This is already part of how we plan. We partner stakeholders to identify built heritage that is architecturally and socially significant, consulting groups like the Heritage and Identity Partnership and the National Heritage Board's Heritage Advisory Panel upstream in planning.
We have evolved our approach over time. In 2018, we piloted a heritage study of the Old Police Academy at Mount Pleasant. That is in Mr Cai's constituency, upcoming and opposite mine. We have conserved six of the most significant buildings and given them new uses, including as a Neighbourhood Police Post and an SPF Heritage Gallery. We will also retain part of the former parade square as a public space for community use. We will weave these elements into a new Mount Pleasant estate that will bring 6,000 homes together with heritage and nature.
Sir, in 2022, we launched the Heritage Impact Assessment Framework for projects that may significantly impact sites with heritage significance. The findings from the assessment guide how we plan our developments, conserve or adaptively reuse heritage elements and engage stakeholders.
Take Bukit Timah Turf City for example. A 2024 assessment recognised its 66 years as one of Southeast Asia's top racecourses. Even as we transform the site into a housing estate, we will conserve the two grandstands that once housed thousands of spectators, as well as the former Bukit Timah saddle club clubhouse. We will sensitively adapt and integrate these landmarks into future developments to keep the area's history alive
Today, we have conserved over 7,200 buildings and structures. Where we cannot conserve, or there are constraints to conserving, we honour a place's history through thoughtful design and storytelling. We will also strengthen the appeal and character of the six identity corridors which are familiar neighbourhoods with landmarks that resonate with Singaporeans. This keeps us rooted in our past, even as we build for the future.
Mr Cai Yinzhou also asked if we can better use our freshwater bodies for recreation. Today, many of our reservoirs are active water sports hubs and we have multiple water activity outlets across our island. As an advisor to the Singapore Canoe Federation, I use those water bodies very often. Many of our reservoirs, as I mentioned, are active water sports hubs and we have multiple water activity outlets where residents can rent equipment and take part in water sports activities like kayaking and canoeing.
Our upcoming PAssion Wave Outpost at Bayfront, located at Marina Reservoir, will further give Singaporeans direct access to water recreation opportunities right at our city's doorstep. We hope that these play spaces will bring more Singaporeans together and make our city a little bit more vibrant, a little bit more endearing.
Sir, we also need to steward the place where we live. In 2014, we formed the Municipal Services Office (MSO), so residents need not navigate a maze of agencies just to resolve a municipal services problem. Today, they only need to submit issues through our OneService Channels. Our backend systems will do the rest, with AI and smart routing capabilities directing about 90% of cases to the right agency or Town Council.
At the same time, I have been working together with our OneService team to improve the functioning of the app and to make it even easier for residents to input their feedback. Even as we upgrade and improve on the OneService app, we also continue to challenge ourselves to improve how we deliver municipal services. Sir, allow me to share how we do so, in Mandarin.
(In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] In 2022, the MSO launched the integrated municipal services trial in Tampines and expanded it to Pasir Ris and Punggol.
Under this model, we consolidated simple municipal services provided by various Government services and assigned them to a single management operator. This allows us to focus our energy on solving problems rather than determining which Government agency the problem belongs to.
Today, frontline staff have learned more skills and can handle problems more quickly. For example, if a cleaning staff discover uneven pavement on the walkways, they can immediately cordon off the area and notify the maintenance team. Landscaping staff who notice soil subsistence can also proactively fill it up to prevent residents from tripping, and also to prevent mosquito breeding. In this way, problems can be resolved more quickly. Residents are happier and satisfied, and participating companies and employees have also learned new professional skills.
Last year we began discussions with operators on how to further expand this model. They have expressed strong support for this. Therefore, we will expand the Integrated Municipal Services model to surrounding towns. We will implement in phases to give operators sufficient time to adapt while carefully listening to their feedback and incorporating it into our planning.
(In English): Mr Chairman, our tiny island home is ours to steward. And even as we build our homes, our schools, our hospitals, our airports, our connectivity hubs for our people, we continue to carefully steward our nature and places which hold special memories for us.
Sir, as I have mentioned many times in this House and in this Chamber, we do not have much to work with. And as responsible stewards of our land, we will always be upfront with Singaporeans about what we can do and what we cannot do so that we can continue to shape our tiny island nation into one of the most liveable cities in the world.
The Chairman: We have some time for clarifications. See some hands. Mr Henry Kwek.
Mr Kwek Hian Chuan Henry: Chairman, I have three short clarifications. Given that condominium prices and wages have risen over time, can MND share a timeframe or timeline when the income ceiling review will be concluded? Is it in a matter of months, or is it when some threshold conditions are met?
Second question is, MND shared that we will have more bigger flats supply coming up. Does it include 5-room flats, which I have asked earlier on?
And third of all is, taller blocks mean higher specification lifts and stricter fire safety standards, driving up long-term maintenance cost. Is MND prepared to help Town Councils offset the added life-cycle cost?
Mr Chee Hong Tat: Chairman, Mr Kwek asked about the timing of our review of income eligibility threshold. This is something which we are actively looking at. I am unable at this point in time to give him a concrete timeline, but certainly we will be ready to share this when the review is completed.
Second question, are we going to build more 5-room flats? The answer is yes, we are going to look for more places where we can do this, and that is why I shared earlier that we need to look for more land that we can prepare the site to build more, build faster. We also need to look at how we can intensify land usage by building taller through clever design, use of more integrated and mixed-use facilities to be able to squeeze out more land productivity. Then, we will have more space. Land is going to be limited in Singapore. That is something which I think all of us would agree. But if we can improve land productivity, we are able to squeeze out more space, then, I can use that space to provide more supply to meet the needs of different groups of buyers – whether it is the singles, seniors, larger families and other groups.
Last question, taller blocks, are we going to be able to provide more support to our Town Councils? Sir, I mentioned earlier in my main speech that the approach that we will continue to take is a partnership. We recognise that the costs have gone up, and we also recognise, as Mr Liang mentioned earlier in his cut, that in some areas the cost of providing those maintenance and services would be higher than the conventional method. He mentioned about the pneumatic waste collection system. And there are some system level gains because you save land, but the maintenance cost in some areas could be higher because the operations are more complex.
So, this is an area where I think if we can work closely with the Town Council, it is a win-win outcome. Certainly, for taller blocks as well, there are system level gains that we derive. But if there are going to be areas where Town Councils will have to spend more, then we have to look at it to see what we can do to ensure that it is a fair arrangement where the Government, Town Councils and also residents would all contribute to this.
The Chairman: Mr Liang Eng Hwa.
Mr Liang Eng Hwa: Sir, Minister Chee, in his speech mentioned that this year we will be launching 19,600 new BTO flats. So, I would like to ask, how he sees the trajectory in the next two, three years. Whether in the next two, three years, are we able to meet the peak demands for the BTO flats, mindful that family formations are much lower than that number? So, whether that trajectory is going to still be there.
My second clarification is on LUP. In the remaining 100 blocks, I am sure there are some blocks where some stacks of the blocks are technically very challenging to do, but another stack could be doable, is feasible to do. Will HDB look at LUP for some blocks on a partial basis? At least some blocks get to be served with lift access, rather than just because one stack cannot be done, the whole block cannot get the lift upgrading.
Mr Chee Hong Tat: Chairman, I will take both questions. The question to the first question is yes, we will continue with a robust supply of new BTO flats to meet the needs of buyers.
I shared earlier that there are different groups of buyers that we are trying to cater to. If we lower the eligibility age for singles to be able to buy BTO flats, more people will be able to apply. If we raise the income threshold, more people will be eligible to apply. If we want to cater to more buyers who previously may be staying with their family members but now want to stay near but have their own flat, that will also lead to a higher demand for housing.
Even though the number of people in the household, the average household size, may have come down, the number of households have actually increased because of this household fragmentation that we are seeing.
This year, we are building 19,600. I have said earlier that if demand remains strong, HDB will continue with this robust supply and we will go beyond what we earlier committed, which is to build 55,000 in three years. We are prepared to go beyond. We are getting ready to be able to do that.
The second question on LUP, I take Mr Liang's point that we do not want to view this in a binary manner, that we cannot do for the whole block because some parts cannot do, so I take his point. The assurance I want to give Members, as my colleague Senior Parliamentary Secretary Harun mentioned earlier, is that we will do our best, because it is our intent to try and provide lift access to as many households as possible. We will do our best.
But I also seek the understanding of the House that in some cases, this may not be possible because the technology may not allow us to do it for that configuration or it will just simply be too expensive. As Senior Parliamentary Secretary Harun mentioned earlier, we are using taxpayers' money, public funds. I think there is a need to balance and to be prudent.
We will try our very best. I am hopeful that with new technologies coming out and working closely with the industry, there will be more options available that will allow us to be able to cater to more units.
The Chairman: Mr Fadli Fawzi.
Mr Fadli Fawzi: Thank you, Mr Chairman. I have two clarifications. First, I would like to ask when the monthly household income ceiling for the Public Rental Scheme's eligibility was last revised and whether there are any plans to review this ceiling in light of wage increases under the Progressive Wage Model. Second, what are the targets that the Ministry has set to increase the number of rental households transitioning to home ownership for each year up to 2030?
The Chairman: Senior Parliamentary Secretary Syed Harun, are you taking that as a response? Please proceed.
Dr Syed Harun Alhabsyi: Thank you, Chairman. With regard to the question on when the income threshold was last reviewed, I do not have the information with me at this point of time. I invite the Member to file a Parliamentary Question if he so chooses.
But I would like to assure the Member that when it comes to rental households, we do look at wanting to be able to support our vulnerable households as much as possible. It is not merely just about the rental flats but also a wraparound approach with regards to supporting them. Certainly, it is not about just the rental flats, but also about their ability to sustain their income in terms of employment opportunities as well as supporting the entire family, including the educational needs of their children.
With regard to the Member's question on — sorry, can I just clarify the second question?
The Chairman: Mr Fadli Fawzi.
Mr Fadli Fawzi: The second question is about targets, the target to increase the transition from rental housing to home ownership.
Dr Syed Harun Alhabsyi: I thank the Member for clarifying the question. In terms of targets, we do not set any annual targets with regards to the transition from rental households to home ownership. Why we do this is because our objective is to support as many rental households as possible to achieve home ownership so long as they are ready.
As I have shared in my speech earlier, in the last year alone, we have helped 2,000 rental families transit in terms of their plans to home ownership and they are waiting for their flats. Indeed, home ownership is a long-term financial commitment. A family's readiness for the transition to home ownership depends on their very specific circumstances, such as employment stability and their savings. So, we work very closely with each rental family to assess their level of readiness for home ownership and to support them in their journey. In recent years, we continued to enhance this support for them to achieve so.
The Chairman: Mr Ang Wei Neng.
Mr Ang Wei Neng: I would like to seek a clarification regarding the Lift Access Housing Grant. Could the qualifying criteria be relaxed for occupants aged 70 and above, without the need for medical certification? Additionally, could HDB require new buyers of resale segmented flat to sign a letter of undertaking to indicate that they know that the flat is unlikely to qualify for LUP in the near future?
The next clarification. We are excited about the 60-storey HDB flat that is near Pearl's Hill Terrace. Considering our future housing needs, I agree that we should explore more options to construct higher HDB flats. Could the Minister share which HDB towns could realistically support high-rise developments of above 50 storeys?
The last clarification is about pest, wild birds. Is MND satisfied with the current resources to deal with the annual 22,000 cases on pest birds, would MND be prepared to add more resources to combat pest birds, including intensified efforts to control food waste and food for feeding of the birds?
Dr Syed Harun Alhabsyi: Chairman, I will take the question on the Lift Access Housing Grant. I thank Mr Ang Wei Neng for the question. As far as the Lift Access Housing Grant is concerned, it is meant for citizen households with members who have medical conditions or mobility issues and who need to urgently buy another flat with direct lift access. The eligibility is assessed based on needs rather than the age of residents and one of the requirements is that there must be a medical condition for which this particular family member or this particular owner has difficulty in terms of mobility and navigating the stairs, which present as a limiting factor at this point of time.
We currently do not have any plans to expand the Lift Access Housing Grant criteria based on age. It is really about the medical needs. Where there is a doctor who can certify that this individual has an illness or conditions which affect his mobility, among other criteria of the Lift Access Housing Grant, then that is something that we will consider for that individual.
The Chairman: Minister Chee, are you going to respond to the two other clarifications from Mr Ang? Please proceed. Minister Chee.
Mr Chee Hong Tat: Thank you, Mr Chairman. Mr Chairman, the first question about 60 storeys, I think it is a bit too early for us to pinpoint which towns we are going to be able to do this, besides the one at Pearl's Hill that I just announced. But certainly, as I said in my speech, where we can, where possible, we would like to do so. Because this is a way to be able to increase the number of units, making better use of the limited land that we have and create more space.
On wild birds, I thank Mr Ang for his support. As Minister of State Tan mentioned earlier, this requires a whole-of-society effort. We cannot solve the problem with just adding more and more enforcement officers or pest control teams, whether NParks or contractors. That is something that we will certainly do to make sure that they are adequately resourced to do their work, but we cannot just do that alone because we also need the other measures to work together as a package. For example, as Senior Minister of State Tan said earlier, please do not feed the birds. That is something which will help a lot. Please manage the food waste properly. That will also help. It takes a whole-of-society effort for us to do this and keep our environment safe and pleasant for everyone.
The Chairman: Mr Pritam Singh.
Mr Pritam Singh: Thank you, Chair. Just a few very quick clarifications and questions. First, on the matter of lower eligibility age for singles who want to purchase BTO flats. I believe that is what the Minister shared MND was looking into, but please correct me if I am wrong. At the same time, I heard the Minister mention earlier that the median application rate for singles is still high, but he did not give a number. However, I believe he gave a number – 2.6 times for first- and second-timers.
So, I appreciate if the Minister could share what the median application rate currently for singles is.
At the same time, in view of the review with regard to the lower eligibility age for singles, because it is a limited window for those individuals vis-à-vis their age, when will MND confirm the new age eligibility criteria for singles?
The second point is on my cut on income eligibility thresholds, to remove the ceiling. Just to be clear, it is not a call to remove the ceiling carte blanche; there are encumbrances which I wish to stress. I think those encumbrances can offer another option. It will be as good as another scheme for a certain category of BTO buyers.
Finally, I thank Senior Minister of State Sun for looking at the prospects of a portal for publishing the rental of HDB shops. Just a small correction on my part. I said that I called on HDB to make this information in October last year. It should be September.
The Chairman: Minister Chee, would you like to go first?
Mr Chee Hong Tat: Thank you, Mr Chairman, I will take the first two questions and my colleague Senior Minister of State Sun will take that third one.
Sir, I do not have a number that I can share with Mr Singh at the moment, but it suffices to say that the application rate for the 2-room Flexi, which is what the singles and the seniors are able to apply for, that number is higher than for families. And that is why I mentioned earlier in my speech that we are going to increase the supply of 2-room Flexi flats by about 50% over the next three years to be able to meet this strong demand.
Looking ahead, I think we are also reviewing whether for some groups of singles who may not want to buy a 2-room Flexi on their own but they may want to buy with a family member, but they need a bigger flat, whether that is something that we can also allow, if we are able to have adequate supply. That is what we are looking at.
I cannot give a timing on when we can review this as well because it really depends on when we feel confident about the supply being adequate.
I hope Mr Singh understands this point and I am sure he does, which is that if I lower the age before supply is adequate, we may then end up with more people entering the market to apply. Then demand goes up. That will also affect the existing group of applicants, including the singles who are aged 35 and above. So, to avoid that, we should time this properly, do it when we are confident that we are able to meet the increase in demand from the various groups of buyers.
The second question on the removal of the income ceiling, we are of the same understanding, Mr Singh. I did mention in my speech earlier that you are not proposing to remove it – full stop; but with certain restrictions imposed on the people who exceed the income threshold.
I did acknowledge in my speech that it is something that we have to study carefully, because there are trade-offs. For example, if you allow this group – currently they are not eligible – if you allow them to come in, they will then apply for the same stock, the same supply of BTO flats that the other buyers, the eight out 10 who are currently below the income ceiling, this group will come in and compete with them for this supply of BTO flats.
So, again, in order to ensure that we are able to meet this higher demand, supply is key, and that is why I hope to have the support of all Members of this House that we have to build more and build faster. There will be some trade-offs that we will need to make, including what Mr Dennis Tan mentioned. If I can avoid affecting some of the areas, I would, but we do have difficult trade-offs that we need to make. And if we prioritise providing adequate housing supply for our people as the number one priority, and if this House agrees with that, then what it means is that we have to be honest and candid about some of the trade-offs that we have to make.
The Chairman: Minister of State Sun Xueling, would you like to respond to the third point from Mr Pritam Singh?
Ms Sun Xueling: Mr Pritam Singh made a clarification on his cut and did not have a question for me, so I have nothing to add.
The Chairman: Ms Nadia Samdin.
Ms Nadia Ahmad Samdin: Thank you, Chairman. I have three clarifications. The first is on blue spaces for Minister of State Alvin Tan. I was very excited to hear more about the new Marine Science Centre. Could he please clarify how will its work complement existing efforts, for example, of St John's Island National Marine Laboratory and other institutions like the Singapore Oceanarium Research and Learning Centre, holistically, and how can Singaporeans, youths and citizen scientists be involved in its work?
Next, could he also share more on the plans for the second Marine Park's recreational spaces, and what lessons can be learnt from the first Sister Islands Marine Park? I also note that the second Marine Park, which includes Lazarus South and Kusu, generally have higher levels of human activity, for example, Kusu during the pilgrimage season, and Lazarus South, for example, recreational spaces and tiny homes. So, how will MND take this into consideration, for example, in terms of zoning and visitor management, when designating this second park, so that we can protect our habitats and minimise pressure on the environment?
My second clarification is for Singapore Parliamentary Secretary Syed Harun, regarding lessons learnt from the SRSF and JSS-OR pilots, including in Ang Mo Kio, where I serve. For example, some who work as delivery riders have asked if there can be motorcycle lots provided, and also, as there are residents who have certain health and well-being challenges, can MND look at centralising more services beyond the example given, which was New Hope, who already does a very good job, I should add.
My last question is just for further help on supporting divorcees, as I asked in my cut.
The Chairman: Minister of State Alvin Tan, would you like to respond?
Mr Alvin Tan: Sir, I will respond to Ms Nadia Samdin's first two clarifications and I will leave Senior Parliamentary Secretary Syed Harun to respond to her latter two.
First of all, I wanted to thank Ms Nadia Samdin for her work with the Friends of Marine Park, and that is why she is very interested in this. For the second Marine Park, the intent is to safeguard the ecologically significant habitats around the area, and also to enhance the existing biodiversity with the existing ones on Sisters' Island.
The intent is also to provide spaces for recreation, for research, for outreach and for education. In this regard, the Friends of Marine Park stakeholders are very important, together with Youth Stewards for Nature, as well as other researchers, outreach, policy groups. They form our key stakeholder group for us to look into addressing and also enhancing many of these features for the second Marine Park. We will then also review any of these compatible features that we can put in after taking into consideration their feedback.
With regards to the Marine Science Centre, it is a nationally coordinated research programme. So, the new Marine Science Centre will in fact work with the Oceanarium and others to coordinate research about marine science capabilities and biodiversity. It will provide a unique strategic vision across all of these different stakeholders and critically involve youths, Government stakeholders, industry researchers, universities, building talent so that we can build a good talent source to research into all the critical marine biology topics that are critical for our area.
Finally, we will also be able to then partner with regional institutions to enhance understanding of marine biology and preservation.
Dr Syed Harun Alhabsyi: I thank the Member, Ms Nadia Ahmad Samdin, with regard to her two questions. For SRSF, as I mentioned in my speech, the response and feedback have been positive. I think the residents have found that their preferences of having a room to themselves and then, subsequent to that, having shared common facilities, continue to be something that has been well received. That is precisely why we are looking to scale. While some of the limitations that the Member has shared are specific to the current temporary site, some of the feedback will also be taken with us, as we transit into the permanent block as part of the new features. We will continue to develop the space and we will continue to see how best we can improve for our public rental flats.
I understand that the question was relating to other vulnerable groups, moving forward, the third question. We will continue to see where the needs are and we will continue to see how best we can align some of our policies to be able to reach out to these vulnerable groups. It remains our intent to make sure that we are able to support as many vulnerable groups, including the divorcees and the single-parent families. We will see how best we need to tweak some of the policies to support in that regard.
Mr Chairman, with your permission, I would like to also respond to Mr Fadli Fawzi's earlier clarification. I do have a response.
The Chairman: Please proceed.
Dr Syed Harun Alhabsyi: Thank you, Mr Chairman. With regard to the income ceiling for public rental housing, just to reassure the Member, as well as Members here, that there is no income ceiling for public rental since 2023. Applications are renewed, reviewed holistically and taking into account the individual household income, household size, housing budget, as well as individual circumstances.
So, it really rings true with regard to our desire to look at the issue of each and every person and family holistically to then be able to see how best we can lean forward to support.
The Chairman: Mr Louis Chua.
Mr Chua Kheng Wee Louis: Thank you, Chairman. Just two clarifications for Minister Chee. The first is on the review of the EC policy – any timeline around that?
Second is in terms of how the Minister talked about building a robust supply pipeline and given that we are now in March 2026. On the HDB front, is it still the plan to have the supply come down to about 15,700 or so, versus the 19,600 levels today. That is for 2027.
Similarly, for private residential property, what are the expectations on supply for the second half of 2026 as well as 2027; the reason being, if I look at the last three Government Land Sale programmes, I think the supply has been coming down, especially for EC supply.
Mr Chee Hong Tat: Thank you, Mr Chairman. The EC review is ongoing. So, I cannot give you a specific timeline. I think the important thing is this. I think Mr Chua highlighted this in his cut as well – it is not so straightforward. I think Mr Kwek mentioned this as well.
If it is something that we can do by just increasing the grant, that is quite direct. But in this case, if that is the move that we make, and because we do not control the EC prices – these are based on what developers bid and what they sell – there is a risk that much of the support given, which is going to come from taxpayers, public funds, will be creamed off by the EC developers, instead of going to the home buyers, which was the intent.
So, I think this is something which we need to look at carefully: how do you intervene appropriately, but without fundamentally changing the nature of what the ECs are. As I explained in my speech to Mr Chua's cut, ECs are more comparable to private condominiums. They are not public housing. Actually, after the 10-year period, they become exactly like a private condominium. And you can sell to anyone, including foreigners.
Because of that, I think we need to ask ourselves as well: if you do this review, do you want to retain the fundamental nature of ECs, or do you want to actually change this? I think that is quite an important point to bear in mind. And if you want to retain it, then what are some of the moves that we can make to improve affordability but yet maintain this feature that it is closer to or more comparable to private condominiums, rather than to resale flats and to public housing.
On supply pipeline, I have actually addressed this earlier in my response to some of the earlier clarifications that we are not going to keep ourselves limited to the 55,000, which is what I said earlier as well. If we need to go beyond this 55,000, we will do so. If there is strong demand and we need to go higher than what we had earlier planned for, we will do so.
Private residential, same thing, I have also said this previously that if the demand remains strong, we do have some capacity that we can release. There are two ways to do this: we can either activate a new site and release it through the Government Land Sale programme; or we could convert some of the sites from reserve to the Government Land Sale programme, or put some new sites into reserve that the developers could trigger if the demand is strong.
So, there are very various ways to do this, but whether it is public housing or private housing, it goes back to the fundamental point that I mentioned earlier – which is that in order to meet all these different demands, all these different needs, supply is key.
And supply means we have to build more. We have to activate more pieces of land. We have to build higher. We have to improve land intensification, improve the design so that we are able to have more integrated mixed use.
These are all the different ways that we can increase the supply.
The Chairman: Mr Foo Cexiang.
Mr Foo Cexiang: Thank you, Chairman. I have three qualifications. First, on lifts. The Tiong Bahru estate, consisting of pre-war and post-war buildings, has not had a lift since its establishment. A lot of the residents are getting older. I would like to ask whether I can work with MND, with a special task force, to explore all options. As the Minister described, they would be prepared to do so.
Second, on pigeons. I think all of us face the concerns of pigeons defecating on the air-conditioning ledges; me as well. I look forward to the recommendations from the Punggol pilot, but I would like to ask the Ministry whether it would consider the use of audible pigeon deterrent devices, such as bio-acoustic units that use pre-recorded predator calls as part of the whole set of factors to combat this. This is just a suggestion.
The third one, the lifts in super high-rise flats. I think the example from The Pinnacle@Duxton would be quite instructive. Currently, the feedback that I receive from residents of Pinnacle is. One, they pay higher S&CC charges, but why does the lifts seem to break down sometimes? And two, a lot of them tell me that they set aside at least 15 minutes to catch the lift, for the fear of having to wait for a long time, especially when one of the lifts is broken down.
But the reality is that while they pay higher S&CC charges, the cost of maintaining this lift is actually more than for other typical HDB flats. So, I think this point which the Minister made that up front, HDB, Town Council and residents will need to have good understanding is a very critical point. It may be better to over specify the number of lifts at the start and pay a higher price at the start, rather than having to maintain a large number of lifts that are not functioning properly in the future, over the longer term. So, that is just a point for me to highlight.
Mr Chee Hong Tat: Mr Chairman, I thank Mr Foo for his three points. Certainly, we will be happy to work with him on some of the specific local challenges that he is facing with the older blocks in his constituency.
On pigeons, we are open to considering different possible ways and we can test this out to see whether they are effective. I do not know whether what Mr Foo describe is a workable solution or not, but I am prepared to try it, and I think we should be open-minded trying different ideas. Black cat, white cat, as long as can catch mice, it is a good cat. So as long as the method works, I think we should be prepared to try.
The last point about lifts is an important one. Because as I described earlier, there are system level gains that we can derive when we build taller, but we do need to then make sure that we be fair to the Town Councils and be fair to the residents. The experience with Pinnacle that was built quite some time ago. I think, today, we learn from that and when we design, we will bring in the latest design specifications and technology.
And also, I think we will certainly bear in mind how we support the Town Councils and the residents where we have some of these features in our estates that derive system level gains that all of us will benefit from but can impose some local level additional cost. So, if we can find a way to bridge that, then we can open up more possibilities that will be good for the country as a whole, the society as a whole.
The Chairman: Mr Dennis Tan.
Mr Dennis Tan Lip Fong: I have two clarifications. My first clarification is for Senior Parliamentary Secretary Dr Syed Harun. Would the Senior Parliamentary Secretary be able to give a clearer timeline for the LUP for the 40 blocks? At least give an indication, for example, does HDB expect this to be carried out within the next two years or five years?
My second clarification is for Minister of State Alvin. Minister of State Alvin was replying regarding the part in my cut on avoid-minimise-mitigate and he was giving some examples of how the Ministry may have carried out their obligation under \"avoid\". I just want to make a clarification regarding this. And if I may, I would like to also go back to his remarks in the Adjournment Motion as an example for this clarification.
And in the Adjournment Motion, in his reply, he has cited, for example and this is what is stated in my cut, the current bus depot construction at Serangoon River Forest. He said that, \"Technical agencies have assessed that this site is not a sensitive nature area and environmental impact of the bus depot is limited. Hence, an environmental study was not required.\" Regretfully, no details of this study was done, and the extent of the study was done and, hence, in my Adjournment Motion as well as in my cut. Let me go back to the cut; I had called on MND to consolidate —
The Chairman: Mr Dennis Tan, if you could just, perhaps hold on.
Mr Dennis Tan Lip Fong: Yes, I am going to put this as a point for Minister of State Alvin.
The Chairman: Hold on. Perhaps you can summarise the gist of what you said in your Adjournment Motion and then apply it to the cut that you had filed today and then ask your clarification.
Mr Dennis Tan Lip Fong: Sir, I am going to explain now, exactly what you have suggested.
The Chairman: Please do so succinctly.
Mr Dennis Tan Lip Fong: I am sorry about that Chairman. Chairman, so in my cut, I have asked, instead, for MND to require a mandatory baseline and functional assessment and institutionalise mandating an EIA. So, go directly to having a baseline study for all forested plots, regardless of whether it is primary forest or brownfield sites and have EIA for these sites, rather than to have what the procedure that was carried out in the case of the Lorong Halus bus depot.
The Chairman: Which political office holder would like to respond to this? Senior Parliamentary Secretary Dr Syed Harun and then Minister of State Alvin Tan.
Dr Syed Harun Alhabsyi: With regard to the clarifications from Mr Dennis Tan, I thank him for the clarifications. Unfortunately, I do not have the exact number now, but I can assure you that within the next few years, we endeavour to actually achieve the lift access specific to these 40 blocks. But I will give you a sharper answer as soon as I have it. Yes, that is my commitment.
Mr Alvin Tan: Sir, I thank Mr Dennis Tan. We have really sparred on this many times and I had already mentioned that Lorong Halus did not require an EIA because the agencies assessed that it is not a sensitive nature area.
I understand his point. We have a broader approach which I have articulated both in the Adjournment Motion as well as earlier on in my expansive reply. At the core of this is effectively, what do we need to steward? And we need to steward both our green spaces as well as address our competing needs for land. And that land, including for those in his area, that means greater connectivity in many other parts of Singapore. It means more schools, more housing, more hospitals.
So, taking a step back, that is important. We do not have a lot of land, and we need to manage all of these, and we need to say this upfront. So, even though we have different approaches to this, I hope that he understands the approach that MND and our agencies need to take for the interest of Singapore and Singaporeans.
The Chairman: We are approaching guillotine time, 3.45 pm. I would like very much to give as many Members who have put their hands up a chance to clarify. The Clerks and I see Ms Lee Hui Ying, Mr Abdul Muhaimin and Ms Elysa Chen. I will call them in order. Ms Lee Hui Ying.
Ms Lee Hui Ying: I thank both Ministers for their comprehensive replies on the efforts for the build environment. So, I have clarifications on other areas. First, is there updated timeline on the 15-month wait-out period for the sales of a private property for residents to purchase resale HDBs? Because every week, we meet residents who appeal to waive on this due to their unique and unfortunate circumstances; some with families with young children and sometimes have to sell because of failed businesses. So, I hope support will be provided to such families.
Second, I echo Minister of State Alvin's strong call to not feed the birds. But unfortunately, recalcitrant illegal bird feeders still continue to do so. So, will there be strengthened enforcement against illegal feeding? And will there be plans for step-up surveillance in hotspots and more importantly, higher penalties for repeat offenders? And on crow shooting, I have asked this earlier in the cut as well, whether there are safeguards to minimise public exposure, especially to young children. Will there be advanced notification protocols in place to inform residents in advance of such shooting efforts?
The Chairman: Perhaps a crisp response from a political officeholder. Minister of State Alvin Tan.
Mr Alvin Tan: Please do not feed the birds. [Laughter.]
The Chairman: Minister Chee Hong Tat.
Mr Chee Hong Tat: Ms Lee had a question about the 15-month wait-out period. So, as I have explained earlier, we will monitor the situation in the resale market a little bit more. Last quarter, the resale prices remain flat. Up to the middle of February this quarter, there was a slight dip, very slight, minus 0.1%. I think it is still too early, given such trends, for us to remove this because, we will all agree, we do not want to remove this and then the prices spike back up. Then all the previous efforts are all wasted.
So, I think we should persist with this a little while more, monitor the data and at an appropriate time when we are ready, let us make a move. And in the meantime, if there are cases that require help, please do continue to appeal for your residents and we will look at each case on its own merits.
The Chairman: Mr Abdul Muhaimin.
Mr Abdul Muhaimin Abdul Malik: I have two clarifications for Minister of State Tan. Regarding the pigeon management plan, as mentioned in my cut, can the Minister of State provide a projected timeline, even an indicative one, for when all the remaining Town Councils can expect to be covered, maybe especially Sengkang?
And the other one is, would the Ministry be willing to share the specifications of the netting solution being trialled with Town Councils, so that Town Councils that wish to proceed may carry out their own installations in affected estates without having to wait out for the conclusion of the trial?
Mr Alvin Tan: Sir, it seems that the issue of birds has dominated this. I would just say that the trial for the 35 units is ongoing. We start in March. We will end next March. Give us that time for us to test whether the half height netting works.
And at the end of the trial period next year, we will share all of the findings to all Town Councils, and we welcome Town Councils to also share their feedback as well as their suggestions. I would also just say that there is no standardisation because different HDB blocks and different aircon ledges have different specifications. So, let us do the trial – 35 – and we will commit to sharing that outcome with all Town Councils.
The Chairman: Ms Elysa Chen.
Ms Elysa Chen: Chairman, hon Member Hui Ying has already asked my question. So, it is fine, thank you.
The Chairman: We have five minutes. Mr Dennis Tan, you had another clarification, or not? None. Ms Lee Hui Ying. Oh, Senior Parliamentary Secretary Dr Syed Harun, can you state your intention? [Laughter.]
Dr Syed Harun Alhabsyi: Thank you, Chairman, to give a sharper response to Mr Dennis Tan on his earlier question.
The Chairman: Yes. Proceed, please.
Dr Syed Harun Alhabsyi: Much obliged. Just to give a sharper response to Mr Tan. We will be looking to implement the progress for the 40 blocks identified within the next three years.
The Chairman: Any further clarifications? None. Mr Henry Kwek, may I invite you to withdraw your amendment?
Mr Kwek Hian Chuan Henry: Chairman, I thank MND for responding to our cuts and I seek leave to withdraw my amendments.
[(proc text) Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. (proc text)]
[(proc text) The sum of $8,640,058,800 for Head T ordered to stand part of the Main Estimates. (proc text)]
[(proc text) The sum of $13,613,535,500 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 – Head W (Ministry of Transport)","subTitle":"A vibrant and sustainable home","sectionType":"OS","content":"Ms Tin Pei Ling (Marine Parade-Braddell Heights): Chairman, I move, “That the total sum allocated to Head W of the Estimates be reduced by $100”.
Our connection to the world is imperative to our nation's relevance and economic vibrancy. As a small, open city‑state, Singapore's prosperity rests on strong links to other countries and global hubs. To sustain that advantage, we must maintain state‑of‑the‑art air, sea and land nodes with the capacity and flexibility to handle current needs and future demand.
To that end, Singapore is making significant, long‑term investments, as we have observed in Budgets past and present. In terms of hard infrastructure, a colossal Terminal 5 (T5) is being built, larger than several of our existing terminals combined and the Tuas Mega Port is expanding in phases, with full completion expected in the 2040s. These projects are designed to position Singapore as a continuing nexus for people, goods and information flows.
If delivered well, these projects will help Singapore attract capital, talent and advanced technology. More importantly, create new opportunities for our businesses and generate good jobs for Singaporeans. Improving lives must remain the ultimate objective of these investments.
Yet, we must also recognise these are multi-decade projects, consuming substantial public resources. They were planned in a different global environment that has become more volatile and uncertain. Recent years have seen abrupt tariff barriers, supply chain restructuring and \"hot wars\" that disrupted energy and critical material supplies. Such shocks can re‑route trade and people flows, sometimes rapidly. Singapore will not be insulated from these shifts.
Therefore, I have the following questions to raise.
First, demand and relevance. How confident are we that T5, Tuas Port and other major projects are being built to meet lasting real demand? What assurance do we have that these assets will remain relevant to the region and the world by the time construction completes? And what mechanisms are in place to adjust project pace, scope and costs as global macro conditions evolve, so as to minimise fiscal and strategic risk? Can we stage or modularise delivery so that we can accelerate to capture upside, or slow and recalibrate to limit downside? What contingencies are in place to manage cost escalation and preserve value for taxpayers?
Third, timing and capability. Can the Ministry update the House on the current status of T5 and the Tuas port development? Are we on track to capture near‑term opportunities, and where feasible, can delivery be accelerated without compromising quality, safety or long‑term flexibility?
Turning to our maritime sector specifically, capacity and connectivity, measured in twenty-foot equivalents (TEUs) and port calls, are critical determinants of competitiveness. When Tuas is completed, how will it materially boost Singapore's throughput, connectivity and service propositions? What economic impact does the Ministry project in terms of gross domestic product (GDP) contribution, value‑added services and the types of jobs and livelihoods it can create for Singaporeans? In anticipation of these opportunities, what targeted programmes will be in place to cultivate and sustain a pipeline of maritime talent?
