1 Ms See Jinli Jean asked the Minister for Home Affairs in light of the rise in accidents involving motorcyclists, whether the Ministry will consider (i) partnering with NTUC’s National Delivery Champions Association that represents freelance delivery riders to introduce a structured safe riding programme for freelancers using motorcycles for delivery work and (ii) working closely with motor insurers to enhance safety awareness among motorcyclists and motorists.
\tThe Minister of State for Home Affairs (Assoc Prof Dr Muhammad Faishal Ibrahim) (for the Minister for Home Affairs): We welcome partnerships with organisations to enhance road safety. The Traffic Police will reach out to the organisations mentioned by the Member.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Alternative Accessibility Solutions for Wheelchair-bound Residents in HDB Blocks where Lift Upgrading Programme Remains Unfeasible","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"2 Mr Yip Hon Weng asked the Minister for National Development in view of the challenges faced by wheelchair-bound residents in HDB blocks where the Lift Upgrading Programme remains unfeasible and who are unwilling or unable to relocate using the Lift Access Housing Grant (a) whether the Ministry will further explore and provide details of alternative accessibility solutions; and (b) how is the Ministry engaging with the affected residents to understand their specific needs beyond relocation.
\tThe Minister of State for National Development (Assoc Prof Dr Muhammad Faishal Ibrahim) (for the Minister for National Development): Mr Speaker, the Lift Upgrading Programme, or LUP in short, was introduced in 2001. Since then, the Housing and Development Board (HDB) has successfully implemented LUP in more than 5,000 blocks which were originally built without direct lift access.
Today, around 99% of all HDB blocks were either built with direct lift access or benefited from the LUP. We recognise that there remains about 1% of blocks which have been unable to benefit from LUP due to high costs or technical constraints. For households in such blocks, they may tap on HDB’s Lift access Housing Grant, or LHG in short, of up to $30,000 to help them buy a replacement flat with direct lift access.
I encourage households with pressing accessibility needs to approach HDB for assistance so that HDB can better understand their needs and explore suitable options with them.
\tMr Speaker: Mr Yip.
\tMr Yip Hon Weng (Yio Chu Kang): Thank you, Mr Speaker. I thank the Minister of State for his reply. I have several such blocks in Yio Chu Kang which do not have direct lift access, like Blocks 642 and 648. Residents who have lived in this estate for decades now have mobility issues. Asking them to take up the LHG and move out of their home and the community that they are familiar with, is not really an option for them.
Can the Ministry share more about the cost-benefit analysis of accessibility of options, such as creating lift options and compared against relocation grants? The Ministry has also previously shared that they are looking into alternative solutions using technology. Is there a timeline for this?
\tAssoc Prof Dr Muhammad Faishal Ibrahim: Sir, I thank the Member for the supplementary questions. I would like to assure the Member that we will continue to explore additional viable options to assist the residents affected on this matter. I shared in my answer that the Member can refer the households with such pressing accessibility needs to the HDB so that we can better understand their needs and explore suitable options with them.
\tMr Speaker: Assoc Prof Jamus Lim.
\tAssoc Prof Jamus Jerome Lim (Sengkang): I have a related question about the parameters that go into the thinking behind the overall LUP. This deviates a little bit from the accessibility issue, but in Sengkang, the district I represent, we have a large number of Sigma and LG lifts. When we appealed for consideration for the LUP, it was suggested to us that it would only be 30 years, which is the standard timeline for the LUP. Is there any scope for the variation in terms of how soon the LUP may be rolled out? Is there scope for reconsideration of this timeline?
\tAssoc Prof Dr Muhammad Faishal Ibrahim: Sir, I thank the Member for the supplementary question. As the Member has made the request, I am sure HDB is looking at it. But as it is in another area or scope of lift matters, the Member may like to file another Parliamentary Question.
\tMr Speaker: Mr Dennis Tan.
\tMr Dennis Tan Lip Fong (Hougang): Thank you, Mr Speaker. I thank the Minister of State for the answers. The Minister of State mentioned about making an appeal to affected residents to approach them to discuss options. Could the Minister of State elaborate on what are these options and what are the likely cost of these other options?
\tAssoc Prof Dr Muhammad Faishal Ibrahim: Sir, every block is unique and every unit is unique, so it is important for us to better understand the different specifications and the unique needs of each household. So, I would like to urge the Member to ask any resident who face such an issue to approach the HDB.