We must also prepare our infrastructure for the digital age. The Next‑Generation Port at Tuas is a good example. Leveraging frontier technologies – automation, advanced sensors, predictive analytics and artificial intelligence (AI) – will keep our infrastructure globally competitive. But we must deploy technology responsibly to augment productivity while managing workforce transitions and reskilling needs.
Hence, we must actively contemplate how technology should be leveraged to advance Singapore's connectivity and economic advantage. To this end, the Government Parliamentary Committee (GPC) for Transport plans to move a substantive Motion later this year, likely in July.
In closing, global connectivity is a strategic choice that must be actively maintained, future‑proofed and made inclusive. We should build fast enough and well enough to capture value, but also flexible enough to anticipate any macro-shocks. At the same time, we must also always be prudent to adapt and protect public interest. Chairman, I beg to move.
[(proc text) Question proposed. (proc text)]
The Chairman: Ms Tin Pei Ling, your second cut.
Ms Tin Pei Ling: Land transport touches every Singaporean's daily life. It shapes how we work, learn, care for family and participate in our community. Over the years, our land transport system has become markedly more efficient, reliable and more integrated.
Heavy investment in public transport – expanding the Mass Rapid Transit (MRT) network, modernising trains and signalling, upgrading bus fleets and developing integrated transport hubs just to name a few – has boosted capacity and improved connectivity. These upgrades have made multimodal journeys smoother and helped shift commuters towards public and active modes.
Looking ahead, technology advancement, demographic change and evolving lifestyles mean our land transport must continue to adapt. Regardless of on foot or on wheels, commuters expect more choice, faster first‑mile and last‑mile connections, and a system that is safe, inclusive and resilient.
Hence, I would like to ask what concrete plans is MOT implementing to build a more reliable, user-centric, inclusive and safer land transport system that meets these changing commuter needs? Specifically, what measures will be introduced or scaled up to expand first‑ and last‑mile options?
Infrastructure also ages. Renewal and expansion therefore go hand in hand. How is MOT balancing the urgent task of refreshing ageing assets, while delivering new lines and capacity? What governance and funding approaches are in place to ensure upgrades are timely, cost‑effective and minimise commuter disruption during works?
Technology will reshape transport operations and service delivery. One certainty is a rise in electric vehicles (EVs) as we decarbonise; another is growing trials and deployments of Autonomous Vehicles (AVs).
In support of greener, smarter mobility, what is MOT doing to boost the capacity, availability and reliability of supporting infrastructure, ranging from EV charging networks, grid readiness, interoperable payment and telematics standards, and AV‑ready roadside systems? How is MOT coordinating with other agencies and industry to ensure sufficient power, standards for fast charging, and effective communications to support mass EV and AV adoption?
As more technology is deployed, the transformation of land transport is something to look forward to. As sensors and connected systems, including increasingly intelligent EVs and AVs, share real time data, smart road and traffic management becomes feasible, enabling tighter coordination and more accurate traffic prediction. This should deliver smoother, more predictable journeys and materially improve the road user experience.
On that note, an extensive deployment of AVs could significantly change vehicle population and ownership patterns. If AV fleets increase shared mobility and ride‑pooling, we may see pressure to reduce private car use. Conversely, easier door‑to‑door transport could increase vehicle kilometres travelled.
The Certificate of Entitlement (COE) is a critical policy lever used to manage car population and road demand. How does MOT anticipate AV adoption affect the medium‑ to long‑term design of the COE system and other ownership controls? Are there plans to recalibrate demand management, for example, differentiated measures for shared AV fleets versus privately owned vehicles?
I look forward to a land transport that anticipates future demands and is user centric. One with flexible infrastructure that can adapt to uncertainty. Technology effectively deployed to enhance commuter experience and demand management tools designed to reflect changing mobility patterns.
The Chairman: Mr Sharael Taha, kindly deliver both your cuts together.
Mr Sharael Taha (Pasir Ris-Changi): Thank you, Mr Chairman. Mr Chairman, if we take a step back and imagine and examine the scale of what is being built at T5, including the Changi East Urban District, this is not merely an airport expansion.
This is economic architecture, with T5 adding capacity of 15 million passengers annually, and the Changi East Industrial Zone expanding cargo from three to 5.4 million tonnes annually, complemented by Airport Logistics Park 2, Tampines Logistics Park, Changi South, Pasir Ris, Wafer Fab Park, Seletar Aerospace Park, the maintenance, repair and operations (MRO) operations in Changi and in Loyang, and enhanced connectivity via the Loyang Viaduct. Singapore is assembling one of the world's most integrated aviation aerospace semiconductor logistics platforms.
But infrastructure alone does not create the advantage, ecosystems do. The Changi East Urban District must evolve into a next generation aerotropolis, integrating advanced MRO, sustainable aviation fuels, digital aviation services and AI-driven logistics command centres linked with Changi Business Park and Loyang Industrial Estate, this becomes a seamless innovation to production to export corridor.
Connectivity must also extend beyond air to the Tanah Merah ferry terminal and integration with the Johor Singapore Special Economic Zone and Batam-Bintan-Karimun Free Trade Zone. Singapore can anchor high value functions, capital, intellectual property (IP), AI, finance and advanced manufacturing orchestration, while Johor and the Riau Islands can provide industrial scale and energy depth under the Sijori framework.
The national AI mission can be the force multiplier, enabling cross border smart factories, optimising multimodal flows, embedding trade finance, and strengthening regional medical and bio manufacturing supply chains. The strategic question is how we elevate this infrastructure expansion into a coordinated AI-enabled economic engine that generates high value jobs, anchors capital and secures competitiveness for many decades in the East and Northeast districts in Singapore.
And critically, how can MOT work hand in hand with the Ministry of Trade and Industry, the Ministry of Digital Development and Information, the Ministry of Manpower and the Ministry of Finance, and our regional counterparts to orchestrate, not just merely coordinate this ecosystem transformation at national scale?
As Singapore strengthens its position as a global logistics hub, I will seek clarification on three areas.
First, with expanding air and sea connectivity, are we keeping pace with manpower needs in aviation and maritime, and building a strong local pipeline for higher value roles? And also, what progress have the One Aviation Manpower Programme and Maritime Cluster Fund made in attracting and developing talent? Ultimately, growth must translate into good jobs, stronger skills and real opportunities for Singaporeans.
Ms Poh Li San (Sembawang West): Mr Chairman, when I became a pilot at 18, I was a minority because there were not too many women pilots in the Air Force. Today, there are more of us, but we are still very much the minority, not just in the Air Force, but across the skies.
Mr Chairman, I must say that, from my experience as a search and rescue pilot, aviation as a career choice was the adventure of a lifetime and something I will not exchange for the world. But it is also a very personal choice. Hence, I target my speech not at setting a target or a quota of women in aviation, but as offering more opportunities and possibilities in our vibrant and world class air hub.
First, I would like to ask for some figures. What is the representation of women in senior leadership in our aviation industry? We know that it is very likely to be in the minority, but there is a large difference between 1% and 20%.
Second, I would like to offer some figures. The aviation industry is at sunrise. The global outlook is very bright. Global passenger traffic looks to double by 2040. Aviation hubs in the region are now racing to increase their runway and terminal capacities, following the slowdown during the pandemic period. Changi Airport will increase its capacity by another 50 million passengers per annum when T5 is ready around the middle of next decade.
But we are not only ones by a long shot. Hong Kong International Airport is building its third runway. India, the world's most populous country, has built 75 new airports in the past decade and is set to build another 70 new airports soon. China will build more than 200 new airports by 2035.
Third, I would like to say what this means for us. In July 2025, the Civil Aviation Authority of Singapore (CAAS) announced a 200 million One Aviation Manpower Fund to attract, develop and retain the aviation workforce. Given that the aviation sector is growing so quickly and that it is also very male dominant, what steps is MOT taking to attract talents, especially young women graduates in science, technology, engineering and mathematics. Airline pilots, aeronautical engineers, ground hand operators, air traffic controllers, airport planners – there are many opportunities, many openings for young women, aviation professionals, and more women are taking up these roles recently.
These are good jobs in the blue sky. In the Asia Pacific region, Singapore has a conducive ecosystem to grow a strong network of women aviation professionals. We are leading Regional Aviation Hub with a thriving and well-connected airport, a major global air cargo hub, and a well-established MRO ecosystem. There are many jobs in these organisations, ranging from airlines, airports, cargo and logistics companies, as well as aircraft manufacturers and maintenance companies.
Of course, ensuring that women land well in aviation is not the work of Government alone. A culture shift is needed if we are to change from a male dominated working environment into a more inclusive one.
Let me cite two examples in the frontline roles, such as flying, ground handling and aircraft maintenance and repair operations. Considerations, such as the proper provision of basic amenities and facilities such as women's restrooms cannot be taken for granted. In addition, human resources (HR) policies during pregnancy and maternity periods must also be well considered, as well as scholarship and internship opportunities.
Again, the Government does not have to do this alone. There are groups in aviation, such as “Women Aviation International SG Chapter”, formed recently in 2021 to connect women professionals in aviation, providing mentoring support and offer scholarship opportunities.
Here, I declare my interest as an advisor to this organisation and an employee in the aviation industry. I would like to ask the Minister how MOT can work with such organisations as well as aviation companies and institutes of higher learning (IHLs) to attract more women into this sector.
The Chairman: Kindly wrap up.
Ms Poh Li San: Today, only about 20% of the workforce in the aviation sector are women. With an expanding industry and increased demand for skilled labour, the sky is the limit. For all of us, men and women who find their passion in aviation.
Ms Yeo Wan Ling (Punggol): Chairman, my Punggol residents are watching the autonomous shuttle pilots with keen interest. These trials are an important step in understanding how AV services may eventually integrate into our wider public transport ecosystem, particularly in strengthening first- and last-mile connectivity.
At the same time, residents have practical questions. Cost is one. As AV services scale, will they remain affordable as part of daily commuting or are they a premium option? Confidence is another. Will there be deeper engagements with different groups, including seniors, who may feel uncertain about travelling in AVs? Adoption is not only about technology readiness, but public readiness.
On the regulatory front, clarity is still needed. In the event of a malfunction or incident, where does liability lie? Will human operators or safety drivers be expected to bear responsibilities when system failures occur? We must also be honest that the workforce implications remain unsettled, especially for our bus captain and point-to-point (P2P) drivers.
We have yet to clearly define what new AV-related roles will look like, what fair compensation should be and how career pathways may evolve from today's driving and technical maintenance roles into future AV jobs.
As I had earlier highlighted in my Budget debate clarifications, while it is important for us to embrace new technologies, this must be done in a way that does not disrupt livelihoods. I therefore urge operators to work closely with our unions within our tripartite framework to co-create fair AV career pathways and ensure workers are supported through this transition. Progress should strengthen both our public system and our people.
The Chairman: Mr Louis Chua, please take your two cuts together.
Mr Chua Kheng Wee Louis (Sengkang): Chairman, research and small scale testing of AVs for use on urban roads in Singapore has been going on for quite a while now. With one of the earliest research and trials on the roads in one-north in partnership with nuTonomy. Another trial under the Agency for Science, Technology and Research (A*STAR) was started at one-north as well, sometime in 2014, this one under the Singapore Autonomous Vehicle Initiative.
In 2015, the MOT signed a memorandum of understanding (MOU) to further expand trials on AV with PSA Singapore and another with the Sentosa Development Corporation and ST Engineering, which I was lucky enough to experience myself.
There have been various other trials since then and fast forward to 2025, a 17-member committee chaired by the Acting Minister was formed to look at the roll-out of AVs on Singapore roads. Today, in 2026, a small number of vehicles are now involved in trials in the residential district in Punggol and the Land Transport Authority (LTA) plans to procure six autonomous buses with operations beginning in mid-2026 for an initial period of three years.
In comparison, in this time, the AV industry in places like China and the US has boomed, with their biggest players, Pony AI, WeRide and Waymo already running fully driverless commercial services in the cities they are operating in. Waymo has around 2,500 vehicles today and targets at least 10,000 vehicles and one million robotaxi rides a week. Pony AI aims for more than 3,000 vehicles by 2026, similar to WeRide.
Countries in the Middle East are also showing markedly faster implementation of AVs. The Dubai Autonomous Transportation Strategy aims to have 25% of the total transportation in Dubai to be autonomous by 2030. Saudi Arabia's Transport General Authority has set a target for 25% of all goods transport vehicles to be fully autonomous by 2030.
Additionally, according to SMRT, our public bus system is struggling to hire bus captains, especially from our local manpower pool. AVs as buses would ease the pressure on this issue, yet despite numerous trials all across the island. Singapore's AV roll-out is still in the trial phase about 12 years on. Beyond stating that Singapore will have, and I quote, \"many autonomous vehicles in Singapore\" in five years' time, can the MOT provide numerical targets for our AV ambition?
As my colleague Mr Gerald Giam shared more than a decade ago in 2015, Singapore is in an excellent position to lead the world in the adoption of driverless cars. But we must ensure that legislation promotes and does not inhibit the test-bedding and public use of these vehicles. I hope we will be able to accelerate AV roll-out in Singapore, especially for buses given the severe shortage of drivers.
As part of Singapore's net-zero goal, Singapore aims to reduce land transport emissions and the electrification of vehicles is one of the key initiatives to help Singapore achieve this target.
One of the key pillars of the roadmap is the deployment of EV charging infrastructure. In response to my Parliamentary Question in February this year, I understand that Singapore currently has around 28,300 charging points. The vast majority, about 88%, are alternating current-based, of which about 50% have a low power rating of 7.4 kilowatts (kW) and below. The majority of TotalEnergies' chargers, which represented 13% of Singapore's charging stations before they were taken over, are rated at 3.7 kW, which is the slowest among those accessible publicly, which take up to 16 hours to charge a typical EV.
Comparatively, only about 11% of chargers deployed have direct current, of which most of the DC chargers can qualify as \"fast chargers\". Where typical AC chargers, typically take four to eight hours for a full charge, DC fast chargers can bring a battery to 80% in just 30 to 45 minutes, based on a May 2024 article by SP Group.
I wish to highlight however, that technology has advanced rapidly in this space. In March 2025, BYD announced its super e-platform, which provides a 400-kilometre range in just five minutes of charging. BYD is now rolling out such megawatt level charging infrastructure in China. For comparison, 1,000 kW is about one MW and this is 135 times higher vs the 7.4 kW typically found in Singapore.
This distinction matters enormously. LTA has already recognised that high-powered fast chargers will be needed to meet the needs of high-mileage users, particularly taxis and commercial fleets. Of all cars registered in 2025, 45% are already electric.
Currently, it is typical for a Housing and Development Board (HDB) multi-storey car park to have only three slow chargers. As EV adoption grows beyond early adopters, everyday residents will find this increasingly inadequate. I strongly urge the Government to accelerate the roll-out of EV fast chargers and/or to increase the number of EV chargers at high utilisation HDB multi-storey car parks, which is already posing a significant challenge to some Sengkang neighbourhoods today.
Mr Dennis Tan Lip Fong (Hougang): In previous years, MOT pointed to chargers being available in the vast majority of HDB carparks. We are now in February 2026 and while the \"coverage\" is higher, the \"quality of access\" remains unequal across our estates.
The Ministry's primary defence for the current pace of scaling is that the average utilisation rate remains low. However, \"average\" utilisation is a misleading metric that may mask peak-hour reality. For the HDB resident returning home at 9.00 pm, a low \"average\" rate is cold comfort when all three charging lots in their multi-storey car park are occupied.
More crucially, we must scale up now for the eventuality that most vehicles in our carparks will be EVs – a goal we should strive to see earlier, in line with our 2030 and 2040 goals. If registrations continue to rise, when will \"scaling up\" reach all our heartland carparks?
Furthermore, there is a \"two-speed\" transition occurring. Residents in newer BTOs often have more access to higher-power chargers, but many mature estates remain stuck with slow 7.4 kW chargers.
I would like to ask the Minister: What is the specific peak-hour utilisation threshold that triggers the installation of additional chargers in HDB car park? When will MOT commit to a \"mature estate fast-charge\" mandate to ensure residents in older estates including in some parts of Hougang, are not left behind? And finally, how will MOT intend to mandate \"idling fees\" across all public charging operators to prevent lot-hogging?
Mr Ang Wei Neng (West Coast-Jurong West): Chairman, I would like to declare my interest as the CEO of Strides Premier, a company that leases out a fleet of more than 300 EVs, amongst other businesses. With nearly 45% of new car registrations in Singapore now being EVs, it is timely for us to strengthen our charging infrastructure. While the roll-out of slow chargers in HDB car parks has supported convenient overnight charging, many EV users, particularly P2P users as well as commercial drivers, require access to fast daytime charging infrastructure in the daytime so as to sustain their operations.
I therefore urge LTA to spearhead the deployment of more fast chargers within the HDB estates, especially at convenient and high-traffic locations, such as near food establishments and neighbourhood centres.
At the same time, the rapid growth of EVs calls for a future-ready workforce. Vehicle technicians must acquire new technical competencies to service EVs safely and effectively, supported by proper training and certification. I encourage MOT to work closely with industry partners and training institutions to support technicians through this critical transition, ensuring our automotive workforce remains skilled, relevant and prepared for Singapore's electrified transport future.
Mr Gerald Giam Yean Song (Aljunied): Sir, walking along our footpaths should be a stress-free experience, yet many pedestrians, especially the elderly and parents with children, often feel they must be on permanent alert. Some cyclists ring their bells persistently on crowded footpaths, as if expecting pedestrians to step off the path to make way for them. I have personally experienced this and many of my residents have shared similar stories with me.
LTA needs to reinforce that pedestrians always have the right of way. Public education must clarify that bells should be used only to alert, not to demand a clear path. We must also educate pedestrians to keep left and avoid sudden changes in direction, for their own safety.
Residents frequently encounter cyclists zooming through bus stops, endangering passengers as they alight. Similarly, those exiting lifts at their flats face risks from cyclists speeding past.
At night, the danger increases without illumination. Between 2023 and 2025, 167 summonses were issued for missing lights, but these were mostly on roads, not footpaths. This indicates a safety gap on footpaths. Why is there not more active education and enforcement of light requirements on footpaths?
Furthermore, while footpaths next to cycling paths became pedestrian-only in July 2025, the converse is not true – pedestrians are not prohibited from walking on cycling paths. If a dedicated pedestrian-only path exists, why is it not mandatory for pedestrians to use it? Mixing users increases accident risks. Will the Ministry reconsider a legal prohibition for pedestrians to use cycling paths, where a dedicated alternative is provided?
Ms Sylvia Lim (Aljunied): Sir, recently a relative of mine suffered a stroke and became wheelchair-bound. Though I thought driving him around would be ideal, I discovered that riding the bus was now a better option for some routes. Our bus stops and buses are wheelchair friendly and the bus captains we met promptly got up from their seats to assist with the wheelchair platform. Such infrastructure and last-mile considerations go a long way to make travel accessible to the wheelchair-bound.
That said, mobility limitations come in a wide range. Besides those on wheelchairs, there are many others who use walking sticks or other aids. These commuters are often unable to navigate stairs. To what extent is our system barrier-free for them?
Take for instance the layout of some new electric buses. Increasingly, bus models appear to be designed to maximise standing room and space for wheelchairs and prams. This results in a reduction in the number of seats available. In some buses, the front half of the bus only has four seats, with all the remaining seats located at the rear of the bus at an elevated level, requiring the commuter to climb a rather steep step. This has caused difficulty to many commuters who can walk but cannot climb stairs. Could the Ministry review how the layout of buses can better cater to commuters with such mobility issues?
Another persistent issue is the lack of lifts at pedestrian overhead bridges. This is an issue across the island and it is also the case for my residents at the Paya Lebar Division of Aljunied Group Representation Constituency (GRC).
In February 2023, I asked a Parliamentary Question about when lifts would be installed at overhead bridges along Hougang Avenue 3. Then Transport Minister, Mr S Iswaran, affirmed that the number of seniors and commuters with mobility challenges would be a consideration for prioritisation. He further confirmed that four of the bridges along Hougang Avenue 3 would be prioritised.
Two years later, in April 2025, I filed another question for confirmation of the bridges that would be prioritised and what the timeline for installation of the lifts would be. The next incumbent Transport Minister, Mr Chee Hong Tat, identified the overhead bridges at Blocks 101, 172, 241 and 248 as the four being prioritised. He stated that construction works for that phase of LTA's retrofitting works were scheduled to take place progressively from the fourth quarter of 2025.
Based on the latest indications from LTA's consultants to our Town Council, the lift works will only commence tentatively in the third quarter of 2027. This is nearly two years after the fourth quarter of 2025 that Minister Chee indicated for commencement of that phase of construction works. Why is there such a long delay?
I hope to have a more satisfactory answer from the new Minister in charge.
Mr Dennis Tan Lip Fong: Mr Chairman, I have filed this cut originally for the Ministry of National Development, but it was directed to MOT. The vision of a car-light Singapore must require a seamless and sheltered first and last-mile experience for every Singaporean. The Government has made meaningful progress, but more can be done.
In July 2025, 176 residents at Parc Vera Condominium at Hougang Street 32, submitted a petition for 80 metres covered walkway linking its rear side gate to an existing HDB covered linkway. The rear side gate links to an open footpath, which doubles as a covered drain and is heavily used by its residents, as it connects to the HDB covered linkway en-route to the nearest bus stop at Block 1, Hougang Avenue 3 – a few minutes walkaway.
For the elderly and families with young children, this path is the most efficient way, yet poses challenges to them during heavy rains.
I wrote an appeal on the condominium's behalf to LTA. Attempts to request to construct the covered walkway have been challenging. While the land is under PUB, they do not build covered walkways. The LTA does not entertain requests for its last-mile connectivity plans if they fall outside 800 metres of a MRT station or 400 metres of a bus interchange and not along a MRT managed road. Lastly, the Town Council has no jurisdiction to spend funds on projects that do not primarily benefit HDB residents.
The request has been assessed primarily through agency boundaries rather than commuter experience. This is a systemic no man's land problem. Why should a resident's ability to reach public transport under cover depend on whether the ground or the drain beneath their feet is managed by HDB, LTA or PUB? If the goal is to encourage public transport usage and climate-proof our infrastructure, the last mile should be treated as a single continuous journey.
To resolve such situations, I have three specific proposals.
First, can we institutionalise connectivity at the design stage? When the Riverfront Residences condominium at Hougang was built, the authorities allowed the developer to build covered linkways to the nearest bus stops. This can be made a standard requirement where covered links are planned upfront and not added later as fixes.
Can URA and LTA mandate at the planning permission stage that developers provide sheltered connectivity to the nearest public transport nodes, including such covered access from each condominium side gates, or include this in the development control handbooks to guide developers on ensuring upfront connectivity by design?
Second, for existing condominiums like Parc Vera, can we start working on a bridge-the-gap framework, with coordinated co-funding or facilitation scheme?
Third, can the Government assign a lead agency for connectivity? If a Management Corporation Strata Title is willing to pursue a walkway that serves a clear public connectivity purpose, the Government should provide a streamlined one-stop shop approach by an appointed agency for funding and approvals. This could be under URA, Building and Construction Authority or LTA.
Ms Elysa Chen (Bishan-Toa Payoh): Chairman, when my son goes to the army in the future, he will carry a 15-kilogramme Standard Battle Order every time he goes outfield. Today, when I carry my 13-kilogramme son and his diaper bag onto public transport, I also feel like I am going outfield. Once, when I was solo parenting, I almost tipped my son out of the stroller while trying to single-handedly board the bus with a stroller and the diaper bag.
Many parents of young children have shared similar challenges navigating public transport safely and smoothly as a family. Parents have also highlighted inconsistencies across operators, particularly on ramp deployment for strollers. Boarding and alighting during peak hours remain difficult for parents and persons with disabilities, with limited space at stroller and wheelchair bays.
Supporting safe, smooth commutes is essential if Singapore is to be a home for families.
I thank the LTA and public bus operators for the steps they have taken to make public buses more accessible for young families and persons with disabilities. But we can do more.
Can the Ministry share what further measures are planned to make buses and trains more inclusive for young families and persons with disabilities? Will LTA study their commuter experience? And can standard operational procedures (SOPs) on ramp deployment be standardised across operators alongside a public education effort?
Parents carry heavy responsibilities. Let us lighten their load by making sure public transport is safe, accessible and supportive for families.
Miss Rachel Ong (Tanjong Pagar): Chairman, during an MRT disruption last year, a deaf commuter shared that she felt confused and afraid when passengers began to leave the train as there were no visual or sign language updates explaining what was happening.
While initiatives such as the Sign Language Virtual Assistant SiLViA at Chinatown MRT station are encouraging, such support is not yet available across the network. Could the Government update whether visual and sign language communication tools will be expanded so that disruption and emergency announcements are accessible to deaf commuters across our public transport system?
Mr Low Wu Yang Andre (Non-Constituency Member): Chairman, the Land Transport Master Plan 2040 sets an ambitious target of nine in 10 peak public transport journeys completed within 45 minutes. As a Punggol resident, I speak from experience. A 45-minute door-to-door journey to the city is for myself and most of my neighbours a pipe dream.
In a city where housing comes at a premium, the families who live in Punggol, Sengkang, Woodlands and other far-flung towns have made pragmatic choices about where to put down roots. Every morning, they pay for that choice in time.
We should not have a two-speed Singapore where time is a privilege of the few.
Ambitious targets require ambitious infrastructure. To understand what happens when ambition falls short, we need to look no further than the North East Line (NEL).
My fellow Members and I have filed multiple Parliamentary Questions on the NEL's capacity crisis over the months. Solutions to the crisis are in short supply. Longer trains would require excavation works that would disrupt the line for over a year. Selective door operation has been studied and rejected. Even at maximum peak frequency, commuters at Hougang and Kovan watch full trains pass them by. Residents in the North-East have become resigned to long crowded commutes.
We built a NEL without the headroom to grow it. That decision is now permanent.
The Seletar Line gives us a chance to do better. In 2018, express services were studied for the Cross Island Line and rejected on cost-benefit grounds. But a point-in-time cost-benefit calculation is the wrong basis for infrastructure that has to serve multiple generations.
In Seoul, their Metro Line 9 faced identical scepticism of their express service. Demand caught up, and then some. Infrastructure of this scale does not just serve demand, it will generate it.
Therefore, I urge the Government to incorporate provisions for express rail services on the Seletar Line from the outset, specifically, bypass tracks at non-interchange suburban stations. Bypass tracks would allow us to serve every major underserved catchment along the line's alignment – Simpang and Yishun East, Seletar and Jalan Kayu, Whampoa and the greater Southern Waterfront – with local trains while express services overtake local services at these stations to reach downtown core at speed.
The time to make this decision is during current feasibility studies and not after ground-breaking, and certainly not after the line is in operation.
Sir, we ask young families to move further out in pursuit of affordable homes. The least we can do is to bring them back to the city at speed. I urge the Ministry to plan the Seletar Line with the foresight that the NEL lacked and the ambition that the next generation of Singapore deserves.
Ms Poh Li San: Mr Chairman, by the end of this year, the Rapid Transit System (RTS) to Johor is expected to open. It will connect to Woodlands North MRT station on the Thomson-East Coast Line. It may soon be a $5 to $7 ticket to a place of good bargains and family outings.
Many of my residents in Sembawang West are looking forward to the RTS. Some have relatives in Johor, many go over to do their grocery shopping, for family trips and simple services such as haircuts, spectacles, dental treatment and facials. RTS will help Singaporeans stretch our dollar.
But for every change, there will be ripples. There will be more Singaporeans using the Thomson-East Coast Line. At the same time, we have already read in newspaper reports that Malaysian workers who used to rent in Singapore now may move back and take RTS to work in Singapore. At $10 commute a day, this may work out economically against the rentals and spending in Singapore.
We do want people to use the line and my prediction is that under-demand will not be a problem. The problem may in fact be over-demand.
Due to these increases in movements, the morning peak period at Woodlands North station and the traffic on the Thomson-East Coast Line may see a massive surge. What are LTA's plans to ensure that Singaporeans staying at Woodlands and using the Thomson-East Coast Line to head down to town during peak periods can continue to enjoy smooth and accessible public transport services? Does the Minister have an update on how much the fares will actually cost?
Many Malaysians work in the semiconductor and food manufacturing factories located within the Woodlands industrial area. Instead of renting a room here, the workers may choose to commute via RTS and cycle or walk two kilometres to their workplaces. Does LTA have plans to widen the shared paths used also by the residents to better cope with the potential increase in cycling and pedestrian traffic?
Mr Ang Wei Neng: Chairman, I would like to declare that I am the CEO of Strides Premier, a subsidiary of SMRT.
MRT remains the backbone of our public transport system, shaping how Singaporeans live, work and connect. Across the island, residents are eagerly waiting for the next phase of rail expansion.
First, may I ask whether the Circle Line Stage 6, linking HarbourFront to Marina Bay via Keppel, Cantonment and Prince Edward Road stations will open in the second quarter of this year, as earlier announced. Residents and businesses are looking forward to the long-awaited closure of the Circle Line loop.
Second, can the Minister confirm that the Thomson-East Coast Line and the Downtown Line will meet at Sungei Bedok station through Xilin and Bedok South stations in the second half of 2026, which is this year? This critical interchange will significantly strengthen network resilience and provide commuters with more reliable travel options.
Chairman, in the West, anticipation for the Jurong Region Line (JRL) is especially strong. For many families in Nanyang and across Jurong, this line represents shorter commutes and better access to jobs and amenities.
May I ask whether the target of opening the JRL Phase 1 by end 2027 remains on track? If the timelines are at risk, will the Ministry commit the necessary resources to keep the project on schedule so that hundreds of thousands of residents can benefit as planned?
Finally, rail expansion must be matched with strong last-mile connectivity. Residents along Jurong West Street 91 live near the future Gek Poh MRT station, yet it is beyond walking distance. There is no direct bus link, including for students of Juying Secondary School.
I urge MOT to introduce a new bus service under the Bus Connectivity Enhancement Programme so that residents, students and workers can fully benefit from the JRL.
Mr Sharael Taha: Thank you, Chairman. Chairman, the Rail Reliability Taskforce has set out clear recommendations – accelerate renewal of ageing core systems, including train signalling and traction power, strengthen backup and resilience measures, improve asset management and spare part planning, deepen workforce capabilities and enhance commuter communications during disruptions. The key question now is in execution.
Who is accountable for each milestone? What are the firm timelines? How will we balance necessary service closures against commuter inconvenience? What concrete contingency plans will minimise hardship and what guaranteed service levels such as standby buses, response time and fair consideration will commuters be assured of?
How are we strengthening supply chain resilience for critical rail components? Beyond hardware, how are we building engineering depth, sharpening recovery protocols and ensuring real-time commuter information is accurate, timely and actionable?
The Chairman: Ms Yeo Wan Ling. Kindly deliver your two cuts together.
Ms Yeo Wan Ling: Mr Chairman, my first cut on rail development. Chairman, as we continue strengthening our rail network, we must recognise that human capital is key to building a resilient and reliable rail ecosystem. With parts of our network ageing, including lines, assets and equipment, renewal and upgrading works will intensify.
In this context, I would like to seek updates on what rail workers can expect in terms of fair competitive remuneration packages, training and safer workplaces.
We appreciate that under the Rail Safety Report, there will be moves towards harmonised training for rail technicians. That is important.
Today, there remains significant localisation across rail systems in maintenance practices, equipment and repair processes. Without harmonisation, workers' skills become tied to one system, one line or one operator. Harmonised training will help ensure that rail workers develop portable skills – skills that can be applied across different lines, systems and operators – strengthening both operational resilience and workers' long-term employability.
I would also like to ask for updates on the extension of the 2019 $100 million Rail Manpower Development Package. While operators are given flexibility to deploy this grant, how can we ensure that its impact reaches a broader segment of all rail workers? For example, could sector-level key performance indicators be considered, such as equipping 50% of workers with new competencies by 2030?
Finally, as public transport evolves and more commuters use personal mobility devices and bicycles to complement their journeys, rail workers are increasingly required to guide commuters on safe and considerate practices. How can we better protect rail workers from verbal abuse or confrontation when they carry out these duties? A strong rail ecosystem depends not only on modern assets, but on a skilled and protected workforce.
As the Bus Contracting Model marks its 10th year, it is timely for us to review how it is working – not just for operational efficiency, but for our bus captains. They remain the backbone of our public transport system. Yet today, starting basic salaries for new entrants remain around $2,250 per month. While advertised gross pay may range between $3,000 to $4,000 and beyond, a significant portion still depends on overtime, and this high overtime is actually structurally tied to this trade.
This raises an important question: are we building a sustainable profession or one where earnings depends on longer hours? If we want to maintain a strong Singaporean core, we must relook bus captains pay, working conditions and career progression.
Today, captains manage split shifts, short meal breaks, long hours, fatigue, changing commuter patterns and increasingly difficult commuter behaviours. With the rise of social media, they are also increasingly vulnerable to online harassment and doxxing when incidents are recorded and circulated. What more can be done to better protect their safety at work?
Looking ahead, half of our public bus fleet is expected to be electric by 2030. Are our current training pathways sufficient to prepare bus captains for this transition? At the same time, with revenue bus AV services expected to begin in the second half of this year, we must ensure that affected workers are supported with clear career pathways and fair packages.
Transformation should uplift, not unsettle. We have seen how the Rail Manpower Development Package supports rail workers through change. As the Bus Contracting Model (BCM) enters its next phase, could a similar transformation support be considered for our bus captains? A refreshed BCM should be a win-win for commuters, operators and the workers who keep Singapore moving.
Mr Abdul Muhaimin Abdul Malik (Sengkang): Sir, the persistent gap in bus connectivity for Compassvale Crescent residents requires our attention. While the Government has repeatedly cited the 400-metre benchmark and the availability of 14 bus services in the vicinity, this technical standard does not fully capture the lived reality of our residents, particularly our elderly and persons with disabilities.
Singapore is rapidly ageing. By 2030, one in four citizens will be aged 65 and above. Simultaneously, we are building a more inclusive society that recognises the needs of persons with physical disabilities. For these residents, even a 400-metre walk is not merely inconvenient. It can be a genuine barrier. Seniors with reduced mobility, persons using wheelchairs or walking aids, those recovering from medical procedures and individuals managing chronic conditions may find this distance insurmountable, especially in our tropical heat.
The distinction between technical accessibility and practical accessibility matters profoundly. On paper, Compassvale Crescent is served. In practice, vulnerable residents face daily challenges that prevent them from accessing essential services, healthcare and community activities.
I acknowledge the LTA's concern about trade-offs. Extending Bus 371 would increase journey times for existing commuters. However, I urge the authorities to explore creative solutions, perhaps introducing a new short loop feeder service that connects Compassvale Crescent directly to Sengkang MRT – without affecting existing routes or a community shuttle service piloted specifically for those with mobility challenges, our Bus Connectivity Enhancement Programme should embody our national values of inclusivity and care for vulnerable. Good bus connectivity is not a luxury. It enables independence, dignity and full participation in society. I therefore renew my call for LTA to reconsider this matter, focusing not on whether residents can technically access buses, but whether our transport network truly serves all Singaporeans.
Ms Valerie Lee (Pasir Ris-Changi): Chairman, during elections, I campaigned on supporting the sandwiched generation, promoting sustainability and empowering our youths. These causes remain close to my heart. But my residents in Pasir Ris-Changi have made me deeply passionate about something else – our land transport system.
Let us begin with bus connectivity in Flora Estate, a dense residential estate in the northeastern corner of Singapore, served by only two bus services along Flora Road and one along Flora Drive, with relatively low frequency, especially during off-peak hours.
On paper, low ridership data may appear insufficient to justify new services or increased frequency. But I would like to argue that retrospective data does not capture suppressed demand. Many residents have grudgingly shifted their commute behaviour to costlier, more pollutive means that worsens road congestions because they feel there is no reliable public transport alternative.