\tMr Speaker: Mr Singh.
\tMr Pritam Singh (Aljunied): Just a question for the Minister of State on lift accessibility. Has HDB done any detailed study on the prospect of stair-lifts for certain affected units where seniors have serious mobility issues?
For example, it could be half landings where the resident has to access at least a good six to eight steps before reaching the lift lobby. Is that something which the Ministry is looking at, particularly since the construction of new lift shafts for some of these affected units is not really viable financially?
\tAssoc Prof Dr Muhammad Faishal Ibrahim: Sir, I thank the Member for the supplementary question. Yes, we have looked at issues relating to stair-lifts. There are considerations like safety, technical constraints, in regard to these. Like what I shared with Mr Yip earlier, we will continue to explore some of these alternatives and options. At the end of the day, we want to see how those are viable and possible for us to do.
\tMr Speaker: Mr Singh.
\tMr Pritam Singh: Have stair-lifts been installed anywhere in Singapore in HDB flats with the half-landing problem?
\tAssoc Prof Dr Muhammad Faishal Ibrahim: From my recollection, no stair-lifts have been installed yet, at this moment, unless there are certain specifications as part of the LUP. So, I think what is key is that while we install infrastructure or devices, we have to look at some aspects in terms of fire safety and other aspects like the technical constraints that may be there.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Savings Scheme to Pool Undisbursed Payouts from Nurses Retention Scheme","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"The following question stood in the name of Mr Xie Yao Quan –
3 To ask the Minister for Health regarding the long-term retention scheme for nurses in the public healthcare system as announced on 20 February 2024, whether the Ministry will consider creating a savings scheme to pool undisbursed payouts to protect the value of these future payouts against inflation.
Mr Yip Hon Weng (Yio Chu Kang): Question No 3.
The Senior Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Health (Ms Rahayu Mahzam) (for the Minister for Health): Mr Speaker, the question has been addressed by the written reply to Question No 8 for Oral answer on 4 March 2024. I invite the Member to seek clarification, if need be. [Please refer to \"Inclusion of Inflation-adjusted Metric to Payouts in Scheme to Retain Nurses\", Official Report, 4 March 2024, Vol 95, Issue 129, Written Answers to Questions for Oral Answer not Answered by End of Question Time section.]
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Mobile Phone Reception Coverage in Lifts in New HDB Developments to Facilitate Emergency Calls","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"4 Dr Tan Wu Meng asked the Minister for National Development (a) to what extent is there a requirement and provisioning for mobile phone reception coverage in the lifts of new HDB developments; (b) whether there can be clear requirements specified to ensure that persons can call for help in emergency situations where they cannot exit the lift and cannot physically reach the lift alarm button or if the lift alarm button has malfunctioned.
\tThe Senior Minister of State for National Development (Ms Sim Ann) (for the Minister for National Development): Lifts in Housing and Development Board (HDB) developments are designed and installed in compliance with the prevailing Codes and Regulations, and requirements set by relevant Authorities.
As part of the Infocomm Media Development Authority's (IMDA’s) quality-of-service standards, mobile operators are required to provide more than 85% service coverage in each building. There is no requirement to provide mobile coverage inside lifts. It is challenging to ensure good mobile coverage inside lifts, due to the enclosed metallic structure of lifts.
Lifts in HDB developments are equipped with and monitored by the Tele-Monitoring System (TMS), which can automatically detect a lift breakdown and alert the lift maintenance contractors.
When the alarm button is pressed during a lift breakdown, an alert will be sent via the TMS to the Essential Maintenance Services Unit (EMSU), which will then dispatch a rescue team to assist anyone who may be trapped. Additionally, residents outside the lifts will be able to hear the alarm and can call the EMSU hotline displayed at the lift lobby for assistance.
Lifts in HDB developments generally also have vision panels installed in the lift doors, which allow residents at the lift lobby to tell if a lift has broken down and whether there are affected users inside. The alarm button inside the lifts is usually one of the lowest buttons for easy reach and is checked regularly by the lift maintenance contractors.
\tMr Speaker: Dr Tan.
\tDr Tan Wu Meng (Jurong): Mr Speaker, I thank the Senior Minister of State for her detailed answer. I would like to raise a couple of supplementary questions, questions on behalf of my Clementi residents, in particular residents at Clementi Peaks, which is a very new precinct, brand new.