My first suggestion is this: can the Ministry move beyond relying heavily on retrospective ridership data when refining bus service plans? I urge the Ministry to survey residents directly and leverage community feedback, to unlock real rider demand. Connectivity and road congestions are closely linked. When public transport options are limited or unreliable, more residents turn to private vehicles. This adds pressure to already busy roads, such as Loyang Avenue.
LTA has shared that upcoming temporary lane closures simulations shows that it could result in delays of up to nine minutes. I would like to ask whether traffic planning models currently simulate scenarios where bus services are enhanced, which will help to bring down the total travel time.
Beyond efficiency, we must ensure safety. During the recent Land Transport Bill debate, I spoke about our Pasir Ris resident Mrs Malar Singam, who was seriously injured by a power-assisted bicycles rider last December. While regulations have been strengthened, more can be done to clearly segregate paths so that our seniors, like Malar, are kept safe.
Road safety is also a concern. Along Loyang Avenue, 13 accidents were recorded between 2023 and 2025 at its junction with Old Tampines Road. Residents have requested stronger enforcement and speed cameras at specific locations. Yet enforcement remains inconsistent and cameras have not been installed where risks have been reportedly highlighted. Can the Ministry then share what alternative enforcement measures have been implemented to make this road safer?
Even as we build for long-term improvements, like the Loyang Viaduct and Cross-Island Line, residents in Pasir Ris and Loyang live with the immediate costs of infrastructure works, like noise and dust, with complaints in the region nearly tripling to about 230 cases per year as compared to 2023.
Real-time noise monitoring systems are already in place. My request is that enforcement be equally real-time. Contractors who exceed limits should face prompt consequences and not action only after complaints.
Many residents in the area are also disturbed by the noise of illegally modified motorcycles late at night, many involving foreign-registered vehicles. How have enforcement checks at our ports of entry stepped up? And have we worked with the Ministry of Manpower to explore whether repeated violations could carry Work Pass consequences?
In conclusion, I have come to realised that good transport policies, like strengthening connectivity, improving safety and minimising disruptions, are in a very practical way, supporting the sandwiched generation and those around them, and this is what I have set out to do from the very beginning.
Mr Liang Eng Hwa (Bukit Panjang): Sir, traffic congestion in Singapore has visibly worsened. It is no longer confined to peak hours or the Central Business District. Heavy traffic is now common even on weekends, along arterial roads and across our expressway network. Road accidents and ongoing works further compound delays, affecting not just motorists but also bus commuters and private-hire passengers.
Sir, I must admit that I hesitated to file this cut, out of concern that the default response from the Ministry might be to just raise Electronic Road Pricing (ERP) pricings or to expand ERP. So, I hope that this is not the response later. Road pricing has been effective in managing demand, but it raises business and household costs, and it cannot be our only lever. I therefore urge the Ministry not to look to non-pricing approaches as well to manage congestions.
Sir, despite our zero-vehicle growth policy, congestion pressures persist. With over a million vehicles on our small island, higher vehicle utilisation appears to be one of the root cause for the congestions. The growth of private-hire services and delivery platforms has intensified road usage. As car ownership becomes more expensive, owners understandably want to maximise usage of their cars, because of sunk costs.
Given these structural trends, we should explore complementary solutions. Firstly, engineering and infrastructure enhancements. Sir, the double-decker road along Keppel Road has shown how vertical expansion can increase capacity. Compared to underground tunnels, such solutions may be more cost-efficient and faster to implement. With limited land for widening, vertical expansion may be our most feasible option in certain corridors. So, does the Ministry have plans to develop more double-tier road systems in congestion-prone areas? And are there plans for additional multi-level interchanges at heavily congested junctions?
Beyond capacity expansions, small but targeted engineering refinements can yield significant gains – improved slip-road geometry, better lane merging designs and additional turning lanes at bottlenecks. Sir, incremental improvements at key traffic choke points can produce disproportionate benefits.
Second, smarter management of commercial vehicle movements. The growth of e-commerce has increased delivery traffic substantially. Logistics vans, service vehicles and contractor trucks contribute to daytime congestions. Can we encourage off-peak delivery windows in dense commercial districts? And can we also expand urban consolidation centres to reduce duplicate trips, or promote shared last-mile distribution hubs to improve logistical efficiency?
Third, faster incident detection and clearance. Minor accidents often trigger cascading congestion, especially on expressways. The speed of detection and clearance is critical. Can we station more rapid-response tow units along major corridors to expeditiously clear stalled vehicles?
During accidents, many motorists still have this old belief that vehicles should not be moved until the Police arrive. In today's context, with in-car cameras and mobile devices readily available, this is often unnecessary. Instead, we should consider requiring drivers in minor, non-injury accidents to clear the carriageway within a fixed timeframe after documenting the incident, for example, just in 10 minutes, and with enforcement actions for unreasonable delays. Sir, we need to reduce accident clearance time and, believe me, it will significantly ease traffic congestion there.
Fourth, cross-border motorcycle flows. On average, about 69,000 Malaysian-registered motorcycles enter Singapore daily in 2025, with quite a significant number issued with traffic offences, about 22,000 of them, and some involved in accidents, about 1,600, based on a Parliamentary Question that I filed recently.
While these riders contribute to our economy, concentrated peak-hour inflows have been causing congestions along corridors, such as the Bukit Timah Expressway and Pan-Island Expressway. Can I ask if the Ministry have conducted studies on the impact of cross-border motorcycles on traffic flows and are there targeted traffic management measures to manage peak in-flows?
Fifth, smarter traffic light management. Motorists often encounter red lights even when cross-direction traffic appears light or if there are no vehicles travelling. While adaptive systems are in place, signal timings do not seem to be responsive or smart. So, can we move towards more advanced AI-based signal optimisation? Some of the suggestions include, integrate real-time GPS data from vehicles and buses, use predictive modelling to anticipate build-ups before they occur and implement corridor-wide synchronisation to create smoother \"green waves\"?
A more dynamic and predictive system could reduce stop-start traffic and improve traffic throughput. Some cities are already using fairly advanced computing technologies, such as quantum technologies, to enhance traffic management. Is the Ministry looking into that as well?
Sixth, on data transparency and behavioural measures. In addition to physical and technological interventions, behavioural nudges may help. Providing more granular, real-time congestion data integrated into navigation platforms may encourage voluntary route changes or staggered departures. Also, flexible work arrangements, through inter-agency coordination, could also help flatten peak demand.
Sir, road pricing remains important, of course, but it must be a multi-pronged approach to manage congestions. And all these suggestions that I have made, I hope would also help to reduce congestions. I look forward to the Ministry's reply, outlining fresh and forward-looking non-pricing strategies to manage congestion.
Mr Jackson Lam (Nee Soon): Chairman, the roads in Singapore are among the safest globally and that reflects decades of investment in infrastructure, enforcement and education. Recent figures show year-on-year declines in fatality rates per capita.
But one persistent challenge remains: the misalignment of responsibility in road traffic incidents. Too often, when collisions or infractions occur, public discourse frames fault as lying solely with \"others\" – the reckless driver, inconsiderate cyclist or distracted pedestrian.
This mindset risks obscuring the reality that safe mobility is a shared responsibility. Pedestrians, cyclists, motorists and transport planners each have a role in ensuring that our roads functions safely for everyone.
Vision Zero frameworks adopted in parts of Europe and North America, for example, emphasise system design that anticipates human error while reducing its consequences.
I therefore ask the Minister, has MOT considered adopting elements of a Vision Zero approach tailored to Singapore, where system design, speed management and clear accountability align across all road users?
Second, while engineering and enforcement remain vital, what new educational or behavioural initiatives are MOT planning that go beyond conventional campaigns to foster mutual road user respect?
Finally, recognising the rise in micro-mobility usage, what steps will be taken to clarify rights and responsibilities between pedestrians and micro-mobility users in shared spaces, backed by data-driven enforcement rather than ad hoc measures?
Mr Chairman, this policy cut is intended to encourage a deeper, more systemic conversation about how we share responsibility for road safety, recognising that blaming \"others\" alone is not sufficient to drive meaningful behaviour change.
Mr Edward Chia Bing Hui (Holland-Bukit Timah): Mr Chairman, I will speak on three areas: one, ERP 2.0 resulting in increasing of vehicular supply; two, refreshing the Certificate of Entitlement (COE) system for greater equity; and three, accessibility in car ownership in our next phase of land transport policy.
Let me begin with ERP 2.0. During the Land Transport Bill debate, I highlighted that ERP 2.0 presents an opportunity to move beyond congestion pricing and towards smarter traffic optimisation. By harnessing more granular real-time data, we can integrate ERP insights with adaptive traffic systems such as intelligent traffic signals, and guide infrastructure planning and network adjustments.
In his round-up speech, the Minister affirmed that better traffic management through ERP 2.0 could create potential for increasing the vehicle population.
This is an important shift. If supply increases, more families who need a car for caregiving needs can gain access to one. COE prices may also moderate. COE prices move on expectations. If signals are unclear, markets react.
The key issue is not whether vehicle numbers should increase, but whether any adjustments are tied to measurable congestion outcomes and communicated clearly. Optimisation must strengthen traffic flows and policy confidence.
Second, refreshing the COE system for greater equity. The original intent of the COE classification was equity, differentiating between mass-market and higher-end vehicles.
Today, that distinction is increasingly blurred. Manufacturers are adjusting specifications, whether engine power or motor design, so that premium models qualify under Category A (Cat A), while practical vehicles end up in Category B (Cat B) due to technical criteria, even though they are not luxury vehicles.
For instance, the Toyota Noah Hybrid, with an open market value (OMV) of around $28,000 falls under Cat B. Meanwhile, a luxury model like the BMW 216 Gran Coupe, with an OMV of around $35,000 falls under Cat A. This shows that higher-end cars can fall into Cat A, while practical models fall under Cat B, undermining the original intent to distinguish mass-market from luxury. Technical thresholds no longer reliably reflect affordability or market positioning.
The price delta between Cat A and Cat B is also narrowing, signalling reduced meaningful differentiation between the categories. In fact, in the recent COE bidding exercise, Cat A premiums exceeded Cat B. This raises questions about whether the current framework still achieves its intended segmentation.
If equity remains the policy objective, we should ask whether engine capacity and power output remain the right measures.
Mr Chairman, OMV provides a stronger basis for differentiation. It reflects the true purchase cost of a vehicle rather than technical specifications alone. We already use OMV to calculate Additional Registration Fee (ARF) through a tiered structure. Building on this, the COE framework could evolve from separate Cat A and Cat B categories towards an OMV-based model with a single bidding pool. Pooling supply into one category will smooth out price fluctuations caused by mismatches in supply and demand between categories.
Third, accessibility and caregiving needs. As our society ages and more families support members with disabilities or special needs, mobility becomes a necessity and not just a convenience.
While the COE framework focuses on congestion management, we should consider calibrated mechanisms that support genuine caregiving needs without undermining system integrity. A tiered adjustment to the final COE price, with discounts for lower-OMV vehicles and premiums for higher-OMV vehicles, could improve accessibility for lower- and middle-income families, while preserving market discipline. Such an approach offers a clearer and more transparent way to achieve accessibility objectives compared to introducing additional special categories, which can become complex to define and administer.
Mr Chairman, ERP 2.0 allows us to better optimise our limited land resource and may enable calibrated increases in vehicle supply, giving more families access to mobility. Refreshing the COE framework by anchoring differentiation on OMV provides clearer distinctions between mass-market and luxury vehicles; while tiered adjustments can enhance accessibility for families with caregiving needs. In doing so, we preserve market discipline while strengthening fairness and accessibility in car ownership.
Mr Ang Wei Neng: Chairman, I would like to declare my interest as the CEO of Strides Premier. In November 2024, then Minister for Transport, Mr Chee Hong Tat, informed this House that with the planned injection of 20,000 additional COEs over the next few years, the COE quota for Category A, B and C would continue to rise each quarter, before reaching its projected peak supply from 2026.
However, the recent announcement by LTA shows that the COE quota for February to April 2026 is in fact lower than the last quarter. This marks the first decline since 2025 and appears to contradict the earlier position stated by the Ministry. I would therefore like MOT to clarify whether there has been a change in policy direction, and if so, the reasons behind this shift.
In addition, we observe that the number of Cat A COEs has fallen for the February to April 2026 period, while the supply of Cat B COEs has increased compared to the previous quarter. It is therefore not surprising that in the first bidding exercise of February 2026, the price gap between a Cat A and Cat B COE narrowed sharply to $4,570, the smallest gap in 58 months, since March 2021. In the second bidding exercise of February, Cat A COE price was even higher than the Cat B COE price by $1,500.
In the first bidding exercise in March, which just ended, the gap is also quite narrow between the Cat A and Cat B COE at $5,782. This convergence may also be driven by market developments, including the growing ease of tuning EVs to meet Cat A criteria, as well as the increasing presence of higher-end internal combustion engine vehicles with lower engine capacities qualifying under Cat A .
If the trend of declining Cat A COE supply and rising Cat B COE supply continues, the convergence of Cat A and Cat B COE prices will persist. Such an outcome would run contrary to the original intent of maintaining distinct categories within the passenger car segment.
As MOT has previously stated, the primary objective of Cat A COE is to preserve a portion of the vehicle quota for mass-market cars, thereby ensuring greater accessibility and affordability for the average Singaporean car buyer. I would therefore like MOT to clarify whether there has been any shift in this policy intent and if so, the reasons for the shift.
Chairman, many residents have shared with me their frustrations over the persistently high COE prices. At different stages of life, some Singaporeans may have a greater need for a car than others, such as families with young children and those caring for elderly parents, or salespersons whose livelihoods depend on mobility. I therefore hope the Ministry will continue to keep these Singaporeans in mind and ensure that our policies remain fair and balanced.
Mr Azhar Othman (Nominated Member): Thank you, Chairman. The COE in Singapore aims to prevent road congestion, which is a commendable objective to control the number of vehicles on the road. However, imposing the COE on a motorcycle seems illogical, as they do not significantly contribute to traffic congestion in the country. It is noteworthy that approximately more than 60,000 motorcycles cross the Causeway daily to commute and work in Singapore.
This influx indicates that motorcycles owned by Singaporeans are not the source of congestion. The traffic issues we face are not stemming from motorcycles, yet the COE imposes a financial burden on those who purchase them. Typically, buyers of motorcycles of lower- and middle-income earners who rely on these vehicles for work, including roles in delivery services. Penalising them with the COE is unjust, especially when they do not contribute to traffic congestion.
Removing the COE for motorcycles would alleviate financial strain and allow these individuals to save money, ultimately enabling them to generate more income and improve their livelihoods.
The Chairman: Thank you, Members, for your cuts. We now go to responses. Minister Jeffrey Siow.
The Acting Minister for Transport (Mr Jeffrey Siow): Mr Chairman, first of all, let me give my thanks to Members for the very thoughtful cuts.
As I was listening to the speeches, I felt grateful for the many good suggestions and ideas from colleagues in the Chamber. I do not think we will be able to address every single idea and question today that has been asked of us, but we will try.
It is a long-standing tradition that MOT has many cuts. I should know because I used to work there as a civil servant. \"Death by a thousand cuts,\" as we used to say. But the interest, your interest shows just how much transport is part of Singaporeans daily lives.
Every morning, millions of people step out of their homes and trust that the system will work. When transport works well, it becomes part of our routines, but when it does not, it affects your jobs, your family time, your peace of mind.
We at MOT understand this heavy responsibility. It is a privilege for us to work on issues that matter so much to Singaporeans. To carry this responsibility well, we anchor our work on three principles: first, to be globally oriented, because Singapore's survival has always depended on staying connected to the world; second, to be future-focused and always plan for the long term; and third, to be people-centric, because transport exists to serve the needs of our people.
Let me start with global orientation. Singaporeans are connected to the world by air, and most of what we eat, buy and use is brought to us by sea. What happens elsewhere in the world can therefore affect us significantly, and this includes the ongoing conflict in the Middle East, which we are watching very closely.
As the world around us becomes more volatile, we need to strengthen the foundations that allow Singapore to survive and thrive. International rules and standards are critical for both aviation and maritime, which operate across national borders.
And to shape these rules and standards, Singapore has served on the councils of the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) and the International Maritime Organization (IMO) for over two decades. Last year, my team and I campaigned for re-election to both councils. I was moved by the strong support that other countries expressed for Singapore. They appreciated our solid record of leadership, consensus building and spearheading training programmes over the years.
Singapore was re-elected to both ICAO and IMO Councils with the highest number of votes in our categories. We were very encouraged by this result.
At the same time, it was evident that the rules-based global order is under strain. Consensus at ICAO and IMO is harder to achieve, especially on long-term issues like sustainability. Positions are more polarised. And we are seeing more factions along lines of national interest, instead of global benefit.
To bolster our influence abroad, we draw from our strength at home. Our air and sea hubs are both world-class. Changi Airport is one of the best airports in the world; and PSA International is one of the world’s most successful port operators.
Ms Tin Pei Ling asked about the latest developments for T5 and Tuas Port. Construction on T5 started last year and should be completed by the mid-2030s. As Ms Poh Li San noted, this will increase Changi’s capacity by about 50 million passengers per year. Looking at passenger growth trends, we are confident this capacity will be needed to meet underlying demand. The completion of T5 will also open up the possibility of remaking the older terminals, T1 to T4, in the future.
I am happy to invite Ms Tin and Members, all Members here actually, to the \"T5 in the Making\" exhibition at Changi Airport, where you can preview T5 and the future of aviation.
Mr Sharael Taha asked about the broader aviation ecosystem that will complement T5. Indeed, the ecosystem we are building goes beyond the terminal itself, to the Changi East Industrial Zone, the Changi East Urban District and potentially, the Tanah Merah Ferry Terminal for better air-sea connectivity. This aerotropolis, to borrow Mr Sharael’s term, will be sustainable and technology-intensive, and will create many good jobs, while better serving passengers, air cargo users and MRO companies.
On Tuas Port, we opened our 12th berth last year and will open four more berths this year. Phase 2 reclamation works are progressing. Senior Minister of State Murali will share more.
These major infrastructure projects are only possible because of our Government’s focus on long-term planning. We started planning for T5 13 years ago and Tuas Port almost 30 years ago.
When we design these projects, we are not just thinking about today. We are planning for the future. This is why I am happy to hear that Ms Tin Pei Ling and the GPC for Transport will file a Motion on the deployment of technology in transport later this year. I look forward to another exciting debate on the future of transport then, in a few months.
For MRT lines, we also plan far ahead. I heard the requests from Ms Poh Li San, Mr Ang Wei Neng, Mr Andre Low and Mr Sharael Taha for updates on various MRT projects.
An MRT line takes about 15 years to build. And in just 20-over years, we have almost doubled the length of our entire MRT network. This is a remarkable achievement. And we are still building.
The Thomson-East Coast Line Stage 5 and the Downtown Line 3 extension will be opened later this year. The two lines will be connected at Sungei Bedok station.
Later this year, we will also open Circle Line Stage 6, so the Circle Line will finally be a real circle.
Next year, we plan to start construction on the Cross Island Line Phase 3, which will extend the line from Jurong Lake District westwards.
I also promised Mr Ng Chee Meng an update on the Seletar and Tengah Lines. I have good news for him. We plan to commence engineering studies this year. Mr Ng’s residents would be happy to know that we will prioritise studying a corridor to serve Sengkang West and Serangoon North. This could also include future connections to the Cross Island and Circle Lines.
Mr Ang Wei Neng asked about the JRL. He will be pleased to know that we are starting engineering studies for the West Coast Extension of the JRL later this year. The first phase of the extension will connect the JRL to the Cross Island Line.
I have more good news. LTA has started works for a new JRL station, between Tengah and Choa Chu Kang stations. The working name of the station is JS2a – very unimaginative, because the last time we tried to be imaginative, it is very hard to change people's minds when we have to move the station. So, JS2a is targeted to open in the mid-2030s and will serve residents in the Forest Hill district in Tengah, in time for the completion of housing developments there.
The JRL was planned to open in end-2027. Many of my residents, especially in Tengah, are looking forward to it, because it will be a game-changer for their transport options. Unfortunately, due to construction delays and testing, the opening of the JRL will be held back by about six months, to mid-2028. I know some of my residents, who have already moved into Tengah, will be disappointed. But we will do our best to complete the works as soon as possible.
In the meantime, I have asked LTA to introduce two interim shuttle bus services, from selected JRL stations to key destinations in the region, until the JRL is open.
Ms Poh Li San asked for an update on the RTS Link. This is another long-term project that took years of discussion with Malaysian counterparts.
The economic case for the RTS Link is clear. But the project still required sustained commitment from both Governments. The RTS Link will connect Singaporeans from Woodlands North on the Thomson-East Coast Line, to Bukit Chagar in Johor Bahru in just five minutes.
We have planned the capacity of the Thomson-East Coast Line such that it is more than sufficient to accommodate the passenger numbers arriving via the RTS Link.
Ms Poh asked about the fares for the RTS Link. I know my counterpart in Malaysia has announced a figure of $5-$7. I have not discussed the fares with him. But under the terms of our Bilateral Agreement, it is the operator, RTS Operations Pte Ltd (RTSO), who has to determine the fares. We await RTSO’s announcement of fares in due course.
Opening new MRT lines is exciting. Announcing new MRT lines is even more exciting. But just as important is to maintain the system that is already built.
The oldest part of our MRT network – the North-South and East-West lines – is close to 40 years old now. And I was reminded of this last year, when we retired the last of our first generation MRT trains – the Kawasaki-C151s. Many people of my vintage would have fond memories of taking these trains as a child for the first time when the MRT was first built. I have a photo that I treasure very deeply because it is a photo of me and my father taking the train for the first time.
It is timely to rejuvenate some of our older, well-loved MRT stations as well, not just for trains. For instance, we announced last year that we will rejuvenate Yishun MRT station, with a new entrance, additional lifts and a larger concourse. LTA is now studying other stations for rejuvenation, including Admiralty, Khatib and Sembawang.
Beyond our MRT network, we are also planning for a future with AVs. AVs are not new to us. We had experimented with them since 2013. The technology has taken awhile to mature, but with advances in AI, sensors, mapping and computing, AVs are finally a reality.
Recently, we have been deploying AVs quite aggressively in closed environments like our airport and seaport, for baggage and cargo. But it will be some time yet before we see mass deployment of autonomous passenger vehicles on our roads. After all, there are fewer than 7,000 such AVs in the world today, a tiny fraction of the total vehicle population here in Singapore. What we are doing now though is to plan ahead and prepare early, as we have always done.
We have been trialling AVs in Punggol since last September, to learn how AVs can work in Singapore’s context. Since January, we have been taking passengers on the AVs, by invitation. The AV trials have been running smoothly and safely, and many Punggol residents have expressed strong support. They have been asking Senior Minister of State Sun Xueling and me, whether they can start taking rides on the AVs, and when. So, I am happy to announce that from 1 April, we will open up rides for interested members of the public. Not an April Fools' joke; 1 April, we will open up rides for interested members of the public. This will be on a sign-up basis. Rides will be free for a short period, before we begin revenue service. Senior Minister of State Sun will provide more details.
If all goes well, I intend to trial AVs in other parts of Singapore. We are considering Sentosa, Tuas and Mandai, amongst others, as possibilities. This will depend on whether there is interest from AV companies and commuters in these areas. I thank Mr Louis Chua for his support to accelerate the roll-out of AVs, especially autonomous buses, since we do not have enough bus drivers, as he also pointed out.
LTA will launch trials for autonomous public buses by the second half of this year via bus service 400 in Marina Bay and bus service 191 in One-North. But for technological and commercial reasons, autonomous buses are developing more slowly than autonomous cars. So, we will continue to watch this space closely.
AVs are just one part of our future transport landscape. We are putting together our next Land Transport Masterplan now. And in developing this plan, there are many exciting things we want to share and we also want to hear from Singaporeans to understand your transport needs and co-create ideas on how we can address these needs. Minister of State Baey Yam Keng has been leading this effort. Over the last three months, LTA has met more than 200 people for in-person Focus Group Discussions and received more than 3,500 written responses from the public. We hope to hear from more in the coming months, as we intensify our public engagements.
Let me share some of the common feedback that we have received so far.
On public transport, one common feedback is long travel times, especially from HDB estates further away from the city. Today, public transport may take two to three times as long as private transport, often from areas where there are only bus connections, but no MRT.
I want to narrow this gap to be closer to one to two times. Our upcoming MRT lines like the Jurong Region Line and Cross Island Line will bring us closer to this goal. We will also need to improve the bus network, and first- and last-mile connectivity.
To Mr Andre Low’s suggestion on express train lines, express services can reduce travel time by a bit for some commuters, because Singapore is small. But typically, they require a separate set of tracks and additional signalling systems. And this means much more significant land take, much higher costs and more time needed for construction. Skip-stop services, which are essentially sharing tracks for express and regular services, are technically possible, but this is operationally complex and regular trains have to be held back at stations to allow express trains to pass. This will have significant adverse impact for commuters on regular services.
We will keep an eye on this issue. If the technology improves, we will consider it. But for the Seletar Line, I think it is unlikely that we will implement it.
Another frequently raised topic is train crowding, and Mr Low spoke about the NEL – in a slightly overstated fashion, I think. But he did.
In the longer term, new MRT connections like the Cross Island Line and the Seletar Line will improve the situation for residents in the North-East. But in the short term, I have brought back free morning off-peak travel on the NEL and Sengkang-Punggol LRT, to encourage more commuters to shift out of the morning peak.
It is early days yet because we implemented it at the turn of the year, but I am happy to share that this has so far been quite effective. Around 8% of commuters have shifted off peak, which has resulted in a less crowded ride for other commuters travelling during morning peak hours.
The crowdedness has come down, akin to the effect of adding two extra trains, or 20 buses.
A third popular topic is whether we can add more bus services. I received many such requests, including two in the last half an hour in this Chamber, which I have noted – Flora Drive and Compassvale Crescent.
My MOT colleagues and LTA have been trying our very best. Since the $1 billion Bus Connectivity Enhancement Programme was launched, we have added 25 new bus services and enhanced over 60 existing ones islandwide.
I would very much like to launch more bus services. To do so, I need to buy buses. I also need to build depots and interchanges, including in Sungei Serangoon. But most importantly, I need to hire bus captains. There are just not enough Singaporeans who want to be bus drivers and we have already reached the limit in terms of how many foreign bus drivers we can recruit.
Ms Yeo Wan Ling proposed raising the starting salary for bus captains, which is now around $3,600, including overtime, to attract new recruits. I support her suggestion. We are in discussions with the bus operators and the National Transport Workers' Union on this as well as to further improve working conditions and career progression for existing bus captains.
A fourth area we receive a lot of feedback on is COEs.
Ms Tin Pei Ling and Mr Edward Chia asked if we will review the COE system, given new developments, such as EVs, AVs and the ERP 2.0 system.
The COE system was introduced in 1990 to control our vehicle population as we do not have enough land in Singapore for every person or even every household to own a car. If every household owns a car, we would have around 1.5 million cars on our roads – more than double our current car population. Our roads will be jammed up, like in many cities around the world, during peak hours and also off peak.
Every vehicle takes up road space and contributes to congestion, including motorcycles. This is why, to Mr Azhar Othman's query, we cannot exclude motorcycles from our COE system. But to Mr Liang Eng Hwa's question, we are watching the volume of Malaysian motorcycles very closely. We expect the increase in the Vehicle Entry Permit fee from $4 to $7 per day and the opening of the RTS Link, from 2027, to reduce the volume of the foreign motorcycle population in Singapore.
Mr Edward Chia has observed that the recent Category A and B prices have converged.
This is not the first time this has happened. In 2014, we added a power rating criterion to engine capacity precisely to separate Category A and Category B cars more clearly. This was in response to public feedback that Category A and B cars were becoming indistinguishable because there were more cars with smaller engine capacities but higher power. This change worked for some time.
But as Mr Chia pointed out, in recent years, manufacturers have been adjusting specifications of cars to fit within Category A. This has once again caused Category A and B prices to converge. Last month, Category A prices exceeded Category B prices, although in the exercise that just concluded an hour ago, Category B has returned to somewhat normal, higher than Category A once again.
But with Category A quota supply having peaked last year and Category B quota supply continuing to increase this year, it is likely that the two prices will continue to converge for some time. I have therefore asked LTA to review this issue. We will gather views from the public and from the industry on how to improve the COE categorisation for cars, including Mr Chia's specific proposal to apply discounts or surcharges based on open market value.
I hope Members can see from the above examples how MOT listens to feedback and tries our hardest to address concerns. I know this matters to you. It also matters to us. However, in land transport, many issues are zero sum. There is a trade-off for almost every decision we make and therefore, someone who is upset if he or she feels that they are on the wrong side of the line.
An example is bus route planning, which Ms Valerie Lee and Mr Abdul Muhaimin asked about.
LTA's bus planners are trained, when planning routes, to take into account current and future ridership – not just current ridership but also future ridership – journey times, travel patterns, alternative routes, amongst others. They are professionals, but even they find it very difficult, almost impossible, to satisfy everyone's preferences despite their best efforts.
Let me share my own experience in Chua Chu Kang.
Residents in one part of my division have been asking why a particular popular bus service did not stop at one bus stop downstairs from their homes. So, I asked LTA. After further analysis, LTA found that it was indeed possible to adjust the route. So, they did it. After the adjustment, most of the residents in those HDB blocks were very happy. But almost immediately, LTA and I got many emails from other commuters complaining that their journey was now longer and the buses were more crowded because of this one additional stop.
I understand that as commuters, we each have our specific personal situations and needs. But at the same time, I hope Singaporeans can understand that it is not easy to manage these trade-offs. But someone has to decide and that is our responsibility here at MOT to adopt a system-wide view and to deliver the greatest good for the greatest number.
Mr Chairman, I have shared how we will remain globally oriented, plan for the future and put people at the centre of what we do. And when I say people, I do not mean just the commuters. I also mean our transport workers who are the heart of my team.
Over the last nine months, I have met many of them over meals, festive celebrations and award ceremonies. I know how hard they work. Our rail maintenance workers toil in the quiet hours of the night. Our seafarers spend months away from their families. Our air traffic controllers keep their heads cool in high-stress environments.
These are but a few examples in our family of over 300,000 transport workers. Their work is unseen and unheard, but they are the ones who keep us moving and they will always have my support.
In August last year, I met Hasri Bin Abiden at Tengah bus interchange. He has been a bus captain for over 10 years. When a new bus service was introduced recently, Hasri volunteered to take on this new route. For an experienced bus captain, this is a challenge. It means changing routines and dealing with unfamiliar surroundings. Hasri told me that before he was deployed, he decided on his own accord to get on his motorcycle and practise the route all by himself at night, for many nights. He wanted to familiarise himself with the route so that he could better serve his future passengers.
Hasri is not alone. Every morning, he and many like him try to be the best that they can because they are proud of what they do. So that tomorrow morning and every morning after that, Singaporeans can step out of our homes with the confidence to get to where we want to go. [Applause.]
The Chairman: Senior Minister of State Sun Xueling.
The Senior Minister of State for Transport (Ms Sun Xueling): Mr Chairman, I will respond to Members on air and land transport issues.
We are focused on building a globally oriented, future-focussed and people-centric transport system. Singapore's aviation story is one of constant evolution. From a small island nation, we have built one of the world's most interconnected air hubs. We are now linked to over 170 cities around the world.
However, being a hub also means we are not immune to global disruptions. We are monitoring the Middle East conflict closely. The safety of flights and passengers remain our top priority. Singapore Airlines and Scoot have suspended their flights to affected Middle Eastern destinations until 7 March. We will continue to monitor the situation. Other airlines that fly to Middle Eastern destinations from Changi have also cancelled or delayed their flights.
But even as we navigate the global climate of uncertainty, we never lose sight of the longer-term horizon.
Over the next decade, we expect Changi to continue to grow. Our growth thus far has also created over 60,000 quality jobs directly in aviation, from air traffic controllers managing our busy skies to engineers managing our aircrafts. By 2040, global air travel demand is set to double and Asia Pacific will be driving two thirds of this growth. We are already preparing our infrastructure to support this by building T5.
Just as important is our OneAviation workforce. The growth of Changi will bring about more opportunities for all, including good, well-paying jobs for Singaporeans.
Mr Sharael Taha asked how we are investing in our aviation workforce. CAAS has committed $200 million towards the OneAviation Manpower Fund to attract, develop and retain the OneAviation workforce. Over the past six months, CAAS has consulted extensively with aviation companies, schools, unions and workers to understand how to help Singaporeans access quality jobs in the aviation industry and progress in their careers. Three priorities have emerged.
First, CAAS will work with our IHLs to integrate professional training and undergraduate education. The aviation industry offers many rewarding and well-paying careers, such as in air traffic control and aircraft engineering. We have a good pipeline of IHL students who are training for such roles.
This includes Wong Rui Qi, who is currently pursuing a diploma in Aerospace Engineering at Temasek Polytechnic.
I met Rui Qi last year. Rui Qi shared with me about his interest in aerospace engineering and his eagerness to start a career as a licensed aircraft engineer as soon as possible. Today, upon graduation, Rui Qi will still need to undergo up to 44 months of professional training before attaining a professional license from CAAS to become a licensed aircraft engineer. By embedding industry-recognised skills training into the IHL curriculum, students, like Rui Qi, will be able to graduate more job-ready and embark on their aviation careers quickly.
Second, CAAS will enhance the workplace environment and experience for the Changi workforce. This could include enhancing our infrastructure, improving transport accessibility to and from the airport, particularly during late and early hours, and also providing better rest facilities for workers.
Third, CAAS will work with NTUC to develop a sector-wide mentorship scheme. This will support the career development of new entrants to the aviation workforce in key operational roles. This will enable us to build a future-ready and resilient next generation of aviation professionals.
CAAS will share more details for each of these three areas in the coming year.
To complement these efforts, we are also strengthening our outreach to bring aviation opportunities closer to Singaporeans.
Last Saturday, I attended the East Side OneAviation Careers Fair at Heartbeat@Bedok. There were over 2,000 job vacancies available in the aviation and aerospace sector and 18 participating organisations.
I look forward to working with interested Community Development Councils (CDCs) to bring aviation and aerospace careers to more local communities in Singapore. Let me repeat that. I look forward to working with interested CDCs to bring aviation and aerospace careers to more local communities in Singapore.
Ms Poh Li San asked about how we are attracting women to join the aviation sector.
I recently met Ms Megan Zheng, who has been an air traffic control officer (ATCO) for the past 12 years. She shared that it is a job like no other. Other than it being deeply fulfilling, she knows that every instruction that she gives helps guide an aircraft safely to land and that she is responsible for the lives of all the passengers and crew on board.
And while ATCOs work shifts, Megan explained that her rosters are planned well in advance, up to a year ahead. And this allows officers like herself with two young children to plan their family commitments and personal time with confidence.
About 40% of our ATCO workforce are women today, and this has been growing steadily. As our air traffic continues to grow, we look forward to having more ATCOs join us.
Beyond the skies, the way that we run our airport is also evolving. Airport operations and planning is an exciting discipline that will become increasingly technologically driven as we prepare for T5.
We deployed the first driverless autonomous baggage tractors at Changi just two months ago, which will help to enhance worker safety, reduce physical workload and allow operations to continue in all weather conditions. Autonomous wheelchairs are also being trialled in T2 to help us meet the changing mobility needs of our passengers in the future.
This is the exciting future that draws in our students like Ms Ng Yu Jing from Temasek Polytechnic. Yu Jing and her course mates shared with me their enthusiasm to be a part of T5, and to chart the next chapter of Singapore’s aviation story.
Efforts to attract women into aviation do not just rest with the Government. When I attended the Women In Aviation Singapore Chapter Gala last year, I was heartened to see women and companies leaning forward to provide opportunities for women at every level in aviation. This includes the Women In Aviation Singapore Chapter mentorship programme, which gives young mentees access to valuable perspectives beyond their organisation. Women In Aviation Singapore Chapter’s mentorship programme has supported over 100 mentees over the past four years. CAAS has also been working closely with Women In Aviation Singapore Chapter to conduct outreach efforts to girls in schools and young women just starting out on their careers.