Some of the lifts at Clementi Peaks have issues with mobile reception inside. My residents have observed this. And I and my grassroots leaders, having gone in the lifts and actually done a survey of the lifts, have noticed that in some of the Clementi Peaks lifts. Can I put two questions to the Ministry of National Development (MND)?
Firstly, would it shape HDB and IMDA's future planning norms to consider the scenario of a lift breakdown, where for whatever unfortunate reason, the alarm button at the same time is also not working?
Secondly, would it also shape HDB and IMDA's planning requirements to consider the scenario where an elderly resident has fallen in a lift or had a medical emergency, let us say late at night, and is not physically able to reach the alarm button and therefore mobile phone reception would be their key lifeline for help? And I hope agencies may consider this amidst our ageing population.
\tMs Sim Ann: I thank Dr Tan. As I have explained, at the moment, there are no planning requirements for mobile coverage within HDB lifts. And my understanding is that it is not included in IMDA's requirement for coverage because human traffic there is transient, along with other places within a building. Also, from the perspective of what happens when there is a breakdown and the possibility of rescue being required, I have also outlined the existing safety features that HDB lifts are equipped with.
Nevertheless, we acknowledge that there may be times where residents or volunteers notice that the mobile coverage in HDB lifts might be weak and would like it to be made stronger, in which case HDB will work with the telecommunications operators to discuss with them and also to see if coverage can be boosted. In the case of Clementi Peaks, we will follow up.
\tMr Speaker: Mr Gerald Giam.
\tMr Gerald Giam Yean Song (Aljunied): Sir, can I ask the Senior Minister of State if the 80% to 85% coverage includes car parks in HDB estates? Some residents in my new estate in Tampines have reported some patchy coverage.
\tMs Sim Ann: Sir, I have with me a list of areas that are excluded from the framework where IMDA sets out a baseline requirement of 85% coverage.
The areas excluded are those where human traffic is transient. These include bomb shelters, store rooms, toilets within individual premises, lifts, plant rooms, mechanical and engineering (M&E) rooms, lift motor rooms, lift houses, water tank areas, warehouses, ventilation facilities, vaults, in-building car parks located at second levels of basements and below, all in-home basements of private landed residential properties, mechanical and plant facilities, rooms and emergency stairways.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Government Grants to Support Marquee Events and Considerations in Decision-making","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"5 Mr Don Wee asked the Minister for Trade and Industry what considerations do the Singapore Tourism Board give when deciding which artiste or event to disburse grants to.
6 Mr Gerald Giam Yean Song asked the Minister for Trade and Industry (a) when did the Government start supporting marquee performance or sports events through grants; (b) for events taking place in 2024, what are the total grants agreed upon and how many tourists are these events expected to attract; and (c) what are the estimated benefits to the Singapore economy from all these events.
\tThe Minister of State for Trade and Industry (Mr Alvin Tan) (for the Minister for Trade and Industry): Mr Speaker, may I have your permission to take Question Nos 5 and 6 in today's Order Paper together, please?
\tMr Speaker: Yes, please proceed.
\tMr Alvin Tan: Sir, the Singapore Tourism Board (STB) has been supporting leisure events through grants since 1998, to complement other marketing initiatives including campaigns and partnerships. For leisure events that STB has supported, international visitors make up 25% to 30% of the total attendees on average.
Aside from leisure events, STB also supports the development and marketing of new tourism products, rejuvenation of existing tourism offerings, upskilling of our tourism workers and also helping our local tourism companies become more productive and innovative.
STB conducts thorough assessments before providing any grant. These include the qualitative and quantitative benefits of any proposed event, such as its ability to drive foreign visitorship and tourism receipts, incorporate unique and innovative programming and also to profile Singapore as a vibrant and appealing destination. These events are expected to create value by generating more business for our companies here, adding to Singapore's vibrancy and also amplifying Singapore's global brand and international stature.
STB tracks overall international visitor arrivals, tourism receipts and the average length of stay. Members can refer to STB's press release on 1 February 2024 for our tourism sector's performance in 2023.
\tMr Speaker: Mr Don Wee.
\tMr Don Wee (Chua Chu Kang): Thank you, Speaker. I thank the Minister of State for his reply. Considering that other countries in the region are also strengthening their tourism sectors, may I ask, how does our Government maintain our competitiveness and strengthen our tourism competitiveness or proposition?