We are excited for more women to join our aviation sector, especially as we continue to face manpower shortages and there are many well-paying jobs available. The OneAviation workforce will continue to remain at the forefront as our aviation sector continues to grow.
Let me now turn to the land transport sector.
We are ensuring that our public transport network remains accessible and convenient. But manpower remains a binding constraint. The sustainable, long-term solution is to leverage technology, such as AVs.
Ms Yeo Wan Ling asked for an update on the autonomous shuttle operations in Punggol, the AV regulatory framework and support for the manpower transition.
In Punggol, around 740 people have tried the shuttles on Routes 1 and 3. Many commented that the rides were smooth and comfortable, and 99% said they would recommend the service to others. The shuttles provide last-mile connections not previously provided by direct transport links and reduce travel disruptions by up to 15 minutes. Punggol residents have seen the shuttles making their rounds and told me they are excited to try it soon.
Given the positive feedback, we will open up the rides on Routes 1 and 3 to the public from 1 April. The rides will be accompanied with a commentary on features of the AV, and they will be free for an initial period. This will allow more people to experience the technology and provide feedback for the operator to improve its service. Grab, the operator, will share more details on how to register for the rides. From the middle of this year, commuters may board and alight at any stop along Routes 1 and 3 at a flat fare of $4 per passenger.
ComfortDelGro’s autonomous shuttles on Route 2 in Punggol are making good progress in familiarisation and we look forward to commencing by-invite rides for Route 2 soon.
On my rounds in Punggol, I spoke with safety operators on board our autonomous shuttles. Mr Victor Tan has been a taxi driver and a driving instructor with ComfortDelGro for the past 15 years. He shared that training to be a safety operator on board the autonomous shuttle allowed him to augment his driving experience so that man and machine operate seamlessly as one.
Mr Vincent Teo and Ms Sarah Binte Ahmad wanted to try something new after driving for several years and see the new technology in action. They worked hard for their safety operator training with GrabAcademy and WeRide, which required a 90% passing score. I hear that Sarah’s four children are incredibly proud of their cool mom and Vincent will be progressing to an AV remote operator course soon.
These are examples of fellow taxi and private hire vehicle drivers who are giving autonomous technology a try. And new jobs will not just be in the area of safety operators.
There will be new jobs for more individualised in-person customer service which cannot be provided by a machine. There will be new jobs in maintenance and operations of autonomous fleets. New jobs in software and engineering. These are better paying jobs of the future that not only our current drivers can consider, but also our younger generation who may be interested in the future of autonomy.
This is an evolving space and many other countries, like China, Japan, the United Arab Emirates and the United States, are deploying AVs. Our best strategy is to prepare our people, our infrastructure and our laws. As the Prime Minister mentioned, we will make sure that autonomous technology and AI work for us.
Together with our unions, we are developing training and conversion programmes for our drivers. We are mapping out new job roles and opportunities for our drivers. I understand that the National Trades Union Congress (NTUC) is having engagement sessions on AVs. So, a shoutout – if you are curious to find out more, please sign up!
We are also developing a more holistic legal framework for AVs, which will specify clearly the responsibilities and accountability of key parties in the ecosystem. This will provide clarity to our workers, industry and the public, and we will consult each of these groups in the coming year.
We are also leveraging technology for a cleaner living environment. EVs have zero tailpipe emissions. Our air quality will improve, our children no longer have to breathe in harmful fumes from vehicles. EVs are also quiet. We often receive feedback on traffic noise. EVs will improve this.
In January 2026, EV adoption grew to a record 55% of new car registrations. Mr Louis Chua and Ms Tin Pei Ling asked whether our EV charger network is adequate to support the growing EV fleet. I am pleased to share that there are more than 29,000 charging points island-wide. We have achieved our target to provide all HDB residents with convenient access to a charger, with more than 90% of HDB carparks equipped with slow chargers. This addresses the needs of residents who want to charge their cars overnight.
Mr Ang Wei Neng and Mr Dennis Tan suggested deploying more fast chargers. We have already deployed 150 fast charging points at 70 carparks at HDB town centres and JTC premises.
Technology continues to evolve rapidly. There are more EV models that now support faster charging. New ultra-fast chargers that can add hundreds of kilometres of range to EVs in under 10 minutes. And there are also more sophisticated grid management solutions which allow us to reduce costly infrastructure upgrades.
We envision a mix of charging options to serve different preferences. EV owners who prefer overnight charging can continue to use the slow charging points near your homes. Those who prefer to charge while running errands for one to two hours can do so at a fast-charging hub, with multiple fast charging points of power ratings of around 50 kW. And those who would like a quick charge of 10 to 20 minutes, similar to the experience at petrol kiosks today, can do so at ultra-fast charging points above 150 kW.
Currently, there are fast-charging hubs in commercial and industrial premises, such as Pasir Ris Mall, Suntec City and Corporation Place in Jurong West. We will deploy more fast-charging hubs so that there will be at least one fast-charging hub per HDB town by the end of next year. Each hub will be equipped with at least six fast charging points. We will start in areas with higher EV charging demand and adequate electrical capacity, such as carparks near Compass One in Sengkang, MacPherson market and Plantation Plaza in Tengah.
We are also working with industry to explore ultra-fast charging options and agencies to optimise our electrical grid for our growing charging needs.
Mr Ang Wei Neng and Ms Yeo Wan Ling highlighted the importance of equipping our workforce for the EV transition. We launched the National EV Safety Specialist Certification in 2022, which has provided more than 2,000 people with foundational safety training in EV maintenance.
We will build on this effort. MOT’s National Transport Academy, SkillsFuture Singapore and the Institution of Engineers, Singapore will launch a Skills Pathway for EV Technical Specialists. This charts out the progression roadmap for a career in EV maintenance, including the training available from IHLs, the Singapore Bus Academy and NTUC LearningHub. Major automotive employers, such as Borneo Motors, BYD, Cycle & Carriage and Komoco, and our public bus operators will also support with employment opportunities. Eligible individuals and employees will enjoy at least 50% course fee subsidies for SSG-approved courses.
I will now touch on public buses and its workforce.
The Bus Connectivity Enhancement Programme was introduced in July 2024 to enhance bus connectivity, especially in newer estates located further from MRT stations and to also offer alternatives travel modes along rail lines with high ridership.
Specifically for the North-East region, we have introduced 12 new bus services over the past 1.5 years, including 11 peak period services and extended the routes of two existing bus services. Residents have expressed appreciation for the new bus services, but they often ask if there can be more bus connections to other destinations.
Mr Chairman, the binding constraint to more bus services is not the number of buses but rather the number of bus captains. The job of a bus captain is not easy, as described by Ms Yeo Wan Ling. We have worked with bus operators and the National Transport Workers’ Union to improve the working conditions for bus drivers over the years, such as longer breaks during shifts and caps on shift lengths. But this has not arrested the decline in local recruitment.
As mentioned by Acting Minister Jeffrey Siow, we will do more to encourage locals to join the bus sector, including mid-career entrants. This would include working with bus operators and the union to raise salaries and improving working conditions and career progression for bus captains.
Ms Yeo also asked how we are preparing bus captains for the AV transition. We are commencing our AV bus trials on public bus service 191 and 400 later this year. The Government, led by LTA’s Singapore Bus Academy, is working closely with public transport operators like SBST, our unions and AV tech solution providers to prepare our bus captains. Through the support and training programmes, we will upskill these bus captains and ensure that they are equipped with the required skills to take on new roles, such as safety and remote operators, fleet managers and other positions in the technical and passenger service functions. Our priority is to ensure that our bus captains are well equipped with the required skills to take on new and meaningful roles in this AV transition as we pilot the AV services in a safe and responsible manner.
I would like to touch on improving safety of worker transport. Government agencies have been working closely with industry and non-governmental organisations (NGOs) to improve the safety of worker transport. We have made good progress, introducing requirements for lorries ferrying workers to be fitted with canopies and higher protective side railings, have lower speed limits and to meet minimum space requirements.
In close consultation with our tripartite partners, we will take a further step. From 1 January 2027, we will no longer allow the ferrying of workers in caged lorries. Caged lorry decks present additional safety risks to rear deck passengers. For example, if a lorry with a cage door that is latched or locked from the outside is involved in an accident or a fire, workers may not be able to escape.
Companies may still use their caged lorries to transport goods. If companies need the flexibility to transport either workers or goods on their rear decks, they can choose to replace the cage structure with a canopy, side railings and rain covers.
I thank the NGOs for this suggestion and their patience while we assessed the risks.
To Mr Jackson Lam's query about MOT's approach to road safety, we continuously enhance road safety through both infrastructure improvements and community engagement. Our Friendly Streets initiative exemplifies this, where LTA constructs new signalised crossings, barrier-free crossings and wider centre islands for safe crossing. There are also reduced speed limits and other traffic calming measures.
In the five pilot sites with Friendly Streets, we have seen average vehicular speeds reducing by up to 25%. More residents are also walking or cycling along these Friendly Streets. Twenty-five more sites are in the works, such as in Holland/Buona Vista and Punggol. Given the positive feedback, we will roll out another 20 new Friendly Streets over the next few years. Some of the new sites include Pandan Gardens and Kampong Gelam. Residents can look forward to being engaged on road infrastructure improvements to improve safety, convenience and comfort.
By 2030, every town will have at least one Friendly Street. This means at least 50 Friendly Streets island-wide.
Chairman, transport connects us all, to family, to work and to the world. Our investments into infrastructure, people and technology will ensure that these connections remain strong, safe and sustainable, for Singapore and Singaporeans.
The Chairman: Senior Minister of State Murali Pillai.
The Senior Minister of State for Transport (Mr Murali Pillai): Mr Chairman, the sea has always been Singapore's open passage to the world. We have relied on it throughout our history.
Today, the seas are choppy. When we speak of supply chain disruptions, it is sea lanes that grant or prohibit, passage to supply chains across the world. When we speak of geopolitical tensions, it is the literal ports of call that are changing amid greater volatility and global uncertainties.
[Mr Speaker in the Chair]
Since last weekend, we, on this side of the world, have been saddened to note the ongoing situation in the Middle East. Not only has it claimed lives, it has also begun to disrupt the flow of around 20% of the world's oil and gas through the narrow Strait of Hormuz. Already, several shipping companies have announced the suspension of vessel transits through the Strait. This will inevitably cause upward price pressures on these commodities. All these consequences happened in just a matter of days.
Amidst this upheaval, the maritime sector can be a steady conduit, keeping Singapore connected to the world. Singapore was built on the backbone of our geography along two straits, the Straits of Malacca and Singapore. The sea can continue to afford us the same riches it had in the past, if we only look to our time-proven instincts and skills and grow our seafarers and maritime workforce. If we do this well, we will ride the seas as we have throughout our history.
We will press ahead with four key thrusts.
First, we must remain open and support the free flow of trade, people and partnerships. The open seas are not an empire to be conquered but a global commons subject to internationally accepted rules and laws. For Singapore as a small island nation, this rule is a bulwark upon which we rely.
But governance of a global commons cannot be a sole enterprise, least of all for a small country like ours. The Acting Minister for Transport Mr Jeffery Siow has explained how we will continue to drive collective efforts at key international institutions, such as the IMO.
We also pledge to work with like-minded partners to contribute to the development of rules and standards for international shipping. One way is by establishing Green and Digital Shipping Corridors with other countries. These collaborations enable us to collectively develop technologies, infrastructure and standards to promote a more sustainable and connected maritime ecosystem. We will continue to find new opportunities to grow these connections.
Second, Singapore must continue to offer itself as a key node in global supply chains. The hon Member Mr Sharael Taha asked about how MOT is strengthening the long-term competitiveness of our maritime sector.
The Maritime and Port Authority of Singapore (MPA) is developing a Maritime Singapore Master Plan. It will be a future-focused industry-wide blueprint to guide the sector's development over the next few decades. It aims to strengthen Singapore's competitiveness as a key node and hub port, enhance Singapore's attractiveness as an International Maritime Centre, establish Singapore as a global leader in maritime innovation, including in AI and develop a future-ready maritime workforce.
We will not develop the Master Plan alone. Over the next few months, MPA will set up a local industry panel comprising key business leaders to gather insights, as we engage our unions and the public. MPA aims to formalise the Master Plan by 2027.
To be a node is to provide many points of entry, as well as to spark synergies amongst those already here. We are growing Singapore as a centre for maritime technology, innovation and research and development (R&D).
As mentioned by the Acting Minister Mr Jeffery Siow, we are also investing in the capabilities and capacity of our port. Hon Member Ms Tin Pei Ling asked for an update on Tuas Port's development and how it will boost Singapore's competitiveness. Reclamation works for Phase 2 are close to 80% complete, and planning for Phase 3 is underway. When completed in the 2040s, Tuas Port will have a capacity of 65 million TEUs and will be the world's largest fully automated container terminal. This will further secure Singapore's connectivity to the world and our competitiveness as a trusted node for international shipping.
Over the next few decades, we will continue to refine the design of Tuas Port to meet new needs as our operating environment changes. This is the benefit of a phased approach that we have adopted for the development of Tuas Port.
As one of the world's busiest ports, Singapore is also a useful testbed and living laboratory for those seeking to trial innovative maritime solutions in a realistic operating environment. MPA will introduce a new innovation track under the Maritime Cluster Fund Business Development scheme, to better support companies to deepen their technological and innovation capabilities here. Under the scheme, companies establishing innovation and technology desks or corporate venture capital functions here can receive funding and increased access to R&D expertise as well as regulatory support. This will help to position Singapore as a global node for talent, ideas and capital.
I recently met Mr Nicholas Brabeck, Managing Director of Everllence Singapore. Everllence is one of the shipping industry's main engine makers. I was heartened to hear that Everllence had chosen to set up its largest service hub outside of Europe here, not only because of Singapore's infrastructure as well as its strategic location, but also due to our skilled and resilient workforce, both onshore and at sea.
We will continue to ensure graduates and workers are well-equipped to seize the many well-paying opportunities in this sector. Some of these roles may be unfamiliar to Singaporeans. But they are good jobs. For example, onshore maritime roles include ship charterers and ship brokers, who earned competitive median gross wages of approximately $10,000 in 2024, and marine and technical superintendents, who drew median gross wages ranging from $8,000 to $13,000 from 2021 to 2024.
In fact, the maritime industry is not just for those who sail, but for many who work on land. One such person is Ms Divika Gill whom I met several weeks earlier. She joined the sector about three months ago after graduating from Singapore Polytechnic. She is now a fitter, an understated description in the maritime world referring to a highly skilled technician supporting engineering operations and upholding the highest safety standards to make vessels ocean-worthy. She aspires to be a marine engineer. She is among a growing group of women who find meaning and purpose in a maritime career.
Mr Sharael Taha also about asked how we are creating a pipeline of skilled Singaporeans.
First, we will continue to invest in maritime talent. In line with feedback from companies, MPA is streamlining the requirements of the Maritime Cluster Fund Management Associate scheme and updating the programme to keep up with the latest practices in talent development.
Through these refinements, smaller firms, including SMEs, would be able to create structured professional development opportunities for their employees. Grooming talent for management and leadership positions supports their business growth in the longer term. MPA will also increase opportunities for Management Associates to rotate across different maritime roles and for longer, to build greater depth and expertise. This will groom young professionals early by broadening their understanding of the maritime value chain.
Second, we want to prepare Singaporeans to take on leadership roles in the maritime sector. As maritime is global in nature, maritime leaders will need to have experience and capabilities running international operations and managing cross-cultural teams. This is why we are launching a new Maritime Cluster Fund Global Rotation scheme. The scheme provides grants to companies to co-fund the overseas deployments of local middle managers, to equip them with the competencies to take on supervisory roles.
But attracting top talent into the maritime sector and keeping them, is not just a matter of Government making policies top-down. It has to be done in close partnership with our industry leaders, players, unions and IHLs.
The maritime sector's track record of supporting committed individuals through scholarships and internships is a testament to the importance the industry places on talent development. In fact, if hon Members were to look up to my right, five scholarship recipients, accompanied by the Chairman of the Singapore Maritime Foundation Mr Hor Weng Yew are here with us in this House today. They are drawn from different backgrounds, including the Institute of Technical Education (ITE) and polytechnics, and their scholarships are sponsored by various maritime companies and organisations.
I hope their example will inspire a new generation of young Singaporeans to take up the challenge and transform the maritime sector.
I recently met Captain Lee Cheng Wee, who first joined the maritime sector more than 50 years ago in the early 1970s. He responded to an advertisement in The Straits Times to be a harbour pilot. He thought he would have a chance to fly over Singapore's waters, boy, was he wrong! He found out it was actually a sea-based job. But while his entry into the maritime sector was accidental, he forged an enduring career over five decades in the maritime sector. He served, also, as our Port Master from 2008 to 2013.
Across the decades, Captain Lee has seen the growth of our port and maritime ecosystem. For him, the close working relationship between industry and unions has been the critical ingredient that allowed Maritime Singapore to grow and for new jobs to be created.
Views like Captain Lee's are important in telling us what tripartism means in real life. Alongside industry stakeholders and our unions, we will continue to set our collective ambition for the maritime sector and ensure that our maritime workforce is ready to chart the next bound.
Last, we will use technology to help each one of us in the maritime sector do more and create rewarding jobs. To do this, MPA will expand trials of Unmanned Surface Vessels later this year. The Unmanned Surface Vessels will operate autonomously while retaining the capability for remote piloting when required. They will leverage AI sensors and real-time data transmission to enhance MPA's operational effectiveness in maritime surveillance and hydrographic operations. This also reduces personnel exposure to dangerous conditions. And that manpower freed up can be channelled to other growth areas.
Last year, MPA launched the Singapore Maritime Digital Twin, a dynamic virtual model of our port. I am happy to announce that MPA will be extending this Digital Twin to bring onboard industry partners, who can test their new products and services to better deliver marine services to port users. Two use cases will be piloted this year: the first will optimise ship supply services for vessels calling at Singapore; and the second will enhance incident response and emergency preparedness for incidents such as oil spills.
We welcome companies to work together with us to build their applications and simulation models using the Digital Twin, including AI-related applications.
As we adopt such new technologies, we will continue to put in place appropriate safeguards to address risks that may arise. As part of these efforts, MPA has introduced programmes to strengthen cyber security training, including using a shipboard technology testbed to train vessel traffic management officers.
Mr Chairman, the seas have always been the place for innovation. In maritime lore, Moby Dick is often cited as a cautionary tale – that one must not be dogmatic and vainglorious like Captain Ahab but be flexible and a survivor like Ishmael. But to me, Moby Dick is also full of revelations about the science of navigation and the role of technology in seafaring – it is hard for us to imagine now, but at the time of writing, the ability to establish precise longitudes for mariners was just 90 years old. It was John Harrison's invention of the chronometer, highly accurate even at sea, that allowed longitudes to be plotted and journeys to be precise enough to chase a nimble whale.
Likewise, Singapore must remain alive to the transformational power of new technologies, to master new tasks and chart new journeys through untested waters. The old ways are gone, and now is the time for new navigators with our own chronometers.
Mr Chairman, even as clouds hang overhead, even as the waves rise, Maritime Singapore can continue to ride the waves of change, if we have strong partners across the world, if we strengthen our position as a trusted node, if we prepare our people and if we open our eyes to the power of technology.
Most importantly, we can do this if we remember our history as an island nation. The seas have marked our destiny in trade and commerce and given us a particular prosperity – a prosperity that can remain ours, as long as we take heart to preserve and grow, our courage and ability to navigate the high seas.
The Chairman: Minister of State Baey Yam Keng.
The Minister of State for Transport (Mr Baey Yam Keng): Chairman, I will elaborate on how we make land transport people-centric and future-ready. Fellow Singaporeans will play an integral role in this journey. Together, we can shape the next bound of our transport system.
I will start with the refresh of the Land Transport Master Plan, followed by our efforts to promote a positive commuter culture and safety on public paths.
Ms Tin Pei Ling asked about the future of land transport and what MOT is doing to build a better and safer land transport system that addresses commuter needs.
As the Acting Minister mentioned, LTA has launched a nationwide public consultation to refresh the Land Transport Master Plan 2040. This is the long-term strategic blueprint that will chart the next phase of our land transport system.
Why do we need to refresh the Land Transport Master Plan? This is because there are many emerging trends that require us to review our priorities and enhance our strategy.
Firstly, demographic changes such as ageing population and evolving lifestyle needs of our people meant that transport provisions must also evolve to cater to working adults moving into new estates further away from their workplaces, families with young children, elderly, persons with disability and other commuter groups.
The effects of climate change and more extreme weather patterns also cannot be ignored. For instance, we need to continue improving our transport infrastructure so that as much as possible, commuters can walk, cycle and ride comfortably.
At the same time, we are on the cusp of significant transformation. Advances in intelligent and autonomous systems have enormous potential to improve and expand our mobility options.
What does this mean for the future of transport? Since kick-starting the outreach for refresh of the Land Transport Master Plan late last year, we have heard from many Singaporeans. I would like to share the \"3Cs\" that have emerged as the top priorities: connectivity, comfort and community.
To achieve the first C of keeping Singaporeans connected and meeting different travel needs, we must continue to invest in our public transport network, as well as on shared and active mobility.
Acting Minister has earlier updated on the progress of the new rail lines under construction. As we build new lines and stations, we will also continue to maintain and rejuvenate older ones to support growing demand and to remain inclusive and accessible to all commuters.
When it comes to last-mile connectivity, we hope to cater for more cycling and micromobility networks island-wide as part of infrastructure planning. This allows for safe, convenient and active transport options for shorter distances within a town, such as the use of bicycles and active mobility devices. This approach is especially essential and beneficial for a dense urban city-state like Singapore.
The North-South Corridor is a good example. With more traffic diverted to its underground tunnel and viaduct, surface streets will be freed up to prioritise walking, cycling, buses as well as communal and green spaces. When completed, residents in the North can enjoy faster commutes to city centre, as well as more pleasant and comfortable travel to places along the corridor.
The second C is comfort. We want journeys to be comfortable and enjoyable so that public transport remains the mode of choice for Singaporeans.
One aspect of our Land Transport Master Plan engagements is getting Singaporeans from all walks of life to share more about their daily commutes – not only about travel times and connectivity, but also about their travel experience.
Participants talked about how they use their neighbourhood spaces and get to transport nodes. As Senior Minister of State Sun Xueling has shared, we will be expanding Friendly Streets to all towns by 2030.
Members also asked about commuter infrastructure that supports walking, such as covered linkways and pedestrian overhead bridges.
LTA is continuously improving the first-mile-last-mile journey to our transport nodes. For example, we already have covered linkways within a 400-metre radius of MRT stations. This is now extended to an 800-metre radius at our Friendly Streets.
We are also installing lifts to existing pedestrian overhead bridges. We have already completed the retrofitting of lifts to bridges near major transport nodes and are now focusing on bridges that serve more seniors.
Ms Sylvia Lim asked about lift upgrading at four pedestrian overhead bridges in Hougang. Mr Chairman, on behalf of the Acting Minister, I would like to confirm that there is no delay. We have been carrying out the retrofitting of bridges with lifts in phases. The four bridges mentioned by Ms Lim is in this current phase, which commenced at the end of last year. There are over 100 bridges that we are upgrading in this phase. Works must be carried out progressively.
We will commence works at two of the bridges mentioned by Ms Lim by the middle of 2027 before moving on to the other two bridges later. We hope that Ms Lim will find this response satisfactory.
Mr Chairman, in every project we do, we have to prioritise and carry out works progressively. Implementing and proving infrastructure takes time and resources, which are also needed by other equally meritorious projects.
We take this principle: benefit as many commuters as quickly as possible. Over time we will cover all the locations that we have identified for enhancements.
The last C is about fostering a sense of community. Transport is a shared experience. A transport system that fulfils our needs, and one that we are proud of, goes beyond policies and hardware.
It is also a matter of how we treat one another in shared spaces on a day-to-day basis, whether on our roads and public paths, or in buses and trains.
While we can improve our infrastructure and hardware, such changes are not without trade-offs. Transport spaces are ultimately shared by all of us. From time to time, conflicting needs do come up. For example, since 2018, LTA has been procuring buses with more open space where wheelchairs and strollers can be parked. This caters to an increasing number of commuters with diverse needs.
But to create space for these bays, LTA had to reduce the number of seats, as Ms Sylvia Lim pointed out. To mitigate this, LTA will install foldable seats within the bays where feasible.
Part of the Land Transport Master Plan exercise is to create the opportunity for these important conversations, to allow people with different needs to hear from one another and forge consensus on the social compact that underlies our shared spaces in our transport system.
An example of where greater consensus is needed is in the use of spaces set aside for wheelchairs and strollers on buses. Ms Elysa Chen raised the need to make public transport more inclusive for young families. For parents with open strollers, our bus captains will also be happy to activate the wheelchair ramp upon request, to facilitate their boarding process.
We have also heard feedback from parents that they are sometimes asked by the bus captains to fold their stroller and carry their child because the bus is crowded and there is a person wheelchair-bound person boarding.
We are actively reviewing this issue and consulting various stakeholders. Aside from increasing the space allocated for wheelchairs and strollers, which comes with trade-offs, LTA has been conducting small-scale operational trials on the more flexible use of such spaces and has gathered initial operational insights. We are now ready to test this at a larger scale.
From April 2026, on around 10 selected bus services plying routes that serve more wheelchair or mobility aid users and parents with young children, our bus captains will facilitate the use of bays by wheelchairs and open strollers on a first-come-first-serve basis. Depending on the findings, we will consider making this the norm across the entire network. We will also gather views at the upcoming Land Transport Master Plan consultations, from commuters, families and advocates to find a balanced way forward together.
Our aim is for our public buses and trains to be an inclusive space for commuters with all needs, including wheelchair users and parents with young children. Singaporeans' active participation in this conversation and our gracious commuting behaviours, will make all the difference.
Aside from the suggestions to improve our transport system, we also heard about the positive impact that our transport system has made on Singaporeans' everyday lives, and that is heartening.
We know that land transport is a deeply personal part of everyone's lived experience and an issue that is close to many people's hearts. There will be more Land Transport Master Plan engagements to come, including school outreach, pop-ups and thematic focused group discussions that deep dive into targeted issues.
We want to hear your stories and perspectives, discuss the necessary trade-offs and partner you in co-creating a transport system that we will all take pride in.
Next, I will speak on our efforts to cultivate a more gracious and caring commuting culture.
Beyond faster and more convenient journeys, ensuring an inclusive public transport system is equally important, as Ms Elysa Chen has mentioned. Besides access to public transport, we want everyone to feel safe and confident when using our buses and trains.
Over the years, we have made our system more accessible to commuters with all needs. Our public transport system is now almost entirely barrier-free. LTA and our transport operators are also expanding our efforts to support commuters with other diverse needs.
To give an example, SBS Transit has piloted a Sign Language Virtual Assistant kiosk called SiLViA at Chinatown MRT station. Using AI, the kiosk features a female avatar, which can translate spoken words or public announcements into sign language.
Miss Rachel Ong asked whether there are plans to scale this. So far, commuters with hearing difficulties have found the kiosk useful. LTA will work with SBS Transit to deploy this initiative at more locations.
Beyond hardware and technology, all commuters can play a part. A \"we first\" society starts with our everyday interactions on our public transport system.
Queuing to board our MRT trains and letting commuters alight first was not the norm here in the past. However, after LTA launched the Graciousness Campaign in 2009 and marked out queue lines at MRT platforms, this is now second nature.
Building such norms is an ongoing process. The Public Transport Council regularly engages commuters on how we can make the public transport system more gracious and inclusive.
Some feedback that they have received includes how our commuters with diverse needs can find it difficult to get a seat, especially if their condition is not visible to others. Commuters with open strollers sometimes also have to wait for the lift behind long queues of able-bodied people.
The Caring SG Commuters Movement, led by Public Transport Council and LTA, will launch a new campaign to shape positive behaviour norms in our public transport system.
First, we will clearly set up priority queue lines at the priority boarding doors within MRT stations and at the lifts within our public transport nodes progressively. If you are using a wheelchair, pregnant or travelling with a stroller, you can use these priority queue lines when waiting for the train or the lift. For other commuters, we encourage you to use the escalators and stairs so that the lifts can be prioritised for those with greater needs. If you still wish to use the lift, please let those in the priority queues enter first.
Second, we encourage all commuters who need a seat, such as those who are pregnant or have health conditions which may not be visible, to obtain a \"Helping Hand\" card from the passenger service centres at train stations and bus interchanges. I also encourage commuters to show acts of care by actively giving up their seats to those who need them more, including those carrying the striking yellow \"Helping Hand\" cards.
We also want to make it a norm for those who need a seat to ask for one. While some commuters may not notice that you need a seat, I am sure that most people are understanding and are prepared to give up their seats if they are approached politely.
Lastly, Mr Gerald Giam, Mr Jackson Lam and Ms Valerie Lee asked about the different ways to improve the safe use of public paths, which are shared between pedestrians and users of mobility devices.
Indeed, we want to encourage active mobility while ensuring safety. To do so, we set out the rules and regulations, enforce them, build the infrastructure and promote the safe and gracious sharing of public paths through education and engagement.
On the requirement of lights, bicycles, power-assisted bicycles and personal mobility devices must display a front white light and a rear red light when ridden on public paths and roads during hours of darkness between 7.00 pm and 7.00 am. This ensures that riders are visible to pedestrians and other path users at night. LTA conducts regular enforcement operations to ensure compliance.
On cycling etiquette and the rights and responsibilities of path users, the Code of Conduct for Users of Public Path provides guidelines to ensure harmonious path sharing.
Riders should look out for and give way to pedestrians on public paths. The bell is meant to gently alert others before overtaking rather than to demand the right of way. When approaching bus stops and intersections of public paths, riders should slow down and stop if necessary. This reduces the risk of accidents with other path users such as those boarding or alighting from buses.
At the same time, pedestrians should also do their part to stay alert to oncoming riders or any potential danger by keeping their eyes and ears open.
Where possible, we also have designed infrastructure to enable safe use and sharing of paths. For example, LTA builds bypass paths behind bus stops to separate cyclists from bus commuters where possible. Markings, signs and speed regulating strips also remind cyclists to slow down and give way to pedestrians near bus stops. LTA also enforces against cyclists who speed or ride recklessly.
We will continue to monitor accidents and public feedback to identify areas for improvement.
On whether to prohibit pedestrians from walking on cycling paths when a dedicated alternative is provided, this had been deliberated before. We do not plan to prohibit pedestrians from using cycling paths adjacent to Pedestrian-Only Paths. This provides pedestrians, who are the largest group of path users, with the flexibility to also walk on the cycling paths when it is safe to do so.
Our approach is to clearly demarcate the paths and focus on strengthening user awareness about path safety through education and outreach efforts. Users are advised to keep to their own paths under the Code of Conduct. Enforcement officers on the ground and volunteers from the Active Mobility Community Ambassadors scheme will also educate pedestrians seen walking on cycling paths to keep to the Pedestrian-Only Paths for their own safety. Chairman, I will now say a few words in Mandarin.
(In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] Since November last year, we have embarked on a year-long public consultation to update the Land Transport Master Plan with the aim of exploring different commuting needs together and jointly shaping our future transport system.
Over the past four months, we have received suggestions to improve transport connectivity and enhance journey comfort.
Most people aspire towards a more inclusive and caring commuting culture. This requires everyone to do their part. Whenever you are travelling on the MRT or public buses, do you notice passengers who need the seats and lifts more, such as seniors, wheelchair users, pregnant women and parents with strollers, and voluntarily give way to them?
We also understand the difficulty faced by many parents travelling on public buses with strollers. Therefore, we will implement a pilot programme starting in April this year. On approximately 10 bus routes, bus captains will help parents with strollers and wheelchair-bound passengers with the use of the designated spaces, on a first-come, first-serve basis.
Sometimes, buses may be rather crowded. I encourage passengers to be more understanding of one another and assist those in need. The same hands you extend to help others today are in fact paving the way for your family and loved ones' needs tomorrow.
The spirit of mutual courtesy and care should also extend to the use of public roads. To ensure the safety of different users, such as pedestrians and users of personal mobility devices, LTA has implemented relevant regulations and optimised road infrastructure. We will continue public education and enforcement in this area to address dangerous and illegal behaviours.
I hope that as we use our shared paths, let us take greater care and not leave safety to chance, be gracious when resolving any differences and look out for one another.
(In English): Mr Chairman, to conclude, we will continue to work hand in hand with fellow Singaporeans to enhance our land transport system and commuter culture. This will ensure that it is future-ready and able to meet the diverse needs of our people.
The Chairman: We have some time for clarifications. Ms Tin Pei Ling.
Ms Tin Pei Ling: Thank you, Chairman. Two questions.
One is that I hear that there will be a review of the COE system later part of this year. I would just like to ask if there is a specific timeline that we can look forward to.
Second is on land transport overall. It is on the impact of ageing population and ageing infrastructure. With an ageing population, of course, there will be more needs. More covered walkways, and covered walkways, if they are a bit lengthy, they may need benches along the way, lifts at overhead bridges, so on and so forth. There will be more demand of such to be built.
On ageing infrastructure, over time, obviously, you need maintenance, if not a refresh or rebuilding of these. These will add cost. So, I would like to understand whether it is possible to give us a sense of how such costs may increase over time, both the construction and lifetime maintenance, and whether it is feasibly sustainable over the longer run. If yes or no, how are we going to manage this?
Mr Jeffrey Siow: Chairman, I will take the first question and I will have Minister of State Baey take the second one.
For the COE review, I intend to start this immediately. We will have to take the rest of the year to do the consultation. We will take it as part of the Land Transport Master Plan process as Minister of State Baey has explained. Hopefully, by the end of this year, we ought to have some form of conclusion.
Mr Baey Yam Keng: As Ms Tin has mentioned, with the changing needs of the population, our infrastructure needs to keep up with the needs. Infrastructure like pedestrian overhead bridge (POB) lifts, as mentioned, we are in this current phase with more than 100 POB lifts. This is Phase 4. We are now focusing on locations that serve more seniors.
We may need a few years, because as we have mentioned in the House before, construction of a pair of lifts at the POB is not so straightforward. We need to look at underground services that may be disrupted and various things. It does take time and resources.
The Member has rightly pointed out, it is not just building it, it is also maintaining the lifts subsequently.
After Phase 4, do we have Phase 5 and subsequent phases? We do have Members asking for lifts at POBs in their respective areas. I believe, if I am not wrong, we have easily more than 700 POBs around Singapore. I do not think we will be able to install lifts at all the POBs or, in that argument or rationale, improve amenities or infrastructure to cater to all needs of the population over time.
I think MOT and LTA will have to look at each of the request and come up with a strategy of addressing the needs of as many as commuters as quickly as possible, as I have mentioned in my speech. It is about balancing the different needs, managing our resources prudently, bearing in mind not only the cost of the construction development but the whole tail of maintenance.
We will definitely make sure that whatever we build will be maintained properly. We call to the public and commuters to make use of these facilities properly, make sure that they last a long time so that we do not need to do repairs or refurbishment too frequently. I believe that with that kind of approach, we will be able to cater to the needs of our ageing population in time to come.
The Chairman: There are a number of POBs in my division as well, Minister of State Baey. So, do not forget mine. Mr Ang Wei Neng.
Mr Ang Wei Neng: Chairman, I have two clarifications. Firstly, we are glad that the Minister has assured us that MOT is working to establish clearer criteria for distinguishing between Cat A and Cat B COE. In the meantime, I would like to seek clarification on the reduction in the supply of Category A COE. Is MOT still committed to increasing the overall COE supply by 20,000 as announced in 2024?
If so, could MOT consider rebalancing the supply of Cat A and B COE, using the new allocation, at least for the next 12 months. This approach will help to moderate the price of Cat A COE while waiting for MOT's review of criteria for Cat A and Cat B COE, which Minister has said will take until the end of the year.
Secondly, we are pleased that MOT is also planning to enhance the renumeration and working conditions of the bus captains to attract more local residents to join the bus industry. We would like to enquire whether MOT will increase the subsidies for the public transport to ensure that these measures do not result in higher transport fares?
Mr Jeffrey Siow: Chairman, we have plans to inject up to 20,000 additional COEs over the next few years, as Mr Ang has pointed out. That plan remains unchanged. It was on the premise that the total mileage has fallen and our ability to manage congestion using ERP 2.0 will be enhanced. So, those reasons stay valid; we will continue to inject those COEs over the next few years.
We have been doing it based on a certain methodology that involves redistributing guaranteed de-registrations via cut and fill, as well as then subsequently doing the injections. The objective is to smoothen the COE quota supply overall.
As to whether we want to inject another parameter, which is to rebalance Cat A and B, we will evaluate that, but I am hesitant about introducing too many parameters. Because, as I think one of the Members, I think it was Mr Edward Chia, who said that in the course of doing this, we do not want to add too much uncertainty, too many variables and therefore, too much perturbation to the market. So, we will evaluate it, but I think, just sort of thinking offhand, probably not too likely.
On the second question on the bus captains, we are discussing with the unions as well as with the bus operators on how to execute the increase in the salaries for new recruits, starting salaries of bus captains. And I think Government is prepared to see what we can do to put in more support to the system. But I wish to point out that, in fact, for the bus network, the Government has already put in a lot of resources to support the financial sustainability of the bus network.
I mentioned the Bus Connectivity Enhancement Programme, which is a significant inject of funds. Overall, on a yearly basis, the Government puts in a billion dollars as subsidies into the bus network. So, it is a significant support already. We have to see then overall, how the fiscal sustainability of the bus network can be maintained, so that we can continue to grow the network at a sustainable pace and that salaries are also then incorporated into the overall cost of maintaining this network.
The Chairman: Mr Liang Eng Hwa.
Mr Liang Eng Hwa: Sir, I believe the political office holders have not replied or responded to my cut on traffic congestion, so can I perhaps ask the Minister, whether is it because he disagrees with me that the traffic congestion has worsened or that there is no non-pricing solutions to traffic congestion, which I had asked for.
So, can I ask the Minister to consider again what I have raised in the cuts, which is that can we optimise the traffic light system, something that many countries have done; and how we can make it more responsive. It could be a really a good high-value AI-use case.
And then, the second suggestion, I mentioned about how we can have more expeditious clearing of vehicles during accidents. It is not really a high infrastructure item, something that can be managed, can be done. You just need to have the policy in place to say, \"You got to clear the traffic within a certain time and there must be enough tow vehicles\", and so on. So, I hope the Minister can give me a more encouraging response.
Mr Jeffrey Siow: Thank you, Mr Chairman. First of all, I want to apologise to Mr Liang Eng Hwa because he made a wonderful speech on transport with many ideas. And I was unable to reply to all the ideas that he had put out. But as he asked the clarification, it gives me an opportunity to be able to respond more fully to the good ideas that he has suggested.
Firstly, I want to reassure him because he had a very major concern about how if he had brought up traffic congestion, that ERP would be my first response. The answer is: not to worry, ERP is not our first option by any means. For the most part, ERP is always our last response, not least because ERP 1.0 gantries were hard to build and expensive to build; but even with ERP 2.0, I would like to reassure the Member that we would use road pricing only when it is really necessary. So, that is the first point.
On using technology, I think Mr Liang gave many examples and I agree with him that, in fact, using AI for systems, such as traffic light management, would significantly improve the fluidity of our traffic. And in fact, the LTA is exploring this. They showed me something recently, has a very nice acronym called CRUISE. I do not know what it stands for, but it looks reasonable and I am happy to find a time to share with Mr Liang, if he is interested.
There were a few other suggestions on, for example, double deck highways on Keppel. I think Mr Liang also suggested that. I think that is less likely something that we will do. I am reminded of Boston, a city which had I spent quite a bit of time in. They had this Big Dig – I do not know whether you would be familiar with it. They spent many years and vast amounts of money putting that two double decker highway into the ground. And today, if you go to Boston, it is a much nicer place to be in, and we have all, as a student, I have driven on that before. I can tell you, it was not a pleasant experience, and more importantly, it bifurcated the sea front from the city. So, I do not think we really want to do that as far as possible here.
Mr Liang also mentioned about logistics. Very much so, we will work with the industry to try to improve how we do logistics in Singapore, make it smoother, in terms of delivering goods. In fact, MOT and MTI have been coming together to try to develop a logistics strategy that is more coherent. And I think at the appropriate time we will update the House on this.
Finally, on traffic clearance. Actually, the Expressway Monitoring and Advisory System (EMAS) already does quite a good job. Today, they take about an average of 15 minutes to clear jams or clear an accident on the highway and to then allow traffic to continue smoothly. Usually, after they clear the accident, if it is a minor accident, it takes about maybe half an hour to an hour for traffic to get back to normal. But for a serious accident, where if it involves a fatality, it needs a bit more time, and that is when the more difficult jams happen. So, I think in terms of performance, it is already not bad, but I agree with Mr Liang that we should use technology to see how we can speed up those processes and reduce the impact of such incidents.
The Chairman: I see a more encouraged look from Mr Liang now. Mr Louis Chua.
Mr Chua Kheng Wee Louis: Thank you, Chairman. Just one clarification for Ministers on the EV chargers. I think the MOT has previously said that we are looking at three to 12 charging points per HDB carpark by 2025, but my question is not so much on the deadline, but more in terms of the number of chargers that can be supported, because in most of the multi-storey car park that I see, it is typically just three 7.4 kilowatt chargers. So, I just wondering in terms of the original tenders that were put out to upgrade the electricity infrastructure, what was the maximum power capacity or number of charging stations that can be supported?
One of the key feedback that we often get is that the additional charging lots is subject to power capacity and it just does not seem to be the case that we might get twelve in each multi-storey car park in the near term.
Ms Sun Xueling: I thank the Member for his clarification. We started with a baseline deployment of at least three charging points per HDB car park. And I have shared in my earlier reply that 90% of our car parks have achieved this. So, moving forward, we are monitoring developments in charging technology, and that is why in my speech, I had talked about a mix of slow chargers as well as fast chargers.
I wanted to take the opportunity to talk about how we are sequencing our fast-charging hubs. I had mentioned that we will be looking at having one in each HDB town, and this will be relying on existing spare capacity at car parks where possible, and for future tranches of deployment, we are also working with the Ministry of Trade and Industry (MTI), and the Energy Market Authority (EMA) to optimise our electrical grid to minimise costly grid upgrades.
So, I think when we look at our charging infrastructure, we should look at it holistically. It should be a mix in future of slow chargers, fast chargers, and we are keeping our eye on ultra-fast charging hubs.
The Chairman: Mr Edward Chia.
Mr Edward Chia Bing Hui: Thank you, Chairman. My first clarification is to the Minister. I thank him for being receptive to my suggestions on COE reform. Just want to confirm that he mentioned that it could also be based on the OMV system, but there will also be considerations on combining into a single pool, doing away with Cat A and Cat B? Can I confirm if that it is also under consideration? Second, also, in terms of the consultation exercise, could you share who are the usual stakeholders that will be involved in the consultation exercise?
My second clarification is to Senior Minister of State Sun. I think she mentioned about fast charging points, one per HDB town, and I think she mentioned that there will be six charging points per town. But typically, a HDB town has about 10,000 to 12,000 vehicles. Just want to check what is the projection in terms of adequacy, I think she mentioned about working with JTC and EMA to improve, what are the current limitations and what are the plans to actually resolve this limitation, so we can scale up more fast charging points per HDB town?
And my third clarification is to Senior Minister of State Murali, very pleased to hear that the maritime sector offers great job opportunities for Singaporeans and congratulations to the young scholars in Chamber today. Just want to ask what are the further plans to create more awareness among young Singaporeans about the job opportunities within the maritime sectors and in particular, what is current take-up rate for the GRaduate Industry Traineeships (GRIT) programme? And are there scopes to scale up the GRIT programme, so that more young Singaporeans can be exposed to the maritime sector and seize these opportunities for themselves?
Mr Jeffrey Siow: Thank you, Mr Chairman. I will take Mr Chia's first question, and then I will have the two Senior Ministers of State reply to his subsequent two questions.
First of all, I do confirm that indeed we will look specifically at Mr Chia's suggestion, which is to look at a system that is OMV-based, but also to look at merging Cat A and Cat B in a single-bidding category.
I think we have to look at how to do this, because there is probably still some merit to having some distinction between a mass market car category and a higher-end car category. We have to see how we can do this, but I think his idea is a very interesting one and we are very happy to try to explore that in the context of trying to find a system of categorisation that is a little bit more stable in the longer term.
As to who we consult, we will consult a range of stakeholders, obviously car buyers, both potential and current car users. We also want to consult the industry, so this would include both the motor dealers, but also car manufacturers and other industry observers.
I think we will also consult academics as well, because in a system like the COE, it involves auctions and I suppose, auction theory is very well developed. It is something that the academics will have something to say; and we will be very happy to seek views from them as well.
Ms Sun Xueling: On the Member's second question, our constraint really is our electrical infrastructure. I would like share that we have kickstarted our first phase of upgrades, which would benefit around 450 HDB multi-storey car parks and this upgrade is expected to complete by around 2029.
And for future tranches of deployment, so as to meet the targets, the numbers that Mr Edward Chia had mentioned, we are working with MTI and EMA to optimise our electrical grid to minimise costly grid upgrades and we will see what more can be done.
Mr Murali Pillai: Sir, I would like to thank the hon Member Mr Chia for his kind words about the efforts we have made thus far to attract young talent. On the specific issue about the GRIT programme, that involves traineeship, the good thing about the maritime sector is that we have jobs available. So, the natural thing to do for young aspirants is to apply for jobs instead of going through traineeship. So, for the maritime sector, we have not participated in the GRIT programme.
As to what further things we can do, I have identified in my speech, we work very closely with stakeholders, such as the Singapore Maritime Foundation, IHLs, our tripartite partners, our unions as well. And just one example that underscores this point. I spoke not too long ago about this lady, Ms Valerie Thai, who was a paralegal in a law firm. She attended an exhibition in a shopping mall that was run by the Singapore Maritime Officers' Union and the Employment and Employability Institute. And then, she decided to become a seafarer. So, we do all that we can to attract young talent into the maritime sector.
The Chairman: There are five more Members who have raised their hands. I am trying to get to all of you, so do yourselves justice and to others. Ms Poh Li San.
Ms Poh Li San: Thank you Chairman. Just a quick question on the status on the autonomous vehicle trials. Other than the Punggol one, there is one more that is running in Marina Bay and Shenton Way area. Just to have an update on the progress of that. Also, it is a busy area, how will we deal with traffic congestion if there are some issues with the trials?
Mr Jeffrey Siow: Mr Chairman, I updated briefly in the speech. We are going to launch the autonomous buses in those two areas. I mentioned the two bus numbers which has now slipped my memory. I believe it is 400-something in Marina Bay and 100-something in Shenton Way. So, we will launch those I think in the second half of this year.
The Chairman: Mr Azhar Othman.
Mr Azhar Othman: This question is for the Acting Minister. He mentioned about the shared space of motorcycles on the road. There are 140,000 motorcycles, if I got it right, and there are 70,000 motorcycles from the causeway that goes to Singapore. Almost half of them come from the other side. And yet, they do not pay any COE, they do not pay any road tax. How do we justify Singaporeans paying so much, sharing the same space, and yet the other side are not doing so?
Mr Jeffrey Siow: Thank you, Mr Chairman. So, first of all, I have a lot of sympathy for the concern. We hear this a lot, very often from our Singaporean motorcycle riders. As to whether or not they are being treated fairly. This is why we have the Vehicle Entry Permit (VEP) and the Goods Vehicle Permit (GVP) schemes.
The idea is that Malaysian motorbikes, when they come in, they pay a fee and then this equalises the cost. The fees are set such that the cost of owning and using a foreign registered vehicle in Singapore is equalised with that of a Singaporean vehicle. We applied a fee to cars, we apply a similar but lower fee to motorcycles.
LTA and MOT, we periodically review this fee, and in fact, we are going to raise the fee substantially from 2027 onwards. At the same time as when the RTS Link is open.
In addition, for our local motorcycles, just so that I address this point, the Government already applies lower ARF, lower road taxes – in fact, ERP charges are also lower for motorcycles relative to other vehicle types.
So, it addresses and recognises how motorcycles are in fact using not fully the same road space as a car but nonetheless still using some road space. They cause some level of congestion and therefore, we have to make sure that is priced properly and the externalities are properly taken into account.
The Chairman: Mr Gerald Giam.
Mr Gerald Giam Yean Song: Sir, I am glad to hear that the Acting Minister wants to reduce the long travelling times on public transport. But he would appreciate that time is not the only factor contributing to a good commuting experience. A one-hour plus commute standing all the way is not easy on the back and the legs.
And since the binding constraint as Senior Minister of State Sun said, is not buses, but bus captains, can LTA deploy more double decker buses or bendy buses on heavily utilised routes, especially during peak hours, so that commuters can get a seat during their commute, or minimally do not miss their bus because it is full.
Mr Jeffrey Siow: Thank you, Mr Chairman. Absolutely agree. I think our intent is to try to deploy as many double decker buses as possible.
Just to explain a little bit, we do still have a legacy fleet of single deck buses. I am often asked, \"Oh, why is it during peak hour, we are still deploying single deck buses?\" and I get lots of angry emails very often on this particular issue. The reason is actually there are additions to the buses. I put in all my double deckers and then, on top of that, during peak hour, whatever single deckers I have, I also put in. And therefore, people do not like it when they see the single deck bus coming, but it is in fact an addition; it is not a subtraction.
Secondly, for electric buses, in the beginning when we first started buying them, most of them were single decker. And in Singapore, because we have to customise our buses, we had to wait for some time before the double deck electric buses came on stream. And so in the interim we did buy some of the single deck electric buses to start the electrification process. So, that is why you have still fairly new electric single deck buses in Singapore.
But of course, we want to try to have double decks, high-capacity buses as much as we can, because they are the most efficient, space saving and reduces our reliance on bus captains, because one bus captain driving a double deck is much better than one bus captain driving a single deck.
So, these are sort of the reasons that are hard to see on the outside, but I hope the Member and the public understands why you still see single decks on the roads today.
The Chairman: Ms Elysa Chen.
Ms Elysa Chen: Thank you, Chairman. Given the multiple road diversions and traffic disruptions that residents along the North-South corridor construction zone have had to endure since 2020, including the ongoing closure of Marymount Flyover and the successive road reconfiguration in the Bishan-Sin Ming area, what is the current construction timeline for the tunnel section of the North-South corridor from Lentor Avenue to the city? And what measures is LTA taking to minimise further disruption to residents and road users for the remaining construction period leading up to 2029?
My second question. I welcome efforts to also normalise asking for a seat on buses and trains, especially for seniors, pregnant women and those with less visible conditions. Encouraging commuters to communicate their needs can help to build a more gracious and responsive public transport culture.
At the same time, we have seen incidents overseas where disputes over priority seating escalated into confrontations, such as the case in Taiwan, when a woman calmly handed over her shopping bag to a fellow commuter and then proceeded to kick an elderly woman across the aisle just as the elderly woman was demanding that the younger woman give up her seat.
As we promote the norm of asking, how will the Ministry also ensure that commuter education emphasises mutual respect and a zero tolerance for aggressive or entitled behaviour?
Ms Sun Xueling: I thank the Member for her clarification. I will have to come back to her specifically on the timeline that she requested, but on the question she had about the disamenities that can be caused due to construction works, we definitely recognise this, that it disrupts residents, commuters, motorists as well. And we continue to seek our residents' patience and understanding.
Just bear in mind that we are trying to enhance transport connectivity at the end of the day, as well as to shorten travel times for our commuters as well as our motorists. Before the commencement of construction works, the LTA often carries out assessments to determine if existing road networks can be improved.
LTA and its contractors will also work closely with stakeholders and residents living near the works to minimise the inconvenience caused to them. And where possible, additional road or lane closures which are needed during certain phases of work will be carried out during off peak periods to avoid further inconvenience to residents.
The Chairman: We are quite close to guillotine time, so the last two clarifications. Sorry, Minister of State Baey, I forgot the second part.
Mr Baey Yam Keng: Yes, I thank Ms Chen for the clarification. Indeed, to make our commuting experience enjoyable, pleasant, every commuter plays a role. Therefore, whether is it someone who needs help or can offer help, we want to make this a norm that people are encouraged to ask for a seat, you know, and it is not just for priority seats. Any seats could be taken or could be given up for anyone who is in greater need.
So, we have the Caring Commuters' movement. We have Caring Commuter champions. We have the graciousness campaign going on. And we will continue in these efforts to cultivate a gracious and a caring culture on public transport. We hope that through education we can develop a new generation of commuters. And the kids can also influence their parents and elders to be more thoughtful for other commuters.
The Chairman: With the Singapore Kindness Movement, let us all be kinder. Mr Dennis Tan.
Mr Dennis Tan Lip Fong: Thank you, Chairman. I am not sure that my cut on covered linkways for condominiums has been adequately addressed.
Could I just ask for Minister of State to address the questions specifically regarding those situations where the condominium needs assistance for a covered linkway, including in a no man's land situation to connect them to the nearest bus stop? And also my suggestion that URA and LTA mandate at the planning permission stage that developers provide shelter connectivity to the nearest public transport node?
Mr Baey Yam Keng: I would like to update the Member that right now, for upcoming condominium developments with more than 700 dwelling units and are located within 400 metres of a MRT station, developers are already required to submit walk-cycle-ride plans as part of the development application process. If covered linkways are required to connect residents to nearby transport nodes, URA will work with LTA to impose requirements on the condominium developers to construct these covered workways as part of the planning approval. So, that is for new developments.
I know that for existing condominiums or estates that were built before this requirement, there could be challenges. And for LTA's planning, you might be aware that we already provide linkways, covered linkways within transport nodes, 400 metres, 800 metres within Friendly Streets and all these. But in areas where the land belongs to another agency, like PUB as in the case that he mentioned in his cut, LTA will help to discuss with the different stakeholders. If it is on PUB land, PUB must give approval. And we have to respect the authorities' assessment of the land. There could be drainage or water pipes underneath that may be affected if we have to dig and build a sheltered linkway. So, there are technical considerations that we have to respect in the respective agency's assessment.
I know the Member has been pushing for a particular condominium, Parc Vera, if I am not wrong. In the case of that particular condominium, I understand that the condominium does not currently meet the LTA's requirement because there is no internal sheltered linkway from the residential building to the side gate – so that must first be in place, before LTA can even think about joining it to a bus stop or transport node.
These are things that would need to be worked through. LTA will be happy to look into it and we can provide more details if the Member can file a Parliamentary Question.
The Chairman: On that note, can I invite Ms Tin if you would like to withdraw your amendment?
Ms Tin Pei Ling: Many thanks to all. I beg leave to withdraw my amendment.
[(proc text) Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. (proc text)]
[(proc text) The sum of $3,109,174,200 for Head W ordered to stand part of the Main Estimates. (proc text)]
[(proc text) The sum of $13,306,280,300 for Head W 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 O (Ministry of Health)","subTitle":"A caring and inclusive society that supports all in every stage of life","sectionType":"OS","content":"The Chairman: Head O, Ministry of Health (MOH). Ms Mariam Jaafar.
Ms Mariam Jaafar (Sembawang): Chairman, I move, \"That the total sum allocated to Head O of the Estimates be reduced by $100.\"
S+3M, subsidies Medisave, MediShield and MediFund, is one of our nation's quiet triumphs. It has protected generations of Singaporeans from catastrophic bills. It has preserved system sustainability. It has embedded shared responsibility, personal ownership and equity.
But it was built for yesterday's risks. S+3M was designed for acute hospital episodes. A surgery, a stroke, a sudden hospitalisation.
Today, our dominant risks are chronic, progressive, community-based: diabetes, dementia, frailty, mental health conditions. They do not bankrupt a family overnight, but they exhaust a family slowly.
Dementia day care costs about $63 per session. Even with the latest subsidies, a middle-income family still pays over $12,000 per year, before transport, home care, medications, and lost caregiver income. At my Woodlands Meet-the-People Sessions, I often hear two concerns: one, \"why can't I use my Medisave? It's my money\"; and two, \"I already used up all my MediSave for chronic care\".
Mrs L, a retiree, cares for her husband with early dementia, while managing her own diabetes. She told me, \"I saved all my life. Why does it still feel like my money isn't enough to stay independent?\" Or K, 24, pays out of pocket for mental health care because her condition is not officially chronic. \"I'm probably going to need this for the rest of my life. How is that not chronic?\" These are the lived realities faced by our fellow Singaporeans.
Incremental cap adjustments and coverage expansions help, but they do not fundamentally reshape incentives. Our system still signals we pay more attention when you are already very sick. That must change. Our lifestyle risks are rising faster than our population ages. More sedentary work. More screen time. Richer diets. Chronic conditions appearing earlier.
Singapore is investing in population-level prevention – 6 % of our healthcare Budget, with plans to double. Healthier SG fully subsidises routine screenings and immunisation programmes. Active-living infrastructure like parks, fitness corners, cycling paths, Active Ageing Centres and community health programmes encourage functional health. These are centrally funded.
But prevention is more than screening. Some seniors need physiotherapy to prevent a fall. Some need home rehabilitation to prevent a re-admission. Some need cognitive stimulation to prevent the onset of dementia. Some adults need weight management programme to prevent diabetes progression. Some youths need early mental health interventions to prevent a spiral. These are investments in independence, not discretionary lifestyle perks. S+3M must evolve, not just to pay bills, but to shape behaviour, support prevention and sustain independence.
Subsidies. I propose three upstream shifts.
One, early disability support. Many schemes require three Activities of Daily Living (ADLs). Introduce an early intervention tier for \"pre-frail\" seniors – funding physiotherapy, balance training, and strength exercises. One month of rehab today can prevent a decade of nursing home care tomorrow.
Two, subsidised diagnostic pathway. When referred by a Healthier SG general practitioner (GP), the first specialist consultation and primary diagnostic scan, CT or MRI, public or private, should be subsidised. A treatable condition should never become a terminal one because someone hesitated over the cost.
Three, fairer means testing for sandwiched families. Two households may have the same per capita household income (PCHI), but the one supporting elderly parents and young children carries a heavier burden. Adjust subsidy tiers for households with multiple dependents.
Subsidies must be easy to use, visible and structured to encourage early preventive action. Automatic enrolment, co-payment reductions, integrated Medisave bonuses and seamless digital claims are ways to nudge behaviour.
MediSave. Even with subsidies, Singaporeans face costs over the long term. MediSave must evolve. I propose MediSave flex where the annual withdrawal limit is linked to balances, with an upper cap to maintain sustainability. Let it fund chronic disease management, broader preventive screenings, evidence-based doctor-referred functional health or nutrition programmes, early rehabilitation after minor injuries or hospital stays, early interventions for dementia or frailty, expanded mental health support. Keep the remainder MediSave core for major episodes. Unused flex balances roll over, rewarding responsible early actions. Bonuses can be awarded, tied to improvements in chronic disease management and functional assessments.
Together subsidies and MediSave flex nudge Singaporeans to act early, adhere to chronic care, and engage in preventive programmes. Singaporeans get more flexibility while the systems preserve catastrophic coverage. MediShield Life remains for rare, high-cost hospitalisation, keeping premiums affordable. Explore premium credits for preventive prescriptions if they are shown to save costs. MediFund remains the final safety net for those genuinely in need.
S+3M actually has been a safety net catching us when we fall. But in an ageing society, we need a springboard that keeps us standing, strong, independent and healthy. We must adapt S+3M: financing not only healthcare, but health itself, not by abandoning the principles, but by fulfilling them fully.
Shared responsibility must include shared prevention. Personal ownership must empower early action. Equity must recognise cumulative burden. This is not about spending more. It is about spending earlier, so that we spend less later – financially, socially, emotionally.
And, Sir, none of these changes one thing. The Government must do everything in its power to keep healthcare affordable and rein in healthcare inflation. If we get this right, we will not only treat illness. We will preserve independence and dignity. We will not only pay bills. We will invest in health.
Will the Ministry commit to studying and reporting, ideally before the next Budget, how S+3M can be recalibrated to better support chronic and preventive care?
[(proc text) Question proposed. (proc text)]
The Chairman: Ms Mariam Jaafar.
Ms Mariam Jaafar: Healthcare is often framed as personal responsibility. Individuals matter, yes, but in Singapore, healthcare risk is shared. Premiums are pooled. Subsidies are pooled. Caregiving burdens are shared. There is no such thing as a purely private health cost.
When preventable illnesses rise, premiums rise, taxes rise. Families feel the strain. Caregivers leave the workforce. Yet today, only about six in 10 eligible residents participate regularly in recommended chronic disease screenings. Four in 10 remain unprotected.
Preventive care saves lives and reduces costs, but only if people participate. If prevention is essential, it should not depend on who remembers to click a link. Opt-in assumes time, awareness and confidence – luxuries not everyone has. Prevention must be the default. I propose: move to opt-out screenings, proactive, personalised health coaching supported by digital nudges.
Collective responsibility is not about blame. It is about design. And design does not sit with MOH alone. It is about what our children eat in school. What is affordable at the hawker centre? How workplaces structure time and stress? Whether our neighbourhoods invite movement or discourage it? The healthy choice must be the easy choice.
If we design upstream, we save downstream. Will the Ministry consider making key preventive programmes opt-out and outline how the Ministry will work across Government to embed preventive defaults in daily life?
Healthier communities do not just happen by chance – they are designed. MOH has launched a programme to improve health in the North, and Woodlands, my Constituency, is piloting an integrated preventive health model.
The North is well placed for this. We have a diverse mix of seniors and families, the full range of housing types, strong community institutions, and opportunities to strengthen chronic care. With two hospitals, several polyclinics and Active Ageing Centres within easy reach, we can test how to bring care closer to home and refine integrated care team models.
The pilot rests on four pillars: first, stronger referral pathways and chronic disease support. Second, moving care closer to home, with smoother transitions; third, redesigning neighbourhoods so that the healthy choice is the easy choice; and fourth, activating communities as health advocates.
I support this initiative. But it cannot be policy on paper – it must be about real people, living healthier lives, every day. I therefore have two questions and three requests for the Minister.
The questions: one, how will success be measured? Two, what resources will be available for grassroots activation?
The requests: ensure town-level care hubs are fully integrated and consistently staffed so residents can access services without delay; expand the scope of community-based care and caregiver support, to cover more conditions and families; and involve my residents directly in co-designing interventions so solutions reflect their real needs and let us avoid stigmatising any community.
Health outcomes are shaped by the systems – transport, food, work patterns as well as socio-economic factors, not moral failings.
Imagine this. Mdm S, 54, does strength training three days a week at the Active Ageing Woodlands Gym under the watchful eyes of a volunteer buddy. When she does not feel like cooking, there are plentiful healthy and affordable Halal options at Kampung Admiralty Hawker Centre. With care and support closer to home, her diabetes is under control and she stays independent.
If we can redesign a town for health, we can redesign a nation.
First, I declare my interest as managing director of a management consulting firm that works in AI and healthcare.
AI in healthcare is often discussed in terms of use cases – detecting disease earlier, automating paperwork, predicting risk, personalised medicine. These are impressive. But today, I want to ask the Minister a bigger question: what is our ambition? If healthcare is truly a national AI mission, our goal cannot be incremental adoption. We must build a system – the infrastructure, the governance, the talent, the plumbing that lets AI transform care safely, effectively and at scale, with better outcomes for every patient in Singapore.
Once we show that AI delivers real patient benefit safely and reliably at scale, Singapore will naturally move from adopter to a global leader in trusted healthcare AI. Singapore has laid strong foundations: HEALIX enables analytics across clusters; the National Electronic Health Record (NEHR) aggregates patient records; the Health Information Bill clarifies rights, responsibilities and safeguards; and early AI pilots are already easing clinician workload and improving patient outcomes.
But infrastructure alone does not make us a leader. Much of our data is still fragmented. Interoperability supports care delivery, but safe access for innovation and AI development, including with third parties, remains rather limited.
To lead globally, three things matter.
One, stronger data frameworks – national data architecture, secure sandboxes, synthetic datasets, and federated learning that enable AI innovation without compromising patient privacy.
Two, interoperable systems that allow AI models to learn across institutions while keeping clinicians in control.
Three, governance rules: every AI recommendation must be explainable, auditable, accountable. Clear innovation governance; top down or bottom up.
On global collaboration, our stance must be clear: we welcome expertise, but only under frameworks that protect our data, preserve sovereignty, build local capability and benefit patients.
Regulations must also keep pace. AI evolves quickly. We need national validation, certification and post-deployment monitoring – standards for bias, explainability and real-world performance, so patients and clinicians can trust every AI decision.
Finally, talent. AI in healthcare is a translation problem. We need professionals fluent in both clinical realities and machine learning.
Sir, we are on track to drive efficiency with AI. But Singapore must be a place where AI solutions are built, tested, certified and scaled safely, and where patient outcomes improve at every step. Healthcare should not merely adopt AI. Singapore must set the standards for trusted, safe and effective AI.
Will the Ministry outline a clear roadmap, with timelines, for strengthening data access frameworks, validation standards and talent development, so Singapore leads in trusted healthcare AI?
Mr Pritam Singh (Aljunied): The MediSave contribution ceiling in 2015 was $48,500. Today, its equivalent – the Basic Healthcare Sum of the maximum amount in the MediSave account – is $79,000, an increase of about $30,000 in a period of about 10 years. With close to 70% of locals holding an Integrated Shield Plan (IP), there has been no increase for close to 10 years since the introduction of MediShield Life with respect to the maximum amount one could use from MediSave to service IP premiums, or what is referred to as annual withdrawal limits.
With out-of-pocket expenses a consistent bugbear for many Singaporeans over the last few years, and the basic healthcare sum rising exponentially year-on-year, there is an expectation that the additional withdrawal limits that allow Central Provident Fund (CPF) members to use more of their MediSave money to service their IP premiums, are in need of a revision. It cannot be reasonably expected that this number or the amount of money that can be used should remain the same after so many years.
Does the Ministry plan to review this in the immediate term? And if not, why not?
The headline of an opinion piece last month in The Straits Times expressed a major anxiety of the health system succinctly: \"Singapore as a super-aged society: can its health system cope?\" The author, an academic with a specialty in public health, observed what is commonplace for many Singaporeans when they visit our public hospitals and healthcare institutions – a large number of seniors in wheelchairs, visibly frail, or struggling with mobility.
The Ministry has shared that the healthcare workforce is projected to grow by 20% from 129,000 in 2024 to about 156,000 in 2030. The assessment is that this number would be broadly adequate for the population's healthcare demands for the years to come.
The intersection of a rapidly ageing population and higher demand for healthcare services will bring the adequacy of the healthcare workforce into distinct focus and any shortages or perceived shortages will be reflected most acutely in service quality, waiting times for specialist care and waiting times to see a healthcare professional, amongst others.
In parallel, there are real concerns and worries about the welfare of our healthcare workers, from allied health professionals to nurses and doctors, in view of heavier patient loads that are anticipated. Separately, the projected increase in healthcare manpower begs the question of how much allowance or buffer is being factored into the healthcare system, including in the event of Disease X type scenarios – a key lesson learned from the COVID-19 experience.
Second, there are deep concerns that the addition of 100,000 policyholders converting their insurance coverage from the private to public healthcare sector each year may significantly strain the public healthcare system. This is a number which the Minister has said he expects to increase.
First, what is the scope of the surge capacity when our healthcare system reaches the upper end of 156,000 healthcare workers? Does the surge capacity account for an additional buffer of doctors, nurses and allied health workers? If so, how much? Or is the surge capacity a case of restructuring processes to do more with less in times of surge demands? If it is the latter, for how long can the healthcare system operate at an optimum level of performance?
Second, does the Ministry plan to increase the range of publicly reportable statistics from what is currently available to waiting times at hospital emergency departments, polyclinics and specialist outpatient clinics, amongst others?
We should carefully track the capacity of the system to cope with the significant demands our demographic shift imposes on it. It is useful to remember that healthcare is a very unique public service. The Prime Minister identified healthcare as one of four national AI Missions. AI indeed stands to inject new productivity possibilities into healthcare at the ecosystem level.
However, at the level of a Singaporean who needs healthcare, what makes healthcare, healthcare, are the people – the doctors, the nurses, the allied health workers – who look after us when we are at our lowest. In that context, the human touch and the personal connection will never be fully replaced by AI.
So, if it means that our healthcare manpower in the years to come would require additional buffers, we should devote more fiscal resources towards it accordingly.
The Chairman: Dr Hamid Razak, you can take your two cuts together.
Dr Hamid Razak (West Coast-Jurong West): Mr Chairman, Sir, for some Singaporeans, healthcare is not just confined to a bill. It is a lifetime of risk.
Today, in this House, I want to share the story of a young Singaporean I met – Gwendalyn. In her early 20s, she was diagnosed with hereditary breast cancer. Overnight, her life changed. She faced surgery, complications of surgery and continued chemotherapy for her condition. She underwent reconstruction, but parts of her reconstruction were not covered because it was deemed to be cosmetic.
For a young cancer survivor, reconstruction is not cosmetic. It is about dignity. It is about mental healing.
There are many such Gwendalyns in our society today. People I speak about are those with hereditary risk of cancer. Her story points to a wider gap.
Cancer care today is not only clinically complex, it is also financially and psychologically complex, especially for hereditary disease. So, the policy question is this: how do we support people who may not be sick today, but are clearly at elevated risk? To that end, I would like to ask the Minister three broad questions.
First, how can we integrate hereditary risk assessment and genetic counselling into primary care and connect it to Healthier SG so that prevention becomes upstream?
Second, will the Ministry review how we finance medically indicated preventive procedures and the reconstruction, including high-risk situations involving a currently healthy organ, so that support is consistent and understandable? For example, in the case of Gwendalyn, if a mass was found on one breast and was found to be diseased, she undergoes mastectomy, what about the contralateral breast, which at current state is healthy but we know she carries the gene for breast cancer? How can the system be seamless when caring for such individuals?
Third, how do we strengthen survivorship pathways for young cancer patients, including psychological and social support, not just medical follow-up?
Mr Chairman, Sir, the test is not just about survival, but about how survivors can return to life.
Mr Chairman, Sir, if hereditary cancers speak about how complex medical care is, then precision medicine tells us how intelligently we can respond to the challenge.
We already see the direction. At National University Health System (NUHS), the Centre for Healthy Longevity is building programmes that strengthen healthspan, not just treat illness, helping Singaporeans stay physically strong, cognitively sharp and metabolically well as we age.
This matters because the public demand is already there. People are seeking tests and optimisation outside the mainstream system. If our public pathways do not keep pace with the credible evidence, we risk two things – fragmented care with uneven quality, with widening inequality and a missed opportunity for Singapore to lead responsibly as a trusted regional centre.
While we focus on taking care of our seniors and our elderly, which is important, the key question as we go about with our society is how do we optimise every Singaporean, regardless of age, to reach the highest potential health for their age? So, Mr Chairman, Sir, may I ask the Minister three questions.
First, what is the Ministry's pathway to evaluate and adopt emerging evidence in precision and longevity-related medicine with clear safeguards for safety and value? Second, how can Healthier SG progressively add functional health markers, including metabolic, cognitive and frailty indicators, so that prevention becomes personalised and not just generic? Third, how will we enable responsible innovation so that we remain evidence-based, future-ready and trusted, so that our policies can keep pace as the evidence emerge, and we do not wait for two to three years after the evidence has already become mainstream?
Because the goal obviously is not just longer life. The goal is delayed decline, preserved independence and dignified ageing.
Ms Sylvia Lim (Aljunied): Sir, Singapore's medical cost inflation is projected to reach nearly 17% this year, significantly higher than general inflation, which is under 2%.
I recognise and agree that there is a need for cost containment and management of insurance premiums. On cancer specifically, MOH has made significant moves. For instance, the Cancer Drug List now has about 394 drugs listed that are eligible for subsidies and claims under MediShield Life and integrated plans.