\tMr Alvin Tan: Sir, I thank Mr Don Wee for his supplementary question. As I mentioned in last Friday's Ministry of Trade and Industry's Committee of Supply, I just want to remind Members that our tourism sector was really hammered by the COVID-19 pandemic. And so, we pumped in $500 million in 2022, the SingapoReDiscover vouchers; we also put in the Job Support Scheme, which the tourism sector benefited from significantly; and also, many different times, myself and my STB colleagues have gone to speak to event organisers in the tourism sector, to keep our offerings open, so people know that Singapore can deliver reliably, even in times of crisis.
Sir, we did that so that we can capture the winds of recovery, which are coming, as I mentioned on Friday. Let me give Members a few different examples. Last year, STB supported the inaugural Olympic Esports Week; we supported Gamescom Asia for two years running; Sneaker Con Southeast Asia, this year 2024; Anime Festival Asia 2024; SG Comic Con 2024; HSBC World Rugby Sevens Series; and the HSBC Women's World Championship for women's golf, which I think Mr Speaker had attended on Sunday as well.
As Mr Don Wee had mentioned: the other governments, other places, other jurisdictions are not standing still. If you look at Australia's state of Victoria, they have a regional tourism events fund; Abu Dhabi has a mega events fund; and Hong Kong too has committed, over three years, HK$100 million to attract and to organise large-scale, international world-class events on its shores.
Mr Speaker, there are two famous lines by a very talented young artist which have been sung and will be echoed by over 300,000 people across six nights at our National Stadium. These two lines are, \"I don't miss a beat,\" and \"I'm lightning on my feet.\"
Sir, STB will continue to be bold, forward-looking, strategic in assessing every single opportunity for Singapore to welcome all of these world-class events, these world-class tourism offerings, to make Singapore an attractive leisure, business destination for people to come, live, work, visit and play. We will certainly be lightning on our feet.
\tMr Speaker: Assoc Prof Jamus Lim.
\tAssoc Prof Jamus Jerome Lim (Sengkang): Sir, having previously spoken about the importance of the economic viability of the Sports Hub and being reasonably convinced that there are indeed spillover effects for such first-mover advantages of STB's, it is nevertheless the case that sometimes there may be negative effects on foreign relations when there are perceptions by other countries that Singapore is kind of hoarding the pie.
And, of course, \"haters gonna hate, hate, hate, hate, hate\". But I am wondering to the extent that STB will work with the Ministry of Foreign Affairs or other agencies, to manage this potential fallout when it comes to international relations, and I had previously spoken about the possibility of foreign aid agencies building up soft power, I am wondering if there is any other efforts by STB or any of the MTI agencies in pushing forward this aspect?
\tMr Alvin Tan: Sir, I thank Assoc Prof James Lim for his questions. The short answer is that we do what is in Singapore's best interests, as any other jurisdiction's government would do for their own jurisdiction's best interests. But if you think about this, if you take a step back, when visitors come from outside of the region and they come to Singapore, there are also attendant benefits because then they may go and visit other tourist sites around the region.
Singapore is a hub. It is a hub, a hive of activity. Connectivity helps and it also supports and benefits our neighbours around the region. So, we do what is best for Singapore, but we also understand that Singapore is a hub, a connectivity hub, and being a vibrant hub also benefits our region and our neighbours as well.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Enforcement against Retailers and Distributors of Batteries for Non-original Active Mobility Devices","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"7 Mr Yip Hon Weng asked the Minister for Transport in view of the rise in fires caused by active mobility devices (AMDs) in 2023 (a) what are the Ministry’s plans to carry out enforcement against the retailers and distributors of non-original AMD batteries; and (b) whether the Ministry intends to increase the penalties for individuals who are found to have tampered with or modified their AMD batteries.
\tThe Senior Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Transport (Mr Baey Yam Keng) (for the Minister for Transport): Mr Speaker, any motorised personal mobility device (PMD) or power-assisted bicycle (PAB) that uses non-original batteries is non-compliant. It is an offence to illegally modify, sell or use such devices on public paths. The Land Transport Authority (LTA) conducts enforcement on paths and operations against retailers. From January 2020 to December 2023, LTA detected about 5,100 offences involving non-compliant devices on paths. [Please refer to \"Clarification by Senior Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Transport\", Official Report, 5 March 2024, Vol 95, Issue 130, Correction By Written Statement section.]