Three months ago, MOH announced a key policy change in hospitalisation insurance. With effect from April this year, new riders on integrated plans can no longer cover the minimum deductible set by MOH while the co-payment of bills at 5% of the total bill will be capped at $6,000 per year instead of $3,000. With these changes, the premiums for the new riders are expected to be about 30% lower than for the existing riders.
Sir, the Minister for Health has put up various videos on TikTok to explain the change. In one of them, he appeared to suggest that the only use of the existing rider was to reduce the deductible and co-insurance, and the public should consider whether they need a rider at all.
However, my understanding is that riders may be essential, especially to cancer patients for other reasons.
First, riders help to pay for costly cancer drugs that are not on the Cancer Drug List, which could be critical for the patient's treatment. Second, there is the issue of loss limits. Without a rider, the patient would need to pay 10% of a hospitalisation bill without any cap.
The second more general issue relates to preventive medical interventions which may not be covered by insurance.
A young breast cancer patient wrote about her plight to The Straits Times' forum page on 28 January. She followed the doctor's advice to remove both breasts even though only one was cancerous. Her hospitalisation insurance covered surgery for the cancerous breast, but only partially for the non-cancerous one.
In April last year, MOH recognised that the line between preventive and diagnostic care was increasingly nuanced, particularly in cases involving genetic predisposition to serious conditions, like breast cancer. MOH mentioned that it would issue claim rules to guide practitioners on breast-related surgical claims later that year.
What is the present status of this review?
Mr Victor Lye (Ang Mo Kio): Mr Chairman, adult children are often the default caregivers for ageing parents. It is a good thing when adult children want their parents to stay with them, even better when the parents are active and in pink of health. Nonetheless, some Singaporeans feel penalised for doing the right thing. This is what I call the filial care paradox.
When children bring ageing parents into their homes, the parents often lose their benefits, such as the Community Health Assist Scheme (CHAS), Silver Support or other subsidies. The parents are now seen as part of a higher-income household or living in a housing type with a higher annual value.
Sir, to support caregiving and encourage filial piety, we need to recognise that the caregiving responsibilities can weigh more proportionately than housing income or housing type. I am not suggesting that we abandon means testing in our healthcare and social assistance architecture. But we can recognise caregiving households more explicitly. I have three suggestions.
First, consider a caregiver housing carve-out. Seniors moving into an adult child's home for caregiving should be assessed independently instead of being lumped into the entire household. Second, consider a transitional period. This is a grace period so that the seniors' benefits do not immediately disappear when caregiving arrangements change. Third, explore functional needs assessment, where we assess the social assistance based on actual needs rather than looking solely at household income or housing type.
Mr Chairman, when adult children bring their ageing parents into their home and care for them, we should give them more support, not less.
Assoc Prof Jamus Jerome Lim (Sengkang): Those of us who have fallen seriously ill at one point or another will be keenly aware of how our healthcare expenditures are lumpy. That is, we may go one year without any medical expenses, but in another year, we may end up spending far more than we would have anticipated.
This is often the case even for chronic conditions since new diagnostic or treatment procedures may only be required on occasion. The reality of spending spikes is corroborated by more systematic research in health economics. Moreover, it is also well-known that end-of-life spending tends to be elevated. This is another manifestation of lumpiness. Patients tend to spend most in the final years of their life.
MediSave currently faces annual withdrawal limits of several types of care. The policy is well-meaning. One does not wish for patient to exhaust their MediSave funds, especially knowing that most of their care costs will indeed be incurred at the tail end.
But this is problematic because the policy is not aligned with the lumpy nature of medical expenses. It also glosses over the role that insurance, including public ones, such as MediShield Life, plays in such instances, since these are more likely to pay out for major illnesses that will otherwise exhaust their MediSave.
Actual data from the CPF supports this notion that there may be excess for saving in our MediSave accounts. In response to a Parliamentary Question posed in 2022, Minister Tan See Leng reported that MediSave account balances for members significantly exceed their Retirement Accounts, with the ratio for those aged 85 and above close to five times larger.
There are two ways to better calibrate MediSave limits.
First, we can permit carrying over of unspent limits for up to three years. This will allow those who incur larger than expected bills to not have to rely on out-of-pocket funds, which, especially for retirees, are frequently paid for by working-age family members so as to be able to top up their medical expenses.
Second, we can have a tiered system of claim limits, with the amounts allowed for claims gradually raised according to age. While nobody can accurately predict when an individual's demise might be, we can rely on aggregate statistics on mortality by gender to adjust claim limits accordingly. It is intuitive to allow more spending at later ages where individuals' health will have deteriorated more.
Sir, these simple steps will help better align the actual usage of MediSave, with the well-meaning constraints imposed to ensure sufficiency in time of medical need, whether they may be today or tomorrow.
Mr Gerald Giam Yean Song (Aljunied): Sir, I repeat my call for MOH to extend coverage for all chronic diseases under the Chronic Disease Management Programme and not just the 23 approved conditions. This would ensure any condition requiring long-term management can be subsidised under CHAS and paid for via MediSave.
Even for conditions on the Chronic Disease Management Programme list, the MediSave 500/700 withdrawal limits can be restrictive. I last raised this issue in 2021 and the Senior Minister of State argued that the risk of overconsumption necessitates these caps. However, how does this apply to public healthcare institutions, where salaried doctors follow strict protocols? The real risk is not overconsumption but undertreatment. When patients are forced to choose between their cash and their care, some may choose to skip medications or appointments to save money.
Self-rationing today can lead to a massive bill tomorrow and emergency hospitalisation. This is a tremendous cost to both the individual patients and the healthcare system. Has the Ministry assessed the clinical cost of medical non-compliance caused by rigid MediSave withdrawal limits? Singaporeans want to be self-reliant and not have to appeal for subsidies or medical assistance. The Ministry should allow for more flexible MediSave withdrawals at public healthcare institutions for patients over 60, especially for those with significant MediSave balances.
Mr Patrick Tay Teck Guan (Pioneer): Chairman, I declare my interest as Chairman of the Mental Health Board at the NHG Health. I rise to make the case that Singapore should position the Institute of Mental Health (IMH) as the true Centre of Excellence in psychiatric treatment and care, and to ask the Minister three questions towards that goal.
IMH is our only dedicated psychiatric hospital, housing our most experienced psychiatrists and specialised teams. Yet it remains stretched across the full spectrum of acuity. If we are serious about building a Centre of Excellence, we must free IMH to focus on what it does best – leading research, training the next generation of mental health professionals and managing our most complex cases.
My first question concerns manpower. Is IMH better resourced than our acute hospitals to handle complex psychiatric patients? And a Centre of Excellence should not merely treat; it should set clinical standards across our entire healthcare system and across all three public healthcare clusters. How is IMH’s specialist expertise being leveraged across the three clusters to uplift psychiatric treatment and care in all our acute hospitals and in the community, so that IMH is not bogged down by excessive referrals beyond what they can handle effectively and efficiently.
My second question concerns care pathways. Will the Minister share data on polyclinic acceptance rates for patients discharged from IMH and acute hospitals with psychiatric diagnoses? A Centre of Excellence cannot function if its beds are occupied by patients ready for step-down care. Are there plans to expand polyclinic capacity for psychiatric cases, so that IMH can focus its resources on those who truly need specialist care? Stable psychiatric patients often remain at IMH simply because there are no community facilities to receive them.
My third question is whether there are plans to develop more custodial care and step-down facilities – sheltered homes, supported living – so that IMH’s beds are reserved for those who need its full clinical expertise?
Dr Wan Rizal (Jalan Besar): Chairman, mental health is a national priority. Over the past few years, we have made significant progress in recognising that mental well-being is foundational to our social and economic resilience. We see growing demands across young people, working adults and seniors. More people are coming forward to seek help and that is a good sign.
But the pressures are real. Mental health conditions cost Singapore around $16 billion annually, largely from lost productivity due to absenteeism and presenteeism. That figure reminds us that mental health is not just a healthcare issue. It affects our workers, families and national resilience.
So, the question is not whether mental health matters. The question is whether our system is built to sustain the demand ahead.
We launched the National Mental Health and Well-being Strategy. We expanded community services and strengthened primary care. As we move into the next phase, could the Minister update us on its progress? Are we seeing measurable improvements in early intervention? Are the wait times stabilising, particularly for moderate and higher-risk cases? Are community providers adequately supported as the demand continually grows?
Every strategy eventually reaches a point where expansion alone is not enough. It requires structural strengthening. Mental health also cuts across healthcare, education, workplaces and the social sector. Could the Minister elaborate on the role and mandate of the Mental Health Office? How does it coordinate across agencies, track system-level outcomes and ensure accountability? If this is truly a whole-of-society effort, then governance must be deliberate and clear.
Sir, access ultimately depends on people. Clinical psychologists and other higher-risk psychology disciplines undergo years of rigorous postgraduate training and supervised practice. Standards must remain high. Patient safety depends on it.
At the same time, demand is growing. How is MOH projecting manpower needs for clinical psychologists and allied mental health professionals over the next five to 10 years? Are there plans to strengthen the local training pipeline and supervision capacity to build a strong local core while maintaining professional standards? And does the Ministry see scope to strengthen professional regulation at higher-risk psychological practice to safeguard patients and reinforce public confidence?
Sir, mental health care must operate as one integrated system. Psychologists, counsellors, social workers, occupational therapists and peer support specialists each play important and complementary roles. How will workforce planning and training reforms ensure stronger integration across these professions and better coordination between primary care, hospitals and community providers? Patients should not experience fragmentation. They should experience continuity.
Sir, as we look ahead, we should also be mindful of the growing use of AI in mental health support. AI tools may be useful for self-help psychoeducational early screening, but we should be cautious. If such technologies begin to substitute professional care, mental health treatment often involves complex clinical judgement and ability to respond appropriately in crisis situations. Could the Minister share how MOH is thinking about the role of AI in mental healthcare and what safeguards may be needed to ensure that technology compliments, rather than replaces, trained professionals?
Sir, if mental health is a national infrastructure, then we must build it with strong foundations, clear standards and long-term sustainability. I look forward to the Minister’s response.
The Chairman: Ms He Ting Ru. Please take your three cuts together.
Ms He Ting Ru (Sengkang): Mr Chairman, I declare my interest as a practitioner in the well-being space. With the mental health crisis showing no signs of abating, would the Ministry provide an update along with a firm commitment to fixed timelines to regulate mental health professionals?
I would like to repeat my call to regulate professionals, such as therapists and counsellors, who play key roles in supporting individuals with mental health conditions. Regulation is important as clients may not know where to go for help if they have concerns about professional standards or ethics.
At the same time, we must also ensure entry barriers are not prohibitive for professionals. Most therapy and counselling qualifications require minimum supervision hours and practicums costing upwards of $200 an hour, which can be difficult for fresh graduates and mid-career entrants. I hope we can explore more ways to reduce such barriers. Beyond subsidies, could the Ministry also consider the use of SkillsFuture credits?
The set-up of the National Mental Health Office (NMHO) is a first step to a vision where mental health sits on a continuum with socio-economic determinants and is not merely the absence of illness.
That said, we still have to work towards a clear vision to improve Singaporeans' mental health. For example, Scotland's Mental Health Strategy 2017 focuses on reducing inequalities for mental health and treatment and access using a life stage model and Malaysia's National Strategic Plan for Mental Health aim to reduce adolescent depression rates from 18% to 10%. These strategies clearly outline a vision of success for improving mental health and well-being, describing what a mentally healthy population looks like. They also include time-bound targets and outcomes beyond broad focus areas.
This aligns with recent World Health Organization guidance on policy and strategic actions to promote and protect mental health and well-being across Government sectors. The guidance calls for: one, active engagement with all stakeholders and ensure meaningful participation of those with lived experiences; two, regular reporting and clear commitments; three, allocating fully costed and dedicated funding to support policy directives and strategic actions to prevent implementation delays.
I would like to seek four clarifications. First, what is the picture of success of the National Mental Health and Well-being strategy? To coordinate efforts across policy areas and sectors, the strategy should outline a few key outcomes and have clear targets.
Second, how does the NMHO plan to work with Ministries and agencies to engage Singaporeans on current initiatives and future plans? Incorporating ongoing feedback from those with lived experience, communities and civil society will ensure the strategy remains relevant and grounded in real needs.
Third, how will the NMHO coordinate reporting, monitoring and evaluation through regular updates? For instance, Scotland's January 2026 monitoring report track key performance indicators across nine strategic outcomes to enhance agency accountability, responsiveness and effectiveness.
Fourth, is there dedicated funding for mental health and well-being initiatives to support the strategy? If so, what is it? Between 2020 and 2022, MOH dedicated around 3% of its healthcare expenditure towards mental health treatment, promotion and prevention. Has this amount increased, and what are the projected amounts going forward?
For years now, the Government has been studying the possible roll-out of a tobacco-free generation policy. Earlier this year, the Minister of State for Health said in an exchange with me that the effectiveness of implementing such a policy is not straightforward and that we are already at an all-time low smoking rate of 8.4% with the existing suite of measures.
Mr Chairman, I agree that implementation of a tobacco-free generation policy is not straightforward. Black markets already stop Singapore from being completely drug-free and vape-free. Similarly, places where smoking is banned are not completely smoke-free despite the efforts of our enforcement officers.
Nevertheless, while New Zealand repeals its laws partly on grounds of political ideology, we should continue to study how to roll out a tobacco-free generation policy once there is real-world evidence on its efficacy and implementability. Maldives' policy has already come into effect, while the United Kingdom (UK) Bill is on track to becoming law, is set to be implemented at the start of 2027.
Like the UK, we are well-placed to introduce a similar policy precisely because our smoking rate is already low. The latest studies, including a Nottingham University study published in January, suggest that a cohort ban will bring forward by decades a smoking prevalence of under 5%, which is defined as an effective endgame for tobacco.
I highlight the end-game because it sets out a target I hope we can work as fast as possible to achieve. Although associated with the smoke-free generation policy, we should state the endgame as an overarching policy objective. With decisions like periodic increases to tobacco duties, I hope we are seeking to maximise the sin tax impact instead of considering its revenue impact.
Similarly, we should be doing more to curb the health impacts of public smoking, for instance, by tackling smoking while walking. Singapore takes a zero-tolerance approach to drugs and vaping. We must do the same with tobacco. Thank you.
The Chairman: Mr Cai Yinzhou, you may take your two cuts together.
Mr Cai Yinzhou (Bishan-Toa Payoh): Thank you, Chairman. Following the invisible costs highlighted in my Budget speech, I want to address the struggles of those with invisible conditions.
With the helping hands scheme supporting those on public transport, many with hidden medical, autoimmune or chronic diseases still face judgment in daily life. Will the Ministry consider expanding these initiatives outside of public transport to more settings like hawker centres and libraries to fostering a society that leads with patience rather than suspicion?
In Singapore, one in five children and one in 10 adults endure the constant, debilitating itch of this atopic eczema. While manageable, the cost of continuous treatment, including wet wraps and phototherapy, is a significant financial and emotional burden. Will the Ministry consider adding atopic eczema to the Chronic Disease Management Programme, which already covers similar conditions like psoriasis?
Lastly, some youths are deterred from sharing suicidal thoughts with school counselors because they fear an automatic, mandatory reporting to their parents, especially when those thoughts might stem from family circumstances. To encourage greater help-seeking while ensuring safety, will the Ministry implement a tiered reporting framework that allows for greater confidentiality in a risk-proportionate manner?
Chairman, we must ensure our infrastructure of care is robust enough to support the struggles we cannot see. I look forward to the Ministry’s vision for a more inclusive and empathetic healthcare landscape.
My second cut addresses the age-old question: what is a life well lived? For many seniors I have spoke with in Bishan-Toa Payoh, the answer is not just more handouts, but dignity, choice and the agency to live their golden years on their own terms.
To this end, I have four proposals.
First, expanding the Integrated Community Care Providers into a \"Senior Concierge\". Minister Ong has spoken about a single coordination point for care and 85 sub-regions, which will soon provide coordination across Regional Health System, Home Personal Care Plus, Singapore Counselling Centre, Drug Rehabilitation Centre and Active Ageing Centres with One Ring to Rule… excuse me, One Care Plan to coordinate them all.
I propose beyond clinical outcomes, to further centralise touchpoints for participating in Employment and Employability Institute for job search, People's Association for community events and Social Service Offices for financial aid applications. One contact, one coordinator, for the whole senior as a person and being.
Second, to measure what truly matters. In our October Sitting, the Ministry's reply on tracking social isolation focused on attendance and outreach numbers. Loneliness cuts deeper and these numbers only scratch the surface. I ask the Ministry to partner with our educational institutes to conduct regular, widespread surveys on the social determinants of health. We need a localised version of \"Quality of Life\" indicators to understand how our efforts are truly reducing isolation.
Third, bringing specialist healthcare to the heartlands. Not being able to eat, hear or walk, is directly linked to cognitive decline and increased mortality. Yet, access to specialised help remains a hurdle. I ask the Ministry to ramp up dental, audiology and podiatry facilities, specifically to estates with high concentrations of seniors. We must catch these impairments before the rapid decline in quality of life.
Fourth, I ask the Ministry to consider introducing degree or diploma courses for audiology and podiatry in tertiary institutions, to increase the number of Singaporeans specialising in these areas and in turn, be better able to serve our seniors who require such specialised care.
By streamlining access, measuring what matters, expanding specialist care and building local expertise, we ensure our seniors are not just \"ageing\", but are living with agency.
Mr Yip Hon Weng (Yio Chu Kang): Mr Chairman, Singaporeans enjoy a long-life expectancy. But are we adding life to years or merely years to life? As healthcare shifts from hospital to home, the real test lies not only in infrastructure, but in the relationships we nurture, the support we organise and the dignity we uphold.
First, social isolation. In our dense estates, many seniors live in loneliness, surrounded by neighbours, yet separated by silence. Countries, like the Netherlands and Denmark, embed social prescribing into primary care, recognising that a prescription can be a person, a purpose and a place to belong.
Mental health support for depression, anxiety and grief remains under-resourced. Suffering in old age is often invisible, yet deeply felt. Can MOH update us on formalising social prescribing in primary care and outcomes under Healthier SG? How are we integrating routine mental health screening into community eldercare, so distress is detected early?
Under Age Well SG, Active Ageing Centres are expanding to anchor seniors in their communities. Can the Ministry share whether reductions in social isolation and improvements in well-being are being observed?
Second, dementia. Families still struggle to access dementia-specific day care and respite services. Dementia-friendly communities, where confusion is met with compassion rather than stigma, remains uneven. How will MOH accelerate dementia day care and respite capacity? How are we strengthening public education, so stigma recedes and inclusion grows? If we are to age well, we must care well for those who can no longer remember for themselves.
Third, caregivers. Many caregivers face financial strain and burnout despite subsidies. Caregiving should not mean declining health, depleted savings or isolation. Will MOH review respite care so it becomes a standard, easily claimable entitlement? As Age Well SG rolls out integrated community models, how will caregiver burden and coordination outcomes be measured to ensure families experience relief?
Fourth, palliative care. Living well includes dying well. Though many prefer to pass on at home, many still die in hospitals because families lack support. What steps are being taken to expand home-based palliative capacity and equip GPs to provide sustained medical and psychosocial support?
Finally, with the expanded EASE scheme allowing seniors in private homes to tap subsidies for age-friendly fittings, how does this complement Age Well SG's ageing-in-place strategy, and how uptake and impact be tracked?
Mr Chairman, we must now build a community of care that ensures every senior lives not only longer, but with dignity at the end.
Mr Fadli Fawzi (Aljunied): Mr Chairman, Singapore is becoming a nation of caregivers. Our ageing society means more Singaporeans will spend a significant part of our lives caring for a spouse, sibling, parent or grandparent who becomes frail, disabled or chronically ill. Support exists, but caregivers still experience it as fragmented. Many repeat their story across hospitals and agencies, with no common way to be recognised as a caregiver and no simple front door that follows them across settings.
Unpaid caregiving is not a small matter. A Duke-National University of Singapore study estimated the monetary value of informal caregiving time for seniors, aged 75 and above, who require human assistance, at about $1.28 billion a year.
As it focuses on 75-year-old-plus seniors needing assistance, it likely understates the wider burden. This is why early identification matters. Local integrated care research found that distressed caregivers at baseline had about a one in four chance of remaining distressed 12 months later, and highlighted the importance of assessing and supporting caregivers early, including during hospital discharge planning.
Budget 2026 strengthens long-term care financing, including a $400 million top-up to the Long-term Care Support Fund to fund additional subsidies from CareShield Life enhancements. But financing alone will not solve the recognition and navigation problem, so I asked the Minister to study and pilot a simple tool used in parts of the United Kingdom (UK) – a carer passport. Once a person is verified as a caregiver, they receive a physical and digital credential that enables recognition across touch points and triggers practical support.
What I have in mind is a Singapore-adapted caregiver passport that would allow some discounts at supermarkets, pharmacies and other caregiving-related outlets. More importantly, the caregiver passport should also allow caregivers to be involved in discharge and care planning, speed up linkage to respite and training, enable structured workplace flexibility conversations and support daily life participation through community partners.
I propose starting with two to three precinct pilots, for six to nine months, enrolling about 100 caregivers per pilot, followed by an evaluation to measure take up, navigation outcomes and changes to caregiver strain.
I have three questions for the Minister. First, will MOH seed a caregiver recognition pilot fund to support these pilots, including evaluation, so we can scale up works?
Second, will MOH support a low burden verification model during pilots, such as self-declaration with validation through healthcare or social service touchpoints?
Third, will MOH fund the minimum operating pieces: coordination, simple QR infrastructure, partner onboarding and modest activation support, so that pilots produce evidence for national adoption?
Mr Speaker, recognising caregivers is about strengthening our social infrastructure, so that we can relieve the burden on our caregivers and make support consistent and easy to access for all.
The Chairman: Senior Parliamentary Secretary Eric Chua, you may take your two cuts together.
Mr Eric Chua (Queenstown): Sir, by 2030, one in four Singaporeans will be 65 or older. This presents both a challenge as well as a tremendous opportunity. Too often, we focus on what seniors lack. It is time to shift that view. Seniors are not liabilities: many are eager and able to contribute meaningfully to society. We must move beyond a deficit mindset and embrace their full potential.
I recently met Prof Linda Fried, distinguished geriatrician, epidemiologist and the first female Dean at Columbia University's Mailman School of Public Health. She is also a trailblazer for co-designing Experience Corps, an inter-generational volunteer programme that engages seniors in their fifties as tutors and mentors for children in public elementary schools, while promoting the health and well-being of the volunteers themselves.
The programme aims for \"triple wins\": first, to help children succeed academically, especially in early literacy; two, boost the physical, mental and social well-being of older adults; and three, strengthen communities by connecting generations.
The results are striking. Students show improved literacy, better engagement and fewer behavioural issues. Volunteers experience reduced depression, enhanced cognitive function and stronger social connections. Schools report enriched learning environments and deeper community ties.
It seems simple: an engaged senior is a healthy senior. Yet, while we understand the science of social determinants of health, activating it is quite another challenge. MOH's Silver Guardian programme encourages seniors to volunteer at Active Ageing Centres. It is a great start, but we can do more. Empowered seniors do not just enrich their own lives; they strengthen families, schools and communities, shaping a Singapore where every generation thrives. I suggest three ways seniors can contribute.
First, on social mobility. Seniors can help ComLink+ families facing financial, social and emotional strain. Many parents are stretched by work and caregiving, while children may lag behind in literacy and numeracy. Inspired by the Experience Corps, seniors with teaching or professional experience can tutor children, offer knowledge, patience and encouragement. Beyond academics, seniors can also mentor parents, share perspective and life wisdom. In so doing, they provide not just help, but lend stability and hope.
Second, mental health. A peer-reviewed Singapore study of adults aged 21 to 89 found that seniors reported significantly lower levels of depression, anxiety and stress than younger adults during the 2020 pandemic lockdown. By contrast, about one in three youths reports internalising symptoms, such as anxiety, loneliness or depression. Many young people hesitate to involve parents or families in their struggles. Seniors, with their steady, non-judgemental presence and life experience, can offer guidance, comfort and hope; helping young people feel less isolated and more resilient.
Lastly, our heritage. History is most powerful when told through lived experiences. Projects, like Humans of New York, resonate because they are real, unfiltered, human. Our seniors often hold the most meaningful stories of our communities. As community docents, they become living bridges to moments that may never appear in textbooks, but remain a crucial part of our shared memory. Through their stories, we preserve not just events, but the struggles, values and quiet triumphs that shape our heritage and collective humanity.
Sir, our seniors built the Singapore we know today. Their sacrifices laid our foundations, their resilience carried us forward and their wisdom continues to guide us. Let us see seniors not through the lens of limitation, but of possibility. As mentors, tutors, caregivers and docents, they can shape lives and strengthen communities.
Let us build a Singapore where ageing is not feared but celebrated; where every senior feels valued, empowered and connected. For when we uplift our seniors, we honour our past and secure a future defined not only by success, but by dignity, compassion and shared humanity.
Let me begin this speech not with statistics or policy, but with three simple introductions.
\"Hi, I'm Benny. I'm sober and I have stayed away from drugs for the past five years.\" Most of us would respond with admiration. We understand the discipline required to overcome chemical dependency.
\"Hi, I'm Benny. I'm sober and I have stayed away from alcohol for the past five years.\" Again, we nod silently. We know the toll addiction can take on health, on families, on livelihoods.
But what if I said: \"Hi, I'm Benny. I'm sober and I have stayed away from pornography for the past five years.\" What happens inside us? Do we shift uncomfortably? Suppress a smirk? Or question whether that even counts as sobriety?
This reaction tells us something important. While we are prepared to discuss substance addictions openly, we remain uneasy when the addiction is behavioural, private and sexual in nature. Pornography addiction is often dismissed as indulgence or simply part of growing up in a digital age. Yet for some individuals, consumption becomes compulsive, distressing and disruptive to daily life.
Today, I rise not to moralise or to condemn desire. I rise to ask whether we are paying sufficient attention to a behavioural addiction that may be quietly emerging, particularly amongst our young people, and to consider what role public health can and should play.
To be sure, dopamine is not the enemy. It is a neurotransmitter essential to how our brains function. It motivates us, reinforces learning and gives us satisfaction after effort and achievement. But dopamine also plays a central role in addiction.
When certain substances or behaviours repeatedly trigger intense reward signals, the brain adapts. Neural pathways strengthen. Over time, the brain begins to prioritise the behaviour associated with that reward. What begins as voluntary can, for some, become difficult to control. Addictive substances, such as drugs and alcohol, are well recognised for this effect. Increasingly, research has examined behavioural addictions, including gambling disorder, gaming disorder and compulsive sexual behaviours, which engage similar reward pathways.
Pornography today is instant, anonymous, inexpensive and available through smartphones at any hour. There are no physical barriers and few natural stopping points. For a subset of individuals, repeated exposure and escalating consumption can entrench patterns that are hard to reverse.
Some international studies suggest that problematic pornography use may affect figures in the low double digits, depending on definitions used. Methodologies differ, but the emerging literature suggests this is not an isolated phenomenon.
Even if prevalence in Singapore is lower, the absolute number affected could still be significant.
We must also situate this issue within the broader digital ecosystem. Modern life is structured around reward cycles. Social media notifications, online gaming achievements, gambling wins, auto-play streaming. Our attention economy is engineered to keep us engaged.
Pornography exists within this larger environment. It is one of many digital stimuli competing for our attention. But it differs in one important aspect: it can shape expectations about intimacy, about consent and about relationships. When exposure begins early, often before emotional maturity has developed, the lessons absorbed may not reflect mutual respect or healthy communication.
In Singapore, conversations about sexuality are often cautious. Families may find them difficult to initiate. Schools approach the topic carefully. Public discourse remains restrained. But silence does not mean protection. When guidance is absent, young people may turn to the Internet as their primary educator, and we all know that the Internet is not designed to teach values.
Technology has industrialised temptation. What once required effort, patience and real human interaction now arrives instantly on screens engineered to capture attention. If our public health response focuses only on treatment after harm, we will always be reacting to damage, rather than building resilience.
Sir, some may ask, why is this a healthcare issue?
Because behavioural addiction reshapes neural pathways. It co-occurs with anxiety and depression. It drives demand for counselling, psychiatric care and family therapy. If we ignore it, it does not disappear. It presents later in our clinics, our IMH wards and our social service agencies.
This is a health issue because it affects brain function, mental health, relational stability and drives demand for counselling and psychiatric services. Individuals struggling with compulsive pornography use often report difficulty concentrating at school or work, escalating consumption despite attempts to stop, secrecy and emotional withdrawal, strained relationships, persistent shame and low self-worth.
This behaviour may begin as stress relief, but over time it can worsen distress. When relationships deteriorate and emotional health declines, the impact is not confined to the private sphere. It affects families, workplaces and communities.
So, as policy-makers concerned with mental health, we cannot ignore emerging behavioural addictions simply because they are uncomfortable to discuss.
Locally, community organisations, such as We Care Community Services, have observed an increase in the number of individuals seeking help for compulsive sexual behaviours, including problematic pornography use. Reporting cases relating to sex, porn and love addiction have risen significantly in recent years. Post-pandemic, those seeking help for online pornography behaviours more than doubled compared with pre-COVID levels.
Most clients are in their 20s. Some cases have also appeared among teenagers, with some of them as young as 12; 12, Sir! These are only the individuals who have come forward. Many more may remain silent due to stigma or uncertainty about who or where to seek help.
Youths today are exposed to explicit content at younger ages, often unintentionally through peer sharing or algorithmic feeds.
In 2024, more than 460 youths aged 19 and below were arrested for sexual crimes. Authorities have noted that early and repeated exposure to sexually explicit materials can be one of several contributing influences shaping young people's understanding of consent and healthy relationships.
Counsellors have also pointed out that without meaningful guidance on boundaries and respect, young people may misinterpret what they see online as normal and acceptable behaviour.
To be sure, we must avoid simplistic conclusions. Family dynamics, peer influence, trauma and broader cultural factors all play roles. But we should not dismiss the potential impact of repeated exposure during formative years.
These are not purely moral questions. These are public health and social stability questions we need to address.
Let me take some time to share one Singaporean's story. Let us call him Dale.
It all began innocently; magazines shared among schoolmates. Then came the Internet, and then a pirated DVD. The images Dale saw disturbed him, yet something in his young mind shifted. Curiosity became habit. Habit became compulsion. Outwardly, Dale functioned: studied, worked, served National Service. Inwardly, he was trapped in a cycle. Stress, rejection, celebration all became triggers. After acting out came the crash: shame, disgust, promises to stop.
He described living a double life. Church on Sundays, alone with his addiction at night. And guilt was crushing. At one point he said, \"I think I am born without the capacity to love.\"
Pornography had shaped intimacy into fantasy and control.
The turning point came when Dale walked into a Sexaholics Anonymous meeting. Ordinary men – fathers, professionals – shared their stories. Dale then realised he was not the only one struggling. Isolation began to break.
With support from We Care, Dale learned to trace his triggers, sit with discomfort and name his emotions instead of numbing them. Recovery was slow and imperfect but deeply human.
Sir, to be sure, this is not a story of moral failure. It is a story of early exposure, silent conditioning, secrecy, shame and courage. Behind the label of \"addict\" is a human being, once a curious boy, trapped in silence, who needed understanding, community and support.
If we are serious about addressing this issue, we must move from discomfort to evidence-based strategy.
Today, we operate with limited national data. Much of our understanding is extrapolated from international research and community case reports. I propose three steps.
First, commission a rigorous, interdisciplinary national study on problematic pornography use in Singapore. We need to understand prevalence, mental health associations, relational impacts and risk factors. With evidence, we can calibrate responses proportionately and responsibly.
Second, review our digital and sexuality education frameworks. Young people need emotional literacy, digital resilience and grounded understanding of consent and healthy intimacy. Parents too may need support navigating conversations in a rapidly evolving digital landscape. If exposure is increasingly common, then equipping youths and their families with tools to interpret what they encounter responsibly becomes essential.
Third, expanding funding and capacity for community addiction services. If demand for counselling related to behavioural addictions is rising, our support ecosystem must keep pace. Those who seek help should encounter accessible and timely support.
Early intervention is humane, preventive and cost-effective.
Sir, this is not about digital content. It is about mental health. It is about how young people form expectations about relationships. It is about how couples build trust over time. If we want strong families and resilient youths, then we cannot treat this problem as unspeakable. We must treat it as solvable.
We cannot eliminate temptation, but we should not normalise harm. If technology has industrialised temptation, then our response must be to industrialise resilience: thoughtfully, proportionately, with care.
Let us not hesitate simply because the subject is uncomfortable. Let us choose evidence over denial, courage over avoidance and support over stigma. Because the question before us is not whether this issue exists, but whether we can address it together head on.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Business Motion","subTitle":"Extension of a Sitting in Committee of Supply","sectionType":"OS","content":"The Chairman: Order. Pursuant to Standing Order No 91(3)(d), I extend the time of this day's Committee sitting for a period of up to 30 minutes.
","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 O (Ministry of Health)","subTitle":"A caring and inclusive society that supports all in every stage of life","sectionType":"OS","content":"[(proc text) Debate resumed. (proc text)]
The Chairman: Assoc Prof Terence Ho.
Assoc Prof Terence Ho (Nominated Member): Mr Chairman, Singapore is expected to become a super-aged society this year as the proportion of citizens aged 65 and above reaches 21%. While we have prepared for an ageing population for many years, we need to accelerate our efforts across infrastructure, systems and people. I would like to offer one suggestion, which is to establish a community-based caregiving corps.
Today, many Singaporeans acquire caregiving knowledge and skills only when their parents or loved ones fall ill, become bedridden or need help with the activities of daily living. We should consider large-scale training of caregivers ahead of time as most adult Singaporeans will at some point become caregivers to family members or supervise caregivers at home.
Those who are trained to a certain proficiency can form a community caregiving corps. It is costly both to the state and individuals for patients to rely only on hospitals or clinics for basic services, such as injections, wound care or physiotherapy. Where appropriate, self-care and community-based support can complement institutional healthcare services, with a caregiving corps within each neighbourhood playing a part.
Services provided by the caregiving corps could include basic clinical care, personal care, therapy, psychosocial support and related assistance within clearly defined care protocols. The corps could include young seniors trained to support older seniors. This would keep younger seniors active and engaged in the community, while at the same time, earning some supplemental income.
Caregivers in this programme would need to periodically refresh their skills, with competencies validated or accredited by healthcare institutions. An online directory or mobile application could help residents find the help they need within their neighbourhood.
We should similarly scale up training for domestic helpers ahead of demand. This would expand caregiving capacity across households, relieve pressure on the formal healthcare system and equip helpers with skills that enhance their employability and earning potential.
Community caregiving should be complemented by scaling up the deployment of technology within homes to help monitor the physical and emotional well-being of seniors, particularly those living alone. Such tools would enable care workers or small neighbourhood teams to keep track of seniors and coordinate services, like community nursing, cleaning and transport to polyclinics.
In this regard I would like to ask if the Ministry could elaborate on plans to scale up technology deployment through the Enhanced Home Personal Care service and other programmes.
Mr Ng Chee Meng (Jalan Kayu): Chairman, Singapore will become a super-aged society this year. One in two who are healthy at 65 years old, are expected to develop severe disability at some point in their lifetime. This means that many Singaporeans will become caregivers at some point. Our families, especially those who are middle income and sandwiched between young and old, will come under increasing pressure and strain.
Our women, who traditionally shoulder a more of the caregiving load, will be disproportionately impacted. I thank the Ministry for providing more support for our caregivers under the Caregiver Support Action Plan. Launched in 2019, caregiver support has been enhanced in a few areas, including respite care, subsidy levels and the Home Caregiving Grant. Further, through Age Well Singapore programme, we will help more seniors age well in the community.
I have a few clarifications and would like to provide some suggestions on how we can refresh our Caregiver Support Action Plan in the next bound.
First, what are the critical gaps in accessibility, affordability and quality of eldercare services that our middle-income families continue to face? And what are the Ministry's plans to address these gaps? Addressing these gaps are important, so that working caregivers can continue working with peace of mind that their loved ones are well-cared for.