In the same period, LTA detected about 100 violations from operations against retailers. LTA does not track cases specifically involving non-original batteries. Non-compliant devices are immediately seized and enforcement actions are taken.
For first-time offenders, the maximum penalty for using a non-compliant device on a public path is a fine of up to $10,000 or imprisonment for up to six months or both; the maximum penalty for retailer companies displaying a non-compliant device for sale is a fine of up to $20,000; and the maximum penalty for individuals illegally modifying a device is a fine of up to $20,000 or imprisonment for up to 24 months or both. We will press on with our enforcement and public education efforts, and will review the need for further measures.
\tMr Speaker: Mr Yip.
\tMr Yip Hon Weng (Yio Chu Kang): Thank you, Mr Speaker, I thank the Senior Parliamentary Secretary for his reply. I have two supplementary questions. Beyond enforcement, is the Ministry considering collaborating with retailers and distributors to educate consumers on identifying safe and certified active mobility device (AMD) batteries? Second, given the rise in some of these fires involving AMDs, is the Ministry considering stricter safety regulations for all AMDs, including mandatory fire retardant casings or automatic shut-off mechanisms for some of these machines?
\tMr Baey Yam Keng: Yes, LTA already engages PAB retailers for them to collaborate with the National Delivery Champions Association to conduct workshops on the safe use of some of the more popular PAB brands used by delivery riders.
On a more general basis, the LTA and Singapore Civil Defence Force co-chair an Active Mobility Fire Safety Taskforce that coordinates efforts to raise awareness among the public of fire safety and proper use of devices, whether through face-to-face interactions or through social media.
On additional requirements for fire retardant features of the devices, if the devices are compliant with the standards – we have separate standards for PMDs and PABs – these batteries should work if they are used properly and charged in a proper manner. The authorities will continue to review these standards and also consider the suggestion by the Member on whether additional device features are needed for better fire safety.
\tMr Speaker: Mr Dennis Tan.
\tMr Dennis Tan Lip Fong (Hougang): Thank you, Mr Speaker. I thank the Senior Parliamentary Secretary for his answers. The Senior Parliamentary Secretary highlighted the harsh punishments when retailers are caught with selling illegal batteries or devices. Can the Senior Parliamentary Secretary share with the House, despite these harsh punishments, what are the challenges that LTA face in trying to clamp down on the number of retailers selling illegal devices as well as illegal batteries? And are there any new plans that LTA may have to deal with the continuing import of illegal batteries and devices?
\tMr Baey Yam Keng: We can only conduct operations against retailers when they have a physical shop. But what we find is that a lot of people or riders purchase their devices online and some of these sources are overseas. That is where we will have challenges in enforcing against such online retailers. I would like to remind the public that, especially for electronic devices, it is critical to ensure that these devices are meant for use in Singapore and comply with the regulations in Singapore.
For some of these devices, they may be purported to be very good and very reasonably priced, but they may be constructed for use in a different climate, in different terrain, than Singapore's. So, I would urge consumers to keep their eyes and ears open, and look out for the right devices to purchase.
\tMr Speaker: Dr Tan Wu Meng.
\tDr Tan Wu Meng (Jurong): I thank the Senior Parliamentary Secretary for his answer. I have got two questions to follow up with the Ministry of Transport. Firstly, I note that the Senior Parliamentary Secretary said, currently the agencies can only conduct enforcement operations on physical shops, when the physical shop is selling a non-compliant device or battery that might be a fire risk. Would the Ministry consider, looking at ways to conduct enforcement operations against online platforms with a presence in Singapore, with an office in Singapore, that may have facilitated the sale of a non-compliant battery that is a fire risk?
Secondly, would the Ministry also look at a way of establishing some kind of supplier responsibility in this vein as well? Because that way, the online platform, if they know they face some liability if they facilitate the sale of an unsafe product and someone is injured or dies, that is a very strong incentive for the platform to take some responsibility as well for what they are selling or intermediating.
\tMr Baey Yam Keng: I thank Dr Tan for the question. I need to add to my earlier reply that if the online retailer or platform is based in Singapore and we are able to reach those platforms, and we know of non-compliant devices being sold or being placed as an advertisement on the platforms, we will reach out to these online retailers and ask them to take down or stop the sale of such devices. There is no law per se, but we are currently reviewing how we can strengthen this aspect of regulation.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"School Educators' Awareness of Academic and Practice Pathways for Emerging Careers","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"8 Ms See Jinli Jean asked the Minister for Education (a) whether the Ministry requires all secondary school educators to be familiarised with the academic and practice pathways to benchmark and emerging careers under the future economic clusters; and (b) if not, whether the Ministry will consider doing so.