Second, whether the Ministry will consider expanding the means-tested Home Caregiving Grant to provide more support for more caregivers, including those who care for family members who require assistance with one to two Activities of Daily Living (ADL), below the current eligibility of three ADL today.
Family members who have mental health conditions or degenerative diseases, such as dementia, which is becoming more common, who may require high supervision but may not necessarily qualify for the three ADL criteria today.
Mr Alex Yeo (Potong Pasir): Sir, in my speech during the debate on the Motion of Thanks for the President's Address last year, I had highlighted that, while we now live longer, the years that we live in good health is on average 10 years shorter. Ideally, our life-span and our health-span should be closer. The concern that we live long but not well, is real.
Preventive healthcare is therefore vital to help our seniors reduce years of bad health and increase their quality of life in retirement. The Healthier SG Programme was launched to address this. However, I wish to advocate for the Ministry to do more and expand the range of preventative healthcare for our seniors.
I will address two areas related to the Healthier SG Programme.
First, based on 2023 data, 11% of those above the age of 70 have dementia and 16% above the age of 70 have osteoporosis. We can expect the numbers to have increased and continue to increase in our ageing society. Dementia is both debilitating and scary for seniors. Poor bone health on the other hand, leads to deteriorating mobility and overall health in seniors, especially after a fall.
Both conditions take a tremendous toll on caregivers in the family. Pre-dementia screening and Bone Density Tests allow for: one, early detection; two, timely intervention which can slow down the progression; and three, better long-term planning, which gives our seniors and their families the time and opportunity to make necessary adjustments.
I had asked a Parliamentary Question in September 2025 on whether the Ministry had plans to include as part of the Healthier SG Programme, screenings for pre-dementia and osteoporosis. I was heartened when the Ministry had indicated that Care Protocols for Dementia and Osteoporosis were being developed under Healthier SG.
I would like to seek an update from the Minister on the progress in including Care Protocols for Dementia and Osteoporosis under the Healthier SG Programme, including the timelines of the roll-out of the screening assessments and whether they will cover all seniors above a certain age.
Second, according to the National Population Health Survey 2024 conducted by the Health Promotion Board, 54.7% of Singapore residents in the oldest age band, 60 to 74 years, were least willing to seek help from healthcare professionals, while 70.9% of those aged 30 to 39 were the most willing to do so. Our seniors can face loneliness, grief, loss of purpose after retirement and the anxiety of declining health and independence. They also belong to a generation that may not often have the vocabulary to convey their mental well-being needs.
In the Committee of Supply 2025 debates, it was announced at that Healthier SG care protocols for major depressive disorder and general anxiety disorder would be rolled out. With the increased emphasis on mental wellness, I would like to enquire on the status and ambit of this roll-out, particularly for our seniors and whether it would expand to other mental ailments.
Relatedly, I would also like to ask the Minister if he can provide our Active Ageing Centre Teams or even our Silver Generation Ambassadors, structured training in basic mental health first aid, so they can be first responders for emotional well-being in the community.
Mr Azhar Othman (Nominated Member): Visiting hospitals can often be an unpleasant experience, unless one is expecting a newborn. I want to address the challenges faced by many individuals, including my own experiences. As many are aware, when our elderly parents go for check-ups, they often require the assistance of their children. This process typically involves several tests, followed by consultation with a doctor regarding the next steps.
I am aware that certain medical institutions offer video consultations. If I may propose that we utilise video calls to all hospitals and polyclinics and minimise waiting times and the hassle of hospital visits for simple updates. While I understand that some situations necessitate in person consultation, technology can significantly enhance the overall experience. By leveraging available technology, and now with AI, we can support especially the sandwich generation who juggle responsibilities for both their children and ageing parents.
These caregivers often need to take time off from work for medical appointments and the lengthy waits sometimes over an hour; even two or three hours for brief updates can be frustrating.
For instance, when my son had a football injury, we faced a similar situation. After waiting for over an hour, the doctor's update lasted for only for five to 10 minutes. Such interaction could be efficiently handled through video calls, which would also allow for real time updates on waiting times for treatments.
The time and energy required for parents to attend these appointments can be overwhelming. I hope the Ministry considers implementing solution that facilitate a similar experience for those caring for both elderly parents and young children.
Dr Haresh Singaraju (Nominated Member): Mr Chairman, I address the Minister on two fronts: strengthening social prescribing and optimising clinical capacity. Beneath both lies one observation. We have built the parts of a better healthcare system, including social programmes, trained professionals and enrolment infrastructure. My three asks are about making them work together.
I welcome that social prescribing is already part of our system under Healthier SG, but the referral options remain narrow, largely involving Active Ageing Centres and Sports SG, while the ecosystem around is wide. This limits the match to what matters to the patient and when we match well, they go. To match well, our care teams need a maintained real time directory of what exists in each neighbourhood.
We are not starting from scratch. SingHealth Community Hospitals are the world's first World Health Organization Collaborating Centre for Social Prescribing with trained well being coordinators and proven outcomes. The Living Asset Map developed by SingHealth Community Hospitals with the Ministry of Culture, Community and Youth and Singapore Land Authority already captures community assets in real time, updated by practitioners on the ground. The evidence is there.
The Minister himself said in Geneva in May 2023, that 60% of health is socially determined, not in hospitals, but in homes and in communities. My first ask follows from his words: scale the Living Asset Map across all three clusters. Map the full ecosystem: arts, culture, heritage, nature, sports, informal community partners and interest groups and resource link workers to close the last mile.
Some may worry that widening referrals could overwhelm social partners. That is precisely why the ask is not an open floodgate, but a mapped, maintained and matched pathway resourced to sustain. But a pathway only works if patients stay long enough to use it.
Healthier SG has enrolled over 1.3 million Singaporeans as of August 2025, but enrolment is not yet activation.
From what I see in practice, not all enrolled patients have completed even a first health plan. They have signed up, but never sat down. Enrolled patients can still seek care elsewhere. Some will ask, is this not about patient choice? It is. But continuity is not exclusivity. No one loses the right to see another doctor. What changes is the default that one doctor, one team knows you. Subsidies encouraged the first step, but a subsidy is not a relationship. Without activation, patients drift and the social needs that only surface over time never do.
My second ask activate what enrolment promises. Publish how many enrolled patients stay and how many actively engaged through follow-ups, screenings and care team visits? We must continuously learn what make patients stay. The Ministry consulted widely before Healthier SG launched; continue that rigour. And resource are providers GPs and polyclinics alike to keep them.
Keeping them takes a team. Team-based care is the direction our system has committed to, our clusters have built the frameworks. We have trained nurses, pharmacists and allied health professionals to practise at the top of licence. But without familiarity, many patients choose otherwise and never benefit. What we hear on the ground suggests utilisation is not where it should be. If we build capacity and fail to activate it, the system pays twice: once to train; once when the doctor does the same work. As we prepare to inject more professionals into the system, getting this right is not optional. It is the condition for that investment to pay off.
Some will say patient preference for doctors is too strong, but care is growing more complex and no single pair of hands can manage it alone. That is why we have trained these professionals in the first place, not to replace the doctor, but to surround the patient. Preference follows familiarity, but familiarity requires introductions and reminders. That is the national effort I asked for.
Think of aviation. Co-pilots were trained, but deferential. The captain made every call. The industry changed the default to structured team functioning. Every professional's input carried weight. Accident rates fell. The same principle applies. The clusters can build the frameworks, but shifting public expectation requires more than any single cluster can do alone.
My third ask: lead that national effort to help Singaporeans understand and trust the care that nurses, pharmacists and allied health professionals provide. Support the clusters in ensuring investment in training translates into care.
Three asks each with a metric, each building on what already exists. Mr Chairman, let me show you what this looks like when all three asks work.
A senior enrols at her neighbourhood clinic. Because she stays, her doctor learns her story.
Over months, he stabilises her chronic conditions. Once stable, her nurse takes over, adjusting medications, coaching on lifestyle and function preservation. Her care coordinator tightens preventive care. She remains well for a year, then two, then her blood pressure climbs. The nurse titrates. It climbs again. She misses an appointment. The care coordinator calls and brings her back. She misses another. The nurse flags it. Something else is going on. She comes in this time. She tells the doctor that her husband died last year. She has not left the flat since.
He refers her through the social prescribing pathway and a link worker to a gardening group three blocks away. She liked gardening. She goes and she goes again. Her blood pressure finally holds. She did not need a new programme. She needed a care team alongside her and a community partner that mattered to her. Let us build that environment.
Dr Choo Pei Ling (Chua Chu Kang): Mr Chairman, in healthcare, technology is often discussed in terms of speed, scale and innovation. But for patients, it is much simpler. It is about whether they can return home.
In stroke rehabilitation, I often meet patients who ask a single question, \"Will I be able to walk independently again?\"
They are not asking about algorithms or processing power. They are asking about dignity and whether their lives can resume some sense of normalcy.
As Singapore becomes a super-aged society, the question before us is not whether we embrace technology in healthcare. The question is whether we deploy it in ways that strengthen independence, reinforce our workforce and preserve sustainability in the long term.
Three shifts will determine whether technology becomes transformational or merely incremental.
First, from extending lifespan to extending healthspan. Singaporeans are living longer, but longevity without independence places strain on families, caregivers and the system itself.
AI-assisted imaging, predictive analytics under Healthier SG, earlier risk stratification for cardiovascular disease and remote monitoring of chronic conditions allow us to intervene before deterioration becomes crisis. Fall-risk modelling can prevent fractures. Early detection can reduce severe complications. Predictive bed management can smooth demand pressures.
But the true measure of progress is not technological sophistication. It is whether fewer seniors lose mobility, whether fewer families experience preventable emergencies, whether more Singaporeans can age confidently in their own homes.
When we predict earlier, we intervene earlier. When we intervene earlier, we preserve independence longer. That is not only clinical progress. It is social stability and fiscal resilience in an ageing nation.
Second, from labour intensity to capability amplification.
Healthcare will always be human, but our professionals today face rising clinical complexity alongside administrative burden and coordination demands.
Generative AI can assist with documentation. Clinical decision-support systems can synthesise complex patient histories. Digital triage tools can prioritise risk more effectively. In rehabilitation, sensor-guided therapy systems and carefully deployed robotic technologies, including exoskeleton-assisted gait training for selected patients, can increase therapy intensity safely and consistently, particularly in early recovery. This allows therapists to focus on assessment, clinical reasoning and patient engagement rather than repetitive supervision.
Technology must give clinicians back time, not take professional judgement away. If technology reduces cognitive overload and unnecessary administrative friction, it sustains morale, protects professional standards and helps us retain the workforce our system depends on. A sustainable healthcare system ultimately depends on a sustainable healthcare workforce.
Third, from throughput to meaningful outcomes. Healthcare systems often measure performance in terms of waiting times, bed occupancy and utilisation volumes. These indicators are important for operational management.
But patients measure success differently. Can I climb the stairs to my flat? Can I return to work? Can I care for my grandchildren? Can I live independently without becoming a burden to my family?
As we scale AI and rehabilitation technologies, we should continue embedding functional indicators – mobility, independence, caregiver burden, re-admission reduction and return-to-community participation – alongside utilisation metrics. Technology should improve outcomes that patients feel, not just metrics we report.
Mr Chairman, Singapore's strength has never been blind adoption of new tools. It has been discipline in the implementation. In healthcare, that discipline means scaling technologies that demonstrably improve independence, strengthen professional capability and remain financially sustainable in a super-aged society.
As Singaporeans live longer, our ambition must be clear – not merely to extend years of life, but to extend years of mobility, confidence and participation. Because ultimately, the goal of healthcare is not activity, it is dignity across the life cycle.
If we deploy technology wisely, we will ensure that Singapore's healthcare system remains advanced and not only that, but also humane, resilient and sustainable.
The Chairman: Minister of State Rahayu.
","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 Minister of State for Health (Ms Rahayu Mahzam): Chairman, may I seek your consent to move that progress be reported and leave be asked again to sit?
The Chairman: I give my consent.
[(proc text) Resolved, \"That progress be reported and leave be asked to sit again.\" – [Ms Rahayu Mahzam]. (proc text)]
[(proc text) Thereupon Mr Speaker left the Chair of the Committee and took the Chair of the House. (proc text)]
Mr Speaker: Minister of State Rahayu.
Ms Rahayu Mahzam: Speaker, I report that the Committee of Supply has made progress on the Estimates of Expenditure for the financial year 2026/2027 and ask leave to sit again tomorrow.
Mr Speaker: So be it. Leader.
","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.\" – [Ms Indranee Rajah]. (proc text)]
Adjourned accordingly at 8.37 pm.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Proportion of Polyclinic Consultations Conducted via Telehealth Services","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"13 Mr Abdul Muhaimin Abdul Malik asked the Coordinating Minister for Social Policies and Minister for Health (a) for each of the years 2024 and 2025, what proportion of total polyclinic consultations were conducted via telehealth services; (b) whether the uptake of telehealth services by patients will be encouraged and if so, how; and (c) whether patient satisfaction in telehealth services are being tracked and assessed, and if so, how.
Mr Ong Ye Kung: Polyclinics handle over 600,000 attendances a month. Telehealth services accounted for about 2% of such attendances in both 2024 and 2025.
The volume is modest, partly because we use telehealth when it can be delivered appropriately and safely. For example, it is suitable for reviewing of test results, monitoring patient recovery and follow-up of chronic conditions, but we should not do away with the initial in-person consultation.
There are ongoing efforts by the polyclinic clusters to expand the use of telehealth where appropriate and to provide support for patients facing difficulties in navigating technology, including working with community partners.
While patients' satisfaction for telehealth services is currently not specifically tracked by the Ministry of Health, the polyclinics do gather feedback from their patients to contribute towards service improvement initiatives.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Restriction Orders Issued under Protection from Scams Act 2025","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"14 Mr Kenneth Tiong Boon Kiat asked the Coordinating Minister for National Security and Minister for Home Affairs (a) how many restriction orders have been issued under the Protection from Scams Act 2025 since its commencement; (b) of these, how many have been varied or cancelled early; and (c) what progress has been made with banks on graduated restrictions, such as transaction limits or preserved GIRO payments, rather than requiring victims to apply for each withdrawal.
Mr K Shanmugam: As of 15 February 2026, 12 Restriction Orders (ROs) have been issued. Of these, one had been lifted as the individual was assessed to no longer be at risk of transferring money to the scammer, two had ceased as they had reached the statutory maximum of five extensions, while nine remain in effect.
Scam victims subjected to an RO can apply to the Police to transfer or withdraw money from their bank accounts. About 10 out of the 12 RO recipients had requested for money withdrawals for daily expenses, which the Police had approved. The remaining two RO recipients did not request to transfer or withdraw any money.
Requests relating to funds for legitimate purposes, such as daily expenses and bills, are processed quickly to minimise inconvenience to the RO recipients. The banks have assessed that significant system changes are required to allow for graduated restrictions. We have therefore decided not to prioritise the development of such graduated restrictions at this time.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Tracking Productivity Growth Rather Than Adoption Rates to Measure Success of AI Strategy","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"15 Mr Lee Hong Chuang asked the Minister for Digital Development and Information (a) whether the Ministry will track productivity growth rather than adoption rates to measure success of our AI strategy; (b) whether grant support will be conditional on companies having a governance framework to prevent purchases of AI tools they cannot effectively use; and (c) whether a pre-approval list of AI vendors will be established to help firms identify effective tools.\n
Mrs Josephine Teo: The Government tracks the productivity impact of our measures at the national level. We will study how to leverage these assessments, together with adoption rates, to assess the effectiveness of our artificial intelligence (AI) strategy.
The Government shares the Member's interest to ensure that AI implementation is effective and leads to good outcomes for companies. This is partially achieved through pre-approving AI-enabled solutions and vendors that have been market-tested and shown to improve productivity. For other customised AI solutions, grant recipients must meet committed milestones before more funds are disbursed. More generally, we require co-payment from recipient companies, so they too have a stake in the project's success.
We will continue to refine grant conditions, whilst avoiding onerous rules that deter genuine efforts to improve.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Encouraging Companies That Tap On Tax Deductions for AI Spending to Retrain Rather Than Retrench Their Workers","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"16 Mr Lee Hong Chuang asked the Prime Minister and Minister for Finance in respect of tax deductions on spending on AI tools (a) whether requirements can be placed on companies participating in AI transformation initiatives to prioritise retraining over retrenchment for workers whose roles are affected; and (b) whether the Government will track the impact of AI transformation initiatives on local headcount and median wage growth in firms receiving incentives under the scheme.
Mr Jeffrey Siow: Companies taking up artificial intelligence (AI) transformation initiatives will receive tax deductions through the Enterprise Innovation Scheme. We do not impose workforce-related requirements or require companies to report the impact on their headcount or workers' wages, as we do not want to make the scheme requirements or disbursement processes too onerous for such companies.
There are however other initiatives that support the reskilling of workers, including with AI. For example, the Enterprise Workforce Transformation Package supports companies to redesign job roles, reskill workers and adopt AI-powered technology solutions. These schemes require companies to meet certain objectives to receive grants or other financial support.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Tracking Environmental Impact of AI Usage","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"17 Assoc Prof Jamus Jerome Lim asked the Minister for Digital Development and Information (a) whether the Government tracks the environmental impact of artificial intelligence usage, including data centre energy consumption and emissions; (b) if so, what methodologies are used and findings obtained; and (c) whether such impacts have been assessed against Singapore's long-term environmental targets, including the Singapore Green Plan 2030.
Mrs Josephine Teo: This question has been addressed in a related Parliamentary Question filed by Ms Elysa Chen at the 3 March Parliament sitting. [Please refer to \"Limits on Singapore's Total Data Centre Capacity\", Official Report, 3 March 2026, Vol 96, Issue 23, Written Answers to Questions for Oral Answer not Answered by End of Question Time section.]
While Singapore does not have a pre-determined upper limit to data centre (DC) capacity, we work within the envelope of our resource constraints and long-term environmental commitments. Therefore, we adopt a calibrated approach to growing the sector. We monitor the resource footprint of DCs using internationally recognised metrics, like power and water usage effectiveness.
These metrics are used in the assessment of applicants for new DC capacity, which is primarily allocated through the competitive Call for Application mechanism. We expect applicants to be best-in-class for resource efficiency.
The upcoming Digital Infrastructure Act aims to uplift the energy efficiency and overall sustainability of DCs. We will share more details when ready.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Dedicated MyCareersFuture Platform for Blue-collar and Vocational Jobseekers","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"18 Mr Kenneth Tiong Boon Kiat asked the Minister for Manpower (a) whether there is a dedicated equivalent of MyCareersFuture for blue-collar and vocational job seekers, such as drivers, plumbers and technicians; (b) if not, how such workers are expected to discover job opportunities; and (c) whether the Ministry will consider enhancing MyCareersFuture to better serve non-professional, manager, executive and technician (non-PMET) job seekers.
Dr Tan See Leng: MyCareersFuture portal provides job search support for all jobseekers by listing both professional, manager, executive and technician (PMET) and non-PMET job vacancies.
Jobseekers who require additional support can tap on employment facilitation services offered by Workforce Singapore (WSG), the National Trades Union Congress' (NTUC's) Employment and Employability Institute (e2i) as well as WSG's appointed career matching providers, Ingeus and AKG, via 32 career centres and jobs and skills centres across Singapore. They can also participate in career events organised by WSG, NTUC's e2i and Community Development Councils (CDCs), including those under the Jobs Nearby @ CDC initiative that connects residents to job opportunities closer to home.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Proportion of Migrant Workers Living in Purpose-built Dormitories with Access to Nearby Recreational Centres","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"19 Ms Valerie Lee asked the Minister for Manpower (a) what proportion of migrant workers in the construction, marine and processing sectors are living in purpose-built dormitories and have direct access to dedicated recreational centres within one kilometre radius of their dormitories; and (b) what measures are in place to ensure that prices of goods and services within these facilities remain affordable for these workers.
Dr Tan See Leng: About 22% of non-Malaysian migrant workers in the construction, marine and process sectors live in purpose-built dormitories that are located within one kilometre of a recreation centre. Free shuttle bus services are also provided to the recreation centres from some large dormitories and mass rapid transit stations to improve their accessibility.
Recreation centre operators are required to keep prices reasonable for their offerings and receive funding support for their operations. This funding is contingent on meeting annual visitorship targets.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Limits of Current Funding Model for Disability Services Tagged to Organisation Rather Than Beneficiary","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"20 Mr Kenneth Tiong Boon Kiat asked the Minister for Social and Family Development (a) whether the current funding model for disability services, where per-capita funding follows the organisation rather than the beneficiary, prevents families from accessing services across multiple providers; and (b) whether the Ministry has considered (i) portable funding that empowers families to choose and (ii) how such alternative funding would affect service quality through competition.
Mr Masagos Zulkifli B M M: The Ministry of Social and Family Development (MSF) aims to provide persons with disabilities (PwDs) access to safe and effective disability services appropriate for their needs, while keeping service costs sustainable and fees affordable for families with PwDs.
Our approach to providing Government support for disability services, such as Day Activity Centres and Adult Disability Homes, achieve these objectives through the appointment of disability providers and the use of enrolment-based subsidies.
First, MSF appoints disability service providers to deliver Government-funded services based on various factors. These factors include their capabilities and track record in delivering safe and effective specialised intervention and care services for PwDs, while keeping service costs reasonable through the selection process. Appointed service providers are required to abide by service model requirements and standards and are subject to regular audits. In addition, MSF, together with SG Enable and the National Council of Social Service, works closely with the disability sector to enhance the range of disability services, build capabilities and encourage fundraising and volunteer participation from the wider community to ensure that PwDs' needs can be met sustainably.
Second, PwDs enrolling in Government-supported disability services are provided with means-tested subsidies to defray the cost of services. This enrolment-based subsidies will follow the beneficiary, should they enrol with a different appointed service provider. Instead of having to take on the burden of searching and assessing the disability services and providers in the market, PwDs and their caregivers can also receive support via SG Enable to navigate the range of services and be referred to the Government-supported disability services appropriate to the PwDs' need from the pool of appointed service providers.
Providing disability services through portable subsidies and free market competition among service providers alone may lead to suboptimal provision of services and cost escalation. This is because not all PwDs and their families have the professional knowledge or the bandwidth to determine the specialised interventions they need from the services offered by service providers.
We may also see inequitable access to disability services especially for PwDs with more complex or specialised needs, as service providers will find it more efficient to serve larger segments of PwDs with lower or common support needs due to the specialised capabilities and costs involved in serving smaller segments of PwDs with more complex or specialised needs.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Risk Points Identified in Street Count of Rough Sleepers 2025 Report for Entry into Long-term Homelessness","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"21 Dr Hamid Razak asked the Minister for Social and Family Development in light of findings from the Street Count of Rough Sleepers 2025 report and the longitudinal study on Ending Long-Term Homelessness (a) whether the Ministry has assessed life transitions, such as marital breakdown, incarceration release, eviction and institutional discharge, as risk points for entry into long-term homelessness; and (b) whether upstream, cross-agency prevention frameworks are in place or under development.
Mr Masagos Zulkifli B M M: The 2025 Street Count of Rough Sleepers report by the Ministry of Social and Family Development (MSF) found that around 500 individuals sleeping rough on a single night.
MSF recognises that certain life transitions can be stress points and increase vulnerability for some individuals. These could be strained relationships, problems with securing or keeping housing, financial issues, incarceration or a combination of the above.
Part of our approach is therefore upstream, to reach out to and provide support to those who need assistance during the transitions when they may be more vulnerable. For instance, individuals undergoing divorce may access support, such as counselling and financial guidance, through the Family Service Centres. If there are housing concerns, they are guided on available public housing options and interim support. Persons released from incarceration are supported through coordinated reintegration efforts, including case management and transitional programmes, led by community partners and relevant agencies. Those without viable accommodation are linked to appropriate assistance. Individuals facing eviction or institutional discharge are similarly supported through casework interventions, financial assistance schemes and referrals to temporary shelter options where necessary.
We will continue to refine our inter-agency efforts to reduce incidences of rough sleeping in Singapore, including further upstream efforts to work with various Government agencies to identify at-risk persons or families.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Safeguards to Prevent Misuse of Training Work Permit Which Imposes Lower Levy","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"22 Ms Gho Sze Kee asked the Minister for Manpower (a) whether the Ministry has assessed the risk that the lower levy for Training Work Permit holders may incentivise employers to deploy such permit holders in roles not genuinely intended for training purposes; and (b) what safeguards are in place to prevent abuse of the scheme.
Dr Tan See Leng: The Training Work Permit (TWP) is a short-term pass, which allows foreign trainees and students to undertake short-term practical training in Singapore.
The following safeguards and restrictions are in place. First, foreign trainees must be from related companies overseas, while foreign students must be undergoing the training as part of their course requirements. Second, the TWP is only valid for up to six months. It is non-renewable for foreign students, while foreign trainees cannot obtain another TWP until the last TWP has expired or is cancelled for six months. Finally, TWP holders are subject to Dependency Ratio Ceilings, similar to Work Permit holders, as well as the levy rates for higher-skilled Work Permit holders.
The number of TWP holders has remained low at around 0.2% of Work Permit holders. Employers who are found to have abused the scheme by deploying TWP holders in roles not genuinely intended for training purposes may be liable for a financial penalty of up to $10,000 per worker and may also be debarred from employing foreign workers.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Providing Tracking Devices for Dementia Patients at Subsidised Rates","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"23 Mr Abdul Muhaimin Abdul Malik asked the Coordinating Minister for Social Policies and Minister for Health whether the Ministry plans to provide tracking devices for dementia patients at reduced or subsidised costs to support their safety and caregiving needs.
Mr Ong Ye Kung: The Ministry of Health does not recommend the routine use of such tracking devices for dementia patients. There are ethical and privacy issues involved in the use of such devices for dementia patients and require careful consideration as part of a broader care plan. Some community trials are underway.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Assistance for Parents and Children Affected by Childcare Centres Ceasing Operations","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"24 Mr Ang Wei Neng asked the Minister for Social and Family Development (a) how many childcare centres ceased operations in the last three years; (b) how does Early Childhood Development Agency (ECDA) assist students and parents affected by the closure; and (c) how will ECDA facilitate the refund of deposits and advance payments to the parents in the event of such closure.
Mr Masagos Zulkifli B M M: An average of 70 preschools per year, or 3.8%, of total preschools per year, have ceased operations in the last three years.
In the event of a cessation, preschools are expected to assist parents in securing alternative care arrangements to minimise disruption of children's care and manage any outstanding financial matters, such as refunds of fees and deposits to parents. Early Childhood Development Agency (ECDA) has powers under the ECDC Act to issue directions to preschools to ensure the orderly cessation of the operation of such centres, with minimal disruption to the children attending the affected centres. ECDA may also assist affected parents who require help with alternative preschool placement.
Parents who require further assistance with matters concerning deposit or fee refunds may seek assistance from the Consumer Association of Singapore or approach the Small Claims Tribunal.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Proposal for Higher Compensation for Local Authors and Publishers for Books Provided to NLB Libraries for Public Borrowing","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"25 Mr Abdul Muhaimin Abdul Malik asked the Minister for Digital Development and Information in view that the Ministry has previously declined considering a Public Lending Rights scheme for libraries under the National Library Board (NLB), whether the Ministry will consider compensating local authors and publishers with higher remuneration for the books they provided to NLB libraries for the purpose of public borrowing.
Mrs Josephine Teo: The National Library Board (NLB) supports local authors and publishers by buying books and promoting them. All our libraries carry Singapore Collections to ensure that Singaporeans have access to local books and perspectives.
NLB pays fair value for the books it acquires, whether local or foreign. Paying above market prices would simply mean buying fewer copies or titles. This will limit its ability to meet the varied needs of library users.
Instead, NLB supports local authors and publishers through a broader range of initiatives to raise awareness of Singapore literature, authors and publishers. Working with many partners across the local literary ecosystem, these efforts include supporting book launches and facilitating the sale of books by local authors at selected events. NLB will continue with such efforts to build a vibrant reading ecosystem in Singapore.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Impact of Multiple Mounted Mobile Devices or Digital Screens on Driving Performance","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"27 Mr Dennis Tan Lip Fong asked the Coordinating Minister for National Security and Minister for Home Affairs (a) whether the Ministry has conducted or commissioned any studies on the impact of multiple mounted mobile devices or digital screens within a driver's field of view on reaction time and driving performance; and (b) whether there are plans to review current regulations to address excessive screen use in moving vehicles.
Mr K Shanmugam: The Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) and the Traffic Police have not commissioned studies on the impact of multiple mounted mobile devices or digital screens on reaction time and driving performance.
It is the driver's responsibility to stay alert on the roads at all times and drive safely. The key issue is not the installation or mounting of devices, but in the wrongful use of such devices while driving. Disallowing the mounting of devices could be counterproductive, as drivers may instead hold their devices in their hands while driving, which poses a graver risk and is precisely the behaviour that the law prohibits.
Singapore already has comprehensive rules governing the wrongful use of mobile devices while driving. Under section 65B(1) of the Road Traffic Act, a driver commits an offence if he or she holds a mobile communication device and uses any of its communicative or other functions while the vehicle is in motion. No proof of harm is required. A first-time offender is liable to a fine of up to $1,000 or imprisonment of up to six months, or both. A repeat offender faces a fine of up to $2,000 or imprisonment of up to 12 months, or both.
The offence also carries 12 demerit points with a composition fine of $400 for light vehicles and $500 for heavy vehicles. Offences committed in School Zones, Silver Zones or Friendly Zones Streets incur two additional demerit points and an additional $100 fine.
Rule 126 of the Road Traffic (Motor Vehicles, Construction and Use) Rules makes it an offence to install any visual display unit in a manner that poses a safety hazard or causes distraction.
Taken together, the current rules are adequate in targeting the wrongful and distracting use of mobile devices while driving. There are no plans to review regulations relating to the use of mounted screens in moving vehicles.
28 Mr Dennis Tan Lip Fong asked the Coordinating Minister for National Security and Minister for Home Affairs (a) how many motorists have been issued summonses in each of the past five years for using mobile devices while driving, including mounted devices; and (b) whether enforcement differentiates between (i) passive navigation display and (ii) active interaction, such as typing, swiping or video viewing.
Mr K Shanmugam: About 2,800 motorists were issued summonses on average annually between 2021 and 2025 for using mobile communication devices while driving.
Three conditions must be fulfilled to make out an offence of using a mobile communication device while driving. First, the vehicle must be in motion. Second, the motorist must have held a mobile communication device in his or her hand. It is not an offence to use a mounted device. Third, the motorist must have operated any of its functions, including viewing a passive navigation display, typing, swiping or video viewing.
Even if a driver uses a mounted device while driving, he or she may, depending on the facts of the case, be liable for the offence of driving without due care and attention or reasonable consideration, or for reckless or dangerous driving.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Risk of In-flight Use of Power Banks","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"29 Mr Yip Hon Weng asked the Acting Minister for Transport in light of Japan's ban on in-flight use of power banks and that they be kept accessible due to fire risks (a) whether CAAS has considered similar measures for flights departing Singapore; and (b) what risk assessments or incident data informed this evaluation, including the thresholds that will justify adopting stricter restrictions.
Mr Jeffrey Siow: The International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) sets guidelines on the carriage and use of electronic devices on flights, including power banks. These guidelines address safety risks, such as fire hazards involving lithium batteries. The Civil Aviation Authority of Singapore (CAAS) aligns its safety regulations with ICAO's guidelines. These include restrictions on the allowable capacity of lithium batteries onboard aircraft, how they must be carried and limitations on their use during flight.
ICAO is expected to update its guidelines on lithium batteries in the coming months, which will be incorporated into CAAS's regulations. CAAS is working with airlines to prepare for these changes.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Balancing Construction Timelines against Rising Costs of Raw Materials and Labour Given Accelerated Pace for Building HDB Flats","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"30 Mr Lee Hong Chuang asked the Minister for National Development with the commitment to launch 19,600 BTO flats in 2026 and the increasing proportion of flats with shorter waiting time, how is the Ministry balancing the accelerated construction timelines against the rising costs of raw materials and labour.
Mr Chee Hong Tat: In deciding the supply of Build-To-Order flats, including Shorter Waiting Time (SWT) flats, the Housing and Development Board considers many factors, like housing demand, land availability and the capacity of our construction industry. The shorter waiting time for SWT flats is achieved by starting the development process earlier, without compromising safety, quality or paying significantly higher costs of construction.
To improve the productivity of our Built Environment sector, the Ministry of National Development has formed an action team together with industry partners to help companies save time, costs and manpower.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Review Discretion Given to Supermarket Operators on Use of Funds Collected from Plastic Bag Charges","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"31 Mr Fadli Fawzi asked the Minister for Sustainability and the Environment (a) whether the National Environment Agency will review its stance in relation to allowing supermarket operators to have discretion over how the funds collected from supermarket plastic bag charges are used; and (b) if not, why not.
Ms Grace Fu Hai Yien: Supermarket operators who are obligated to implement the disposable carrier bag charge are required to publish information annually on the number of disposable carrier bags supplied, amount of proceeds collected, and how the proceeds are used. This ensures transparency and public accountability.
The large majority of proceeds collected have been channelled towards environmental or social causes. We are heartened by the attention that non-governmental organisations and the public have applied on the operators. This scrutiny will encourage operators to use their proceeds more judiciously. The government will monitor the use of proceeds by the supermarket operators and continue to encourage them to channel the proceeds to environmental or social causes.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Fires Involving Blue Recycling Bins","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"32 Mr Fadli Fawzi asked the Minister for Sustainability and the Environment (a) in the past three years, whether the blue recycling bins have been involved in a fire; and (b) if so, how many cases.
Ms Grace Fu Hai Yien: Over the past three years, the number of fires involving blue recycling bins has averaged around 35 each year. These fires were likely caused by the improper disposal of fire hazards, such as batteries and lit cigarettes.
The National Environment Agency (NEA) has been working to educate the residents on the proper use of our recycling infrastructure to minimise fire risk. Under the annual Recycle Right Campaign, NEA educates the public to dispose of used batteries only in e-waste bins and other e-waste collection points. The blue recycling bins should be used only for paper and cardboard, plastics, metals and glass items.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Regular Training in Communications and Customer Service Excellence for Frontline Public Service Officers","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"33 Ms Valerie Lee asked the Prime Minister and Minister for Finance (a) whether frontline public service officers undergo regular training in communication and customer service excellence; and (b) how the Public Service ensures consistent service standards and continuous improvement across agencies in delivering citizen-centric services.
Mr Chan Chun Sing (for the Prime Minister): The Singapore Public Service seeks to achieve a consistently high standard of service delivery through a few ways.
First, we strengthen officers' competencies through continuous learning. The Public Service Division has worked with agencies to develop a Service Competency Framework that sets out the skills expected of service delivery officers across government. This includes frontline officers, as well as those who manage citizens' feedback, our hotlines and digital services.
Our service delivery officers develop these competencies through continuous learning. Our frontline service officers typically undergo training in the relevant policies, programs and commonly asked questions of their respective agencies. They are also given necessary soft skills related to customer service to serve a diverse range of citizens. We also make available various opportunities for public officers involved in service delivery to learn best practices across agencies and private sector, through immersion programmes and job attachments across the Public Service and with private companies, as well as through various peer learning conferences.
Second, we ensure clear service standards and continuous improvement. The public service sets and regularly updates whole-of-Government (WOG) service delivery standards, including standards for both replies to public queries as well as digital delivery of services.
Third, we redesign service processes for a more integrated, seamless and citizen-centric experience. Service quality is not only about how frontline officers serve, but more importantly, how services are organised and experienced by citizens based on their needs. To do this, we leverage data insights from citizen feedback to streamline processes and re-design citizen-centric services. For example, we have begun bundling services across life moments, like birth, National Service pre-enlistment, ageing and legacy planning. Instead of navigating different agencies separately, citizens can access services relating to these life moments seamlessly via LifeSG. Lastly, for those who are unable to transact digitally with the Government, the ServiceSG Centres were established as a digital safety net to provide assistance to the most commonly needed 600 services from over 25 agencies.
Together, these efforts continuously uplift service quality and ensure improvements are sustained across the whole-of-Government.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Collecting Capital Gains Income Data in National Surveys to More Accurately Measure Household Market Income","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"34 Assoc Prof Jamus Jerome Lim asked the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Trade and Industry whether the Government will consider collecting data on capital gains income in national surveys to more accurately measure household market income.
Mr Gan Kim Yong: We have no plans to do so. Based on international statistical standards and the practice of major national statistical agencies, capital gains are not considered a component of household market income. This is because they are typically irregular and reflect changes in asset values as opposed to being recurring income that is available for current consumption.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Active Users of LumiHealth and Reasons for Its Cessation","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"35 Mr Ang Wei Neng asked the Coordinating Minister for Social Policies and Minister for Health (a) what is the number of active users using LumiHealth as of February 2026; (b) how many e-vouchers were issued since 2023; (c) the reasons for ending the popular LumiHealth; and (d) whether Healthy 365 is considered as a replacement app to serve the same objective of promoting healthy living.
Mr Ong Ye Kung: The LumiHealth programme was designed between Apple and the Health Promotion Board (HPB) as a time-limited, two-year programme, to experiment and discover ways to use digital technology to nudge individuals to lead more active lifestyles. The programme concluded on 31 May 2026, after six years of collaboration, including a four-year extension to the original plan. The programme has engaged more than 377,000 Singaporeans in cultivating sustained healthy habits. However, being a commercial partnership, HPB is not at liberty to disclose numbers on e-vouchers. HPB is now integrating the learnings into our broader digital health ecosystem through Healthy 365.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Assistance for Households in Recovering Fees Paid In Advance, following Sudden Closure of Student Care Centre","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"36 Assoc Prof Jamus Jerome Lim asked the Minister for Education whether the Ministry has plans to assist affected households in recovering student and kindergarten care fees paid in advance, following the sudden closure of Little Professors Learning Centre.
Mr Desmond Lee: This question has been addressed by the Ministry of Education's answer to oral Parliamentary Question Nos 3 to 6 on 2 March 2026. [Please refer to \"Governance of Student Care Centres and Minimising Disruptions in Event of Abrupt Centre Closures\", Official Report, 2 March 2026, Vol 96, Issue 22, Oral Answers to Questions section.]
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Reason for Voluntary Approach to New Guideline on Property Flyers to HDB Homes","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"37 Mr Yip Hon Weng asked the Minister for National Development given that the new guideline on property flyers to HDB homes is implemented through an industry-led memorandum of understanding (MOU) (a) why a voluntary framework was preferred over statutory prohibition with defined penalties; (b) what policy considerations informed this choice; and (c) whether there will be a formal review to assess compliance across the sector, including smaller agencies not party to the MOU.
Mr Chee Hong Tat: The industry-led memorandum of understanding (MOU) between the Singapore Institute of Estate Agents (SIEA) and the five major estate agents (EAs) came about after the Council for Estate Agencies (CEA) engaged the industry in 2023 on the rising number of complaints about property flyers left on the doors of HDB homes. The MOU is a positive step and reflects the industry's readiness to take ownership by developing practical solutions to address the community's concerns over improper flyer distribution by property agents.
CEA supports this industry-led initiative, recognising that advertising using flyers is a common marketing practice across sectors, including among property agents. Under the MOU, flyers must be properly distributed without being visible to members of the public other than the intended recipient. EAs will adopt a \"three strikes\" penalty system on errant property agents who commit flyer distribution breaches, with the most severe penalty being a six-month suspension from distributing flyers to HDB homes. EAs are to update SIEA, who will keep a central repository of flyer distribution breaches committed by property agents. This industry-led framework allows EAs to promote responsible distribution practices while minimising unintended impact on agents' livelihoods.
After the commencement of this framework on 1 April 2026, CEA will monitor feedback and work with the industry to assess the situation holistically on whether further measures are required.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Increasing EDG Support Level to Encourage Greater Participation in Productivity and Innovation Projects","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"38 Mr Gerald Giam Yean Song asked the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Trade and Industry (a) to what extent is the $0.62 billion projected underspending in development expenditure for FY2025 due to the reduction in the Enterprise Development Grant (EDG) support level; and (b) whether the Ministry will consider increasing the EDG support level to encourage greater participation in productivity and innovation projects amidst persistent inflationary pressures.
Mr Gan Kim Yong: The $0.62 billion projected reduction in the Ministry of Trade and Industry's development expenditure for financial year 2025 was not due to a reduction in the support level of the Enterprise Development Grant (EDG), which has not changed since April 2023. Instead, it mainly reflects adjustments in development expenditure across MTI and its agencies, as some larger investment projects required more time than anticipated for review. Disbursements will therefore be made in 2026 instead.
The Government is fully committed to supporting our enterprises to grow and transform amid the uncertain and volatile economic environment. At Budget 2026, the Prime Minister and Minister for Finance announced enhancements to the support levels for internationalisation grant schemes. Local SMEs will receive support of up to 70% of eligible costs, up from the previous 50%, while local non-SMEs will receive support of up to 50% of eligible costs, up from 30%.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Relaxing Conservation Guidelines for Painting of Murals in Heritage Districts","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"39 Mr Fadli Fawzi asked the Minister for National Development (a) whether the Urban Redevelopment Authority has studied if a relaxation of conservation guidelines around the painting of murals in heritage districts, such as Kampong Gelam, will have a positive impact on tourism and visitation; (b) if so, whether the results of such a study can be released; and (c) if not, whether such a study can be conducted.
Mr Chee Hong Tat: There are many opportunities for mural art in our historic districts to increase vibrancy and footfall, without obscuring key architectural and heritage features of the conserved buildings and affecting the established character and ambience of our historic districts. For example, murals are permitted on the side walls of corner shophouses and rear boundary walls.
The Urban Redevelopment Authority has consulted the Kampong Gelam Alliance and the Heritage and Identity Partnership, both of whom agreed to maintain the prevailing guidelines for murals on conserved shophouses.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Philantrophic Contributions Made by Single Family Offices to Local Charitable Organisations Since 2024","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"1 Mr Abdul Muhaimin Abdul Malik asked the Prime Minister and Minister for Finance (a) whether the Ministry tracks philanthropic contributions made by Single Family Offices to local charitable organisations; (b) if so, what is the total amount of such contributions since 2024; and (c) if not, why not.
Mr Gan Kim Yong (for the Prime Minister): I refer the Member to the Monetary Authority of Singapore's response1 to Mr Saktiandi Supaat on the economic and social contributions of Single Family Offices for the Parliament Sitting on 24 September 2025. [Please refer to \"Tracking Economic and Social Contributions of Single Family Offices from 2020 to 2024 and Plans to Attract SFOs\", Official Report, 24 September 2025, Vol 96, Issue 4, Written Answers to Questions section.]
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":["1 : https://www.mas.gov.sg/news/parliamentary-replies/2025/written-reply-to-parliamentary-question-on-single-family-offices"],"footNoteQuestions":["1"],"questionNo":"1"},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Green and Sustainability Linked Loans Originated by Financial Institutions in Singapore Offered to New Corporate and SMEs in Past Five Years","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"2 Ms He Ting Ru asked the Prime Minister and Minister for Finance (a) what was the annual total value and number of green and sustainability linked loans originated by financial institutions in Singapore over the past five years; (b) what proportion of these loans represent lending to new corporate and small- and medium-sized enterprise in each year; and (c) whether the Ministry can provide a breakdown by size of borrower.
Mr Gan Kim Yong (for the Prime Minister): A total of 261 green, social, sustainability and sustainability-linked loans, worth S$137.3 billion, were taken up by Singapore companies between 2020 and 20241. The Monetary Authority of Singapore does not have a breakdown based on the size of borrower, including small- and medium-sized enterprises.
3 Mr Kenneth Tiong Boon Kiat asked the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Trade and Industry (a) how many A*STAR scholarship recipients have had their research fields deprioritised while serving their bonds, due to transitions across successive Research, Innovation and Enterprise masterplans; (b) what percentage of these scholars are currently in roles utilising their doctoral expertise; and (c) for scholars with no adjacent redeployment available, whether A*STAR will consider bond release or industry transfer.
Mr Gan Kim Yong: About 80% of A*STAR scholarship graduates are employed in roles which leverage their doctoral expertise. These include roles in both academia and industry.
The remaining 20% have pivoted to a variety of other roles for reasons not necessarily due to deprioritisation of their research fields. These roles include corporate leadership and management positions across various sectors. It reflects how A*STAR scholars have gained knowledge and competencies that are transferable beyond the research ecosystem.
Where redeployment is required, A*STAR facilitates transfers within A*STAR as well as secondments or transfers to the Institutes of Higher Learning and the private sector.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Enhancing Public Education on Right-sizing Integrated Shield Plan Coverage","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"4 Mr Yip Hon Weng asked the Coordinating Minister for Social Policies and Minister for Health (a) what steps will the Ministry take to enhance public education on right-sizing Integrated Shield plan coverage; and (b) whether it will consider transparently publishing comparative data on insurer profitability on their private hospital insurance portfolio and premium changes to help consumers make more informed decisions.
Mr Ong Ye Kung: In 2025, the Ministry of Health (MOH) ran a public education campaign to educate the public on the Integrated Shield Plans (IPs) and riders, to understand the distortive effects of IP riders, and encourage policyholders to size their health insurance coverage appropriately.
In addition, MOH publishes comparisons of benefits, features and indicative lifetime premiums across IPs, as well as service indicators for the insurers. In 2025, MOH and the Central Provident Fund Board also launched the Health Insurance Planner, an interactive tool that helps Singaporeans to make informed decisions about their health insurance coverage.
On insurers' profits, aggregate numbers on gross premiums collected and claims settled across insurers are publicly available. As explained in response to Parliamentary Question Nos 1 to 4 on 24 September 2025, the gross premiums collected and claims settled for IPs reveal that most insurers are barely breaking even or making losses on their health portfolios. [Please refer to \"Reviewing Regulatory Framework for Integrated Shield Plans and Assessing Practice of Pre-authorisation\", Official Report, 24 September 2025, Vol 96, Issue 4, Oral Answers to Questions section.]
The distortion caused by IP riders is benefitting no one.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"GST Relief Mechanisms for Patients Unable to Obtain Essential Medication from Public Healthcare Institutions Due to Systemic Availability Constraints","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"5 Dr Hamid Razak asked the Coordinating Minister for Social Policies and Minister for Health (a) whether the Ministry has assessed the goods and services tax (GST) treatment of medically indicated medications that are unavailable in public healthcare institutions, requiring patients to obtain them privately; and (b) whether any policy mechanisms exist or are under consideration to address GST burdens arising from such systemic availability constraints.
Mr Ong Ye Kung: Subsidised patients who obtain medications at Public Healthcare Institutions (PHIs) for their care will have their goods and services tax incurred fully absorbed by the Government.
If a patient requires a medication that is unavailable in one PHI, the PHI can check to see if the medication is available at other PHIs. If not immediately available, PHIs may exercise discretion to procure these medications for the patient or assess the suitability of alternative treatments. Hence, PHIs would not require subsidised patients to obtain medically indicated medications from private sources in the vast majority of cases.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Ensuring Quality and Continuity of Care and Role of Pharmacists in Light of Increased Use of Telemedicine and Third-Party Medication Delivery Platforms","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"6 Ms Nadia Ahmad Samdin asked the Coordinating Minister for Social Policies and Minister for Health (a) what is the Ministry's assessment on the increased use of telemedicine and third-party medication delivery platforms on the continuity of care and the clinical advisory role of pharmacists; and (b) how the Ministry ensures that care quality is not compromised as dispensing becomes more decentralised.
Mr Ong Ye Kung: Telemedicine needs to be delivered appropriately and carefully, especially when it involves third-party medication delivery platforms.
Hence, safeguards have been instituted to regulate telemedicine. All telemedicine service providers need to have doctors as licensed holders. Registered medical practitioners providing telemedicine must adhere to the Singapore Medical Council's Ethical Code and Ethical Guidelines.
Retail pharmacies, under the oversight of a qualified pharmacist, must comply with the Singapore Standard Guideline for the supply and delivery of medication (SS 644: 2025). Pharmacists must also adhere to the Singapore Pharmacy Council's Code of Conduct. Finally, patients must be counselled concerning the proper use of dispensed medications regardless of care setting.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Recorded Incidences of AI-Induced Psychosis in Past Three Years and Measures to Address AI-Related Mental Health Issues","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"7 Ms He Ting Ru asked the Coordinating Minister for Social Policies and Minister for Health (a) whether the Ministry is aware of increasing recorded incidences of artificial intelligence-induced psychosis; (b) if so, what are the number of cases across in each of the past three years; and (c) how is the Ministry working with relevant partners to better study and tackle this issue.
Mr Ong Ye Kung: There are international reports about psychological disturbances potentially related to intensive artificial intelligence (AI) use, but this is not an established clinical diagnosis. Other than a few anecdotal cases, no clear trends that these cases are on the rise have been observed locally, but we are monitoring this closely because the potential health risk posed by AI and digital media is of real concern.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Deployment of Mobile NEA Enforcement Cameras and Future Rollout Plans","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"8 Ms Valerie Lee asked the Minister for Sustainability and the Environment (a) how many mobile National Environment Agency enforcement cameras were being deployed in January 2026; (b) what their deployment purposes are; and (c) whether there are plans to roll out more.
Ms Grace Fu Hai Yien: In January 2026, the National Environment Agency (NEA) carried out around 490 mobile enforcement camera deployments. These mobile cameras were deployed at public areas where community feedback highlighted persistent environmental public health issues, such as high-rise littering, smoking in prohibited areas, poor refuse management and rat infestation. Where needed, NEA will continue to expand camera deployments to improve environmental cleanliness.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Utilisation Rate of Government Co-Matching Child Development Accounts across Household Income and Caregiving Arrangements","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"9 Mr Victor Lye asked the Minister for Social and Family Development (a) whether the Ministry has studied the differences in the utilisation rate of the Government co-matching of Child Development Account across (i) household income bands (ii) caregiving circumstances; and (b) if so, what broad trends have been observed.
Mr Masagos Zulkifli B M M: The Ministry of Social and Family Development (MSF) studied the utilisation rates of Child Development Account (CDA) monies for the birth cohorts from 2008 to 2011, across income bands from the time the child is zero to 12 years old.
Most parents saved close to the Government co-matching caps to maximise the Government co-matching for the first two birth orders across all income bands. However, lower-income families tended to save lower than the Government co-matching caps from the third child onwards. Consequently, the CDA accounts of children from lower income bands also have less balances compared to the other income bands at the point of account closure when the children turn 12 years old.
The income data used in the study was based on the parents' declaration at the point of application and family circumstances could have changed over time. The cohorts studied also do not qualify for First Step Grant and the ComLink+ Package for Preschool, as these schemes were introduced after 2011 and may influence savings and utilisation behaviour especially in low-income families.
MSF has not conducted a study on differences in utilisation rate of the CDA monies across caregiving circumstances.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Availability of Overseas Experience for Students of Autonomous Universities","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"10 Mr Fadli Fawzi asked the Minister for Education (a) whether the Ministry monitors the availability of overseas experiences to students of autonomous universities through programmes, such as the National University of Singapore Overseas Colleges programme; (b) if so, whether such availability has decreased over the past five years; and (c) what are the reasons for any such decreases.
Mr Desmond Lee: The autonomous universities (AUs) offer their students meaningful overseas exposure through programmes, such as academic exchanges, immersions and internships. The availability of such opportunities declined sharply during the COVID-19 pandemic, but has since recovered to pre-pandemic levels.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Participation Rates of Schools and Students for UPLIFT Enhanced School Resourcing and GEAR-UP Programmes in Past Five Years","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"11 Assoc Prof Jamus Jerome Lim asked the Minister for Education for each of the past five years, how many (i) schools and (ii) students participated in the Uplifting Pupils in Life and Inspiring Families Taskforce Enhanced School Resourcing programme and the Guiding and Empowering Students for Affiliation and Resilience to Unlock their Potential programme, respectively.
Mr Desmond Lee: As part of the Ministry of Education's (MOE's) efforts to uplift students from disadvantaged backgrounds, selected schools were given additional resources and worked with community partners to encourage their students with higher needs to attend school regularly, a key factor that reflects the students' engagement in learning and enables them to make educational progress.
Uplifting Pupils in Life and Inspiring Families Taskforce (UPLIFT) Enhanced School Resourcing (UESR) and Guiding and Empowering Students for Affiliation and Resilience to Unlock their Potential (GEAR-UP) were rolled out across different phases since 2019. By the end of 2025, UESR provided additional resourcing to 100 schools, while GEAR-UP was implemented in 120 secondary schools, with some schools running both initiatives. Collectively, more than 11,000 students benefited annually from these initiatives. About 30% of the target students who previously had absenteeism issues managed to achieve regular school attendance over time.
As part of a holistic review to strengthen support for students from disadvantaged backgrounds, UESR and GEAR-UP have been folded into a new enhanced support package for schools from 2026, which MOE had recently announced at this year's Committee of Supply debate.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Metrics to Assess Effectiveness of UPLIFT Enhanced School Resourcing and GEAR-UP Programmes and Results for Past Five Years","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"12 Assoc Prof Jamus Jerome Lim asked the Minister for Education (a) what metrics the Ministry uses to assess the effectiveness of (i) the UPLIFT Enhanced School Resourcing programme and (ii) the Guiding and Empowering Students for Affiliation and Resilience to Unlock their Potential (GEAR-UP) program; and (b) what the corresponding figures have been for each of the past five years.
Mr Desmond Lee: As part of the Ministry of Education's (MOE's) efforts to uplift students from disadvantaged backgrounds, selected schools were given additional resources and worked with community partners to encourage their students with higher needs to attend school regularly – a key factor that reflects the students' engagement in learning and enables them to make educational progress. Uplifting Pupils in Life and Inspiring Families Taskforce (UPLIFT) Enhanced School Resourcing (UESR) and GEAR-UP were rolled out across different phases since 2019. By the end of 2025, UESR provided additional resourcing to 100 schools, while GEAR-UP was implemented in 120 secondary schools, with some schools running both initiatives. Collectively, more than 11,000 students benefited annually from these initiatives. About 30% of the target students who previously had absenteeism issues managed to achieve regular school attendance over time.
As part of a holistic review to strengthen support for students from disadvantaged backgrounds, UESR and GEAR-UP have been folded into a new enhanced support package for schools from 2026, which MOE had recently announced at this year's Committee of Supply debate.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"PSEA Balance Transfers to CPF Ordinary Account at Age 31 and Uptake of Subsequent Education or Reskilling","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"13 Mr Victor Lye asked the Minister for Education (a) what proportion of Post-Secondary Education Account (PSEA) balances are transferred to CPF Ordinary Account upon reaching age 31; and (b) whether the Ministry has studied how many individuals subsequently undertake education or reskilling after age 31.
Mr Desmond Lee: Any remaining balance in Post-Secondary Education Accounts (PSEAs) is transferred to the member's CPF Ordinary Account when the PSEA account is closed upon reaching age 31. Last year, about two-thirds of the accounts had balances which were transferred to the members' CPF-OA.
Many individuals continue to pursue education and reskilling after they enter the workforce, with substantial support from the Government. In 2025, around 500,000 individuals aged 31 and above participated in SkillsFuture Singapore (SSG)-supported training. Individuals can tap on SSG's course fee subsidies of up to 70%, as well as SkillsFuture Credit to defray the out-of-pocket costs of training. Mid-career workers aged 40 and above can also tap on the SkillsFuture Level-Up Programme to pursue a substantive skills reboot. These initiatives ensure that individuals have continued access to quality training and reskilling opportunities throughout their career.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Employment Restrictions for Dependent Pass Holders Enrolled in Local Educational Institutions","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"14 Mr Kenneth Tiong Boon Kiat asked the Minister for Manpower (a) what is the policy rationale for prohibiting Dependant Pass (DP) holders enrolled in local educational institutions from part-time employment without a separate work pass; (b) whether this policy accounts for prevalence of foreign manpower in the relevant sectors of part-time employment; and (c) whether the Ministry will consider permitting part-time work for DP-holding students, to support internship and work-study requirements.
Dr Tan See Leng: Dependant's Pass holders enrolled in eligible local educational institutions are allowed to work if the work is part of their course requirements. They will need to apply for a Letter of Consent before they start work.
As this policy is meant to support course requirements, it does not need to account for the prevalence of foreign manpower across different sectors.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"HDB Animal Ownership Regulations, Breakdown of Pet-related Complaints in Last Five Years and Enforcement Measures to Address Pet-related Concerns","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"15 Ms He Ting Ru asked the Minister for National Development (a) what are the current regulations and limits on the number of animals allowed in HDB flats; (b) what are the avenues of recourse for neighbours affected by noise, odour or hygiene issues; and (c) whether more updated enforcement measures and public education are needed to better address this concern.
16 Ms He Ting Ru asked the Minister for National Development in each of the last five years (a) how many reports has HDB received about nuisance caused by pets kept in neighbouring flats; (b) whether the Ministry can provide a breakdown by complaints about (i) type of pet and (ii) excessive number of pets; and (c) how many cases ended up with enforcement action being taken.
Mr Chee Hong Tat: The Housing and Development Board (HDB) allows residents to keep up to two cats and one dog of an approved breed in an HDB flat. Residents may also keep small pets, such as birds, if these pets do not cause nuisance and disturbance to the neighbours and living environment.
Between 2021 and 2025, HDB received on average about 4,000 pet-related feedback per year, with 22% related to birds, 31% related to cats and 47% related to dogs. In 2025, about 20% of pet-related feedback was related to an excessive number of pets. This category was not specifically tracked prior to 2025.
If a resident's pet is causing disamenities to neighbours, HDB will advise the pet owner to take the necessary measures to reduce the inconvenience. This includes seeking help from Animal and Veterinary Services (AVS) accredited dog trainers if a resident's dog has disruptive behaviours that cause disamenities. If neighbour disputes arise, HDB will also advise the parties concerned to discuss the issue amicably and, if necessary, go through community mediation. For recalcitrant cases, the flat owners may be asked to re-home their pets, with assistance from animal welfare groups if needed.
To enhance public education and awareness, the National Parks Board (NParks) works closely with stakeholders, such as schools, community interest groups and animal welfare groups, to organise events promoting responsible pet ownership and best practices for pet care. NParks also requires all first-time cat or dog licence applicants to complete a free online course on responsible pet ownership before licence issuance.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Reconsideration of Decision to Order Removal of Mural on 59 Arab Street","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"17 Mr Fadli Fawzi asked the Minister for National Development (a) whether the Urban Redevelopment Authority can reconsider its decision to order the removal of a mural on 59 Arab Street; and (b) if not, why not.
Mr Chee Hong Tat: The Urban Redevelopment Authority (URA) ordered the removal of the mural at 59 Arab Street as murals are not allowed on front façades of conserved shophouses, except those at Haji Lane, given that they may obscure key architectural and heritage features and affect the established character and ambience of the historic district.
In its assessment, URA had consulted the Kampong Gelam Alliance and the Heritage and Identity Partnership, both of whom agreed to maintain the prevailing guidelines for murals on conserved shophouses. The tenant has since removed the mural.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Monitoring of EASE Programme Take-up Rate by Geography, Housing Type and Household","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"18 Ms Valerie Lee asked the Minister for National Development (a) whether the take-up rates for the direct application for Enhancement for Active Seniors (EASE) programme are being monitored by geographical areas, housing types and households; and (b) if so, whether information can be shared.
Mr Chee Hong Tat: The breakdown of the number of Enhancement for Active Seniors (EASE) (Direct) applications between the launch of EASE (Direct) in July 2012 and 23 February 2026, by Housing and Development Board (HDB) zones and by flat type, is as follows:
19 Mr Yip Hon Weng asked the Minister for National Development with the industry-led guideline on distribution of property flyers in HDB estates taking effect from April 2026 (a) whether the Ministry intends to monitor its impact on HDB estate management and resident feedback; (b) if so, how; and (c) whether the Ministry has identified criteria under which it will consider legislative or regulatory measures if self-regulation proves insufficient.
Mr Chee Hong Tat: The industry-led memorandum of understanding (MOU) between the Singapore Institute of Estate Agents (SIEA) and the five major Estate Agents (EAs) came about after the Council for Estate Agencies (CEA) engaged the industry in 2023 on the rising number of complaints about property flyers left on the doors of Housing and Development Board (HDB) homes. The MOU is a positive step and reflects the industry's readiness to take ownership by developing practical solutions to address the community's concerns over improper flyer distribution by property agents.
CEA supports this industry-led initiative, recognising that advertising using flyers is a common marketing practice across sectors, including among property agents. Under the MOU, flyers must be properly distributed without being visible to members of the public other than the intended recipient. EAs will adopt a “three strikes” penalty system on errant property agents who commit flyer distribution breaches, with the most severe penalty being a six-month suspension from distributing flyers to HDB homes. EAs are to update SIEA, who will keep a central repository of flyer distribution breaches committed by property agents. This industry-led framework allows EAs to promote responsible distribution practices while minimising unintended impact on agents' livelihoods.
After the commencement of this framework on 1 April 2026, CEA will monitor feedback and work with the industry to assess the situation holistically on whether further measures are required.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Considerations of Ramp Installation for Corner Units of Older HDB Units and Alternative Measures to Improve Elderly Accessibility","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"20 Ms Nadia Ahmad Samdin asked the Minister for National Development (a) what are the considerations for the installation of ramps for corner units of older HDB flats with multi-steps in front of their house; and (b) what alternative measures are possible should a portable or electronic ramp be assessed as unsuitable for such HDB units, especially for seniors who reside alone without caregivers.
Mr Chee Hong Tat: The Housing and Development Board (HDB) offers a range of subsidised accessibility solutions under the Enhancement for Active Seniors programme for flats with multi-steps in front of their main entrance. These include portable ramps, customised ramps, as well as wheelchair lifters.
The proposed accessibility solution will be assessed based on the available corridor space and must not pose maintenance concerns, obstruct the fire escape route or encroach onto the space of neighbouring units. Minor addition and alteration works to the existing steps or entrance gate may be required.
For those who face constraints with installing or using a ramp, HDB will evaluate the feasibility of other options such as a wheelchair lifter.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Expansion of Green Mark Scheme with Corresponding Workforce Capabilities and Ensuring Integration of Sustainability Competencies","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"21 Ms Nadia Ahmad Samdin asked the Minister for National Development (a) how the expansion of sustainability standards under the Green Mark scheme is matched by corresponding workforce capabilities; and (b) how the Ministry ensures that sustainability competencies are integrated into core built environment roles instead of developed as separate skill tracks.
Mr Chee Hong Tat: Introduced in 2005, the Building and Construction Authority's (BCA's) Green Mark (GM) Certification scheme provides a framework to assess the overall sustainability performance of new and existing buildings. Since its launch, the number of GM-certified building projects has increased to over 2,500 today. The significant progress over the years is only possible with the growing contributions and expertise of our built environment professionals.
The Skills Framework for Built Environment, developed in collaboration with SkillsFuture Singapore and Workforce Singapore, positions sustainability as a core competency for key built environment professionals, such as architects and engineers, quantity surveyors and facility management professionals.
Building on this framework, BCA works with training providers to develop and update courses for both new entrants and practitioners. For example, Singapore Polytechnic has updated the curriculum for their Green Mark and Energy Sustainability course to ensure it reflects the latest requirements and standards of the BCA GM scheme.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Data on Crow-Related Complaints in Past Two Years and Effectiveness of Use of Bird Effigies","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"22 Mr Jackson Lam asked the Minister for National Development (a) over the past two years, how many bird-related complaints received pertain specifically to crows; (b) based on preliminary findings from current trials, how effective has the use of bird effigies been in reducing crow congregation and related disamenities; and (c) whether the Ministry intends to expand the use of bird effigies islandwide and the anticipated timeline.
Mr Chee Hong Tat: The Municipal Services Office received around 10,500 and 15,000 feedback cases on crows in 2024 and 2025 respectively.
The National Parks Board (NParks) has observed that bird effigies are effective in dispersing crows for a period of time. Following the trials, NParks has integrated the use of bird effigies into its holistic crow management plan, to complement other measures, such as trapping and removal, nest removal and upcoming shooting operations.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Deployment of Mobile LTA Enforcement Cameras in January 2026 and Future Rollout Plans","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"23 Ms Valerie Lee asked the Acting Minister for Transport (a) how many mobile LTA enforcement cameras are being deployed in January 2026; (b) what their deployment purposes are; and (c) whether there are plans to roll out more.
Mr Jeffrey Siow: In January 2026, 85 mobile enforcement cameras were deployed across various hotspots to enforce on active mobility, bus lane and illegal parking offences. The Land Transport Authority will deploy additional cameras based on enforcement needs.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Commuters' Travel Patterns During Circle Line Service Adjustments for Future Planning of Rail Renewal Works","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"24 Mr Gerald Giam Yean Song asked the Acting Minister for Transport (a) what are the findings from the travel patterns of commuters during the ongoing Circle Line service adjustments; (b) what proportion of commuters opted for shuttle buses versus alternative rail lines; and (c) how will these insights into commuter behaviour inform the planning of future long term service closures for rail renewal works.
Mr Jeffrey Siow: Following the first week where around 30,000 commuters tried out the shuttle bus service, weekly ridership for shuttle services has settled at around 20,000. We do not have a precise estimate for the number of commuters using alternative rail lines as commuters are free to move between lines after tapping into the system.
Despite the decrease in peak Circle Line frequencies to facilitate tunnel works, the approach of providing and publicising bus and rail alternatives has kept wait times and loading for trains manageable. Most commuters continue to be able to board the first train, other than at certain busy stretches during the peak hours where higher crowding is observed even without the planned closures. We will incorporate feedback from commuters in refining our provision of alternative travel options for future service adjustments.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Implementation of Fixed Book Price Scheme for Sing Lit Books and Books Written by Singaporean Authors","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"25 Mr Abdul Muhaimin Abdul Malik asked the Acting Minister for Culture, Community and Youth (a) whether the Ministry will consider implementing a Fixed Book Price scheme for Sing Lit books or books written by Singaporean authors, similar to countries like France and Germany; and (b) if not tenable, whether the Ministry will consider introducing a scheme that allows for local books to be set at certain minimum prices.
Mr David Neo: The Ministry of Culture, Community and Youth (MCCY) and the National Arts Council continually review our strategies and support for the literary arts and Singapore Literature (Sing Lit) so that our writers are nurtured, and the impact of their work can be felt in Singaporeans' daily lives.
We also regularly study and learn from the strategies of other nations. We note that views on the Fixed Book Price scheme are mixed. Some claim that it has reduced deep discounting practices while others have cautioned that it limits consumers' ability to benefit from price competition, and that similar objectives could potentially be achieved through more targeted support measures, such as grants or direct subsidies. As Singapore is an open and highly digitalised market, readers also buy books through international e-commerce and parallel channels.
A Fixed Book Price scheme may also impact the affordability and accessibility of Sing Lit to local readers, particularly lower-income Singaporeans. Therefore, instead of setting a minimum price, MCCY has expanded the SG Culture Pass scheme to include local literary works from 1 March 2026. This will help promote Sing Lit to more citizens.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Outreach to Lower-income Singaporeans and Underserved Groups to Encourage Utilisation of SG Culture Pass","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"26 Ms He Ting Ru asked the Acting Minister for Culture, Community and Youth how the Ministry is ensuring that SG Culture Pass utilisation reaches lower-income Singaporeans and groups less likely to attend arts and heritage events, including targeted outreach through social and community agencies.
Mr David Neo: To help Singaporeans benefit from the SG Culture Pass, the Ministry of Culture, Community and Youth (MCCY) has partnered social and community agencies that work directly with groups that could face barriers to access.
Through our partnership with the Agency for Integrated Care, MCCY has organised outings with Active Ageing Centres (AACs) for seniors to attend Culture Pass eligible arts and heritage events. We work with AACs to curate suitable events, arrange transport and logistics, and assist seniors with ticket purchases using their Culture Pass credits. For seniors with mobility challenges in nursing homes, we arrange for eligible programmes to be conducted onsite.
MCCY works closely with People's Association to reach communities through their Resident Networks and Community Centres, organising outings to help Singaporeans utilise their Culture Pass credits. We will bring more Culture Pass eligible events to the heartlands so that Singaporeans can access them easily.
The WeCare Arts Experience (WCAE) fund has also been expanded to include Culture Pass eligible programmes. This means that Social Service Agencies and grassroots organisations can apply for the WCAE to defray transport and other logistics costs, so that their beneficiaries (including low-income families and seniors) can more conveniently access and participate in the programmes offered by the Culture Pass.
MCCY will continue to partner social and community agencies so that even more Singaporeans can enjoy our local arts and heritage through the SG Culture Pass.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Clarification by Minister of State for Health","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WS","content":"[(proc text) The following statement was made by the Minister of State for Health (Ms Rahayu Mazam) in reply to Question No 8 during Question Time at the Sitting of 4 March 2026: (proc text)]
The Minister of State for Health (Ms Rahayu Mahzam): Overall, MOH's operating expenditure maintains an upward trajectory. The revised FY2025 estimate of $18.49 billion is $1.63 billion, or 9.7%, higher than the actual FY2025 operating expenditure. The trend of increase will continue, as shown by the estimated FY2026 operating expenditure of $20.04 billion. [Please refer to \"Reason for Lower-than-projected Health Ministry Operating Expenditure in FY2025\", Official Report, 4 March 2026, Vol 96, Issue 24, Oral Answers to Questions section.]
[(proc text) Written statement by Ms Rahayu Mahzam circulated with the leave of the Speaker, in accordance with Standing Order No 29(5). (proc text)]
I wish to make the following factual correction to my statement made during Question Time at the Sitting on 4 March 2026. My statement should read as follows:
The Minister of State for Health (Ms Rahayu Mahzam): Overall, MOH's operating expenditure maintains an upward trajectory. The revised FY2025 estimate of $18.49 billion is $1.63 billion, or 9.7%, higher than the actual FY2024 operating expenditure. The trend of increase will continue, as shown by the estimated FY2026 operating expenditure of $20.04 billion.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null}],"writtenAnswersVOList":[],"writtenAnsNAVOList":[],"annexureList":[],"vernacularList":[{"vernacularID":6893,"sittingDate":null,"vernacularTitle":"Vernacular Speech by Ms Goh Hanyan","filePath":"d:/apps/reports/solr_files/20260304/vernacular-Goh Han Yan MSE 4Mar2026 -Chinese.pdf","fileName":"Goh Han Yan MSE 4Mar2026 -Chinese.pdf"},{"vernacularID":6894,"sittingDate":null,"vernacularTitle":"Vernacular Speech by Ms Sun Xueling","filePath":"d:/apps/reports/solr_files/20260304/vernacular-Sun Xueling MND 4Mar2026_Chinese (mnd).pdf","fileName":"Sun Xueling MND 4Mar2026_Chinese (mnd).pdf"},{"vernacularID":6895,"sittingDate":null,"vernacularTitle":"Vernacular Speech by Dr Syed Harun Alhabsyi","filePath":"d:/apps/reports/solr_files/20260304/vernacular-4 Mar 2026 - SPS Dr Syed Harun - Reply to MND Cuts.pdf","fileName":"4 Mar 2026 - SPS Dr Syed Harun - Reply to MND Cuts.pdf"},{"vernacularID":6896,"sittingDate":null,"vernacularTitle":"Vernacular Speech by Mr Alvin Tan","filePath":"d:/apps/reports/solr_files/20260304/vernacular-Alvin Tan MND 4Mar2026 - Chinese (mnd).pdf","fileName":"Alvin Tan MND 4Mar2026 - Chinese (mnd).pdf"},{"vernacularID":6897,"sittingDate":null,"vernacularTitle":"Vernacular Speech by Mr Baey Yam Keng","filePath":"d:/apps/reports/solr_files/20260304/vernacular-Baey Yam Keng MOT 4Mar2026 -Chinese (MOT).pdf","fileName":"Baey Yam Keng MOT 4Mar2026 -Chinese (MOT).pdf"}],"onlinePDFFileName":""}