\tThe Minister of State for Education (Ms Gan Siow Huang) (for the Minister for Education): Mr Speaker, our secondary school teachers can learn about trends in career pathways and skills in demand from Education and Career Guidance (ECG) counsellors in the school. The Ministry of Education (MOE) also organises programmes for teachers to engage with industry partners and economic agencies during industry networking sessions to gather insights and knowledge about the future economic clusters.
\tMr Speaker: Ms See, a short supplementary question, please.
\tMs See Jinli Jean (Nominated Member): I thank the Minister of State for the response. I would like to ask, how frequent are these sessions? And given that there has been quite a fair bit of discussions on new careers, such as in AI, how are we working together with the teachers to keep them abreast of these developments so that they can then support the students in selecting careers for the future?
\tMs Gan Siow Huang: I thank the Member for the supplementary question. There are various ways that our teachers gather information regarding future economy and the jobs and skills that are in demand. The MOE headquarters, for example, sends quarterly newsletters to our teachers on the emerging economic clusters.
For our students, we do encourage them to seek guidance from the ECG counsellors who are a lot more plugged in and they are specialists on jobs and skills that are in demand in our economy. More than that, we do encourage our students themselves to be empowered and do their own searches online. MySkillsFuture portal has a treasure trove of information about jobs and skills in demand. Also, we know that there are organisations out there, such as NTUC Youth, that reach out to students to provide mentorship and advice.
\tMr Speaker: 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 2024 to 31 March 2025","subTitle":"Committee of Supply – Paper Cmd 27 of 2024","sectionType":"OS","content":"[(proc text) Order read for consideration in Committee of Supply [5th Allotted Day]. (proc text)]
[Mr Speaker in the Chair]
The Chairman: Head T. Ministry of National Development. Miss Cheryl Chan.
Miss Cheryl Chan Wei Ling (East Coast): Chairman, I beg to move \"That the total sum to be allocated for Head T of the Estimates be reduced by $100\".
Sir, the past two years have seen a slew of initiatives announced by the Ministry of National Development (MND) ranging from the introduction of the Prime Location Housing (PLH) model to the reclassification of flats and enhancing singles' access to public housing. These challenges have generally been met with much appreciation as mitigating solutions against the backdrop of escalating rents and housing prices. I am in full support of Minister Desmond Lee's commitment in ensuring better access and affordable public housing for Singaporeans.
Affordable housing is often a debated topic in cities across the world. It impacts people's lives and their long-term family or career planning. For Singapore, it entails a continuous effort to balance the multitude of conflicting needs from ensuring affordable housing with a growing population and limited land availability, exercising inclusivity for different segments in society and evolving our public housing to meet the future aspirations of Singaporeans.
With a record 9,250 private housing units released in 2023, the highest in a decade, and the Housing and Development Board's (HDB's) 2024 target to complete 19,600 Build-To-Order (BTO) flats amongst other initiatives, housing supply has increased significantly, with signs of a property market appearing to abate. I wish to ask the Minister to provide a holistic picture of how MND intends to address the housing demand in the next five years.
Further, I hope to hear how more effort will be placed to support the following three group of people for their housing needs.
First, interim housing for divorcees with special needs children. A divorce and its aftermath are always challenging to deal with, much less for individuals who have to single-handedly care for special needs children in the process of the divorce. The challenges exacerbate when they have no certainty of a place to live in when the matrimonial flat is going to be sold. Without a final Court judgment, they are also unable to rent interim housing from HDB and most have difficulty renting from the open market since the landlords are unwilling to rent any rooms, given their child's condition.
Under the Parenthood Provisional Housing Scheme (PPHS), married couples and family units who have booked an uncompleted unit are able to obtain interim rental from HDB. In Budget 2024, more concessions and expansion have been made to these couples and families via the PPHS Open Market Voucher. While these initiatives align with Singapore's pro-family stance, in which I am also supportive, we cannot overlook and deny the evolving and changing family structure that is happening.
Will MND consider providing interim housing for divorcees with special needs children and are still in the process of finalising their divorce, or provide a scheme that is quite similar to that of a PPHS Open Market voucher?
The second group, seniors who have no family support. With an ageing population in Singapore, much has been discussed on how best to age in place. Many initiatives have been introduced, ranging from the Lease Buyback Scheme (LBS) to the introduction of 3G flats, Married Child Priority Scheme to encourage intergenerational living and even subsidies to enable an elder-friendly home.
More recently, the Community Care Apartments in Bukit Batok, whereby residential units will be integrated with a hawker centre, activity centre and community gardens, have proven to be popular for its refreshed idea in enabling ageing well, while not institutionalising residential living in a nursing home. Indeed, it is heart-warming to see how HDB has evolved in designing housing spaces based on multigenerational assumptions to allow more solitary seniors to mingle. While the hardware and infrastructure are essential for ageing in place, the psychological and emotional aspects of our seniors cannot be neglected. I would like to ask MND for more information on the progress of the Age Well SG scheme?
The third group, families with a foreigner spouse. With Singaporeans being more globalised, there is an increasing trend of cross-national marriages. I have received many anecdotal sharings during the Meet-the-People sessions and interactions with my residents where some revealed that having a foreigner spouse makes them feel disadvantaged living in Singapore, the reason being as they relocate back from overseas work or they married a foreign spouse with plans to set up their family in Singapore, they encounter difficulties in securing affordable home options with their spouse as a family unit.
Family planning is always critical for many of them and access to public housing is an important first step as they enter a different phase in their lives. Today, their access to BTO or Sale of Balance Flats (SBF), grants and housing loan assessment, are impacted if their spouse is not already a Permanent Resident (PR). While I totally understand the rationale of the current rules are meant to protect our public housing supply, which is already heavily subsidised, there is an increasing group of Singaporeans who need homes to raise the next generation. Could we not consider some form of additional rules to be added to existing ones so that we can also enable support to this group of Singaporeans?
Sir, home ownership will always be an emotional topic for every individual and families. After all, it is the roof over our heads that give us peace of mind to focus on work and to raise families and also other aspects of life. While I acknowledge MND has certainly put in tremendous efforts to ensure Singaporeans have access to affordable homes, the work will continue and it needs to continue to evolve as we deal with the changing family unit structures and the future aspiring lifestyles of our population.
[(proc text) Question proposed. (proc text)]
Mr Pritam Singh (Aljunied): Sir, in August last year, HDB confirmed that it had completed 72% of BTO projects that were delayed due to COVID-19 disruptions. In addition, 28% of the BTO projects delayed by the pandemic remain under construction. For these projects, around 22,000 affected households will progressively receive their keys by the first quarter of 2025 or earlier.
Sir, the pandemic did not just affect the contractors who build our BTO flats. It also affected contractors who are involved in other major HDB works, such as electricity load upgrading projects, car park upgrading projects, amongst others, all of which are multi-year projects. In my constituency of Eunos in Aljunied Group Representation Constituency (GRC), one particular car park upgrading project has been ongoing for a considerable period of time, with the expected completion date of the project extended two times already.
Can the Minister share how many of such HDB improvement projects, including those undertaken on HDB's behalf by Town Councils, have been affected by contractors facing difficulties, as manifested by the number of extensions requested, and how many remain uncompleted?
Contract extensions also come with an increase in costs that were not considered originally for HDB projects that are undertaken by Town Councils. Re-tendering a partly-completed project at current prices means that costs will have to be incurred. Would HDB consider helping contractors and Town Councils with additional support to complete these projects, the disruptions of which could not have been anticipated at the time of tender, if necessary?
Mr Chairman: Mr Henry Kwek, please take your two cuts together.
Mr Kwek Hian Chuan Henry (Kebun Baru): Mr Chairperson, I would first like to talk about housing affordability for young couples. I would like to ask MND how it can ensure that Singaporeans, especially young couples who have just entered the workforce, can afford their first BTO flats? In particular, I would like to talk about one specific group. These are the young couples from low-income households who are looking to settle down soon. I think that across the board, the schemes' affordability for most young couples is good. It is this particular group that I am more concerned about, which is, the young couples from low-income households looking to settle down soon.
Sir, some of these people in this category of households, upon graduation, need to contribute immediately to the finances of their immediate families. Even if they are both working, it could take time or years for this group to save up for the downpayment for the BTO, especially if they applied for the BTO during their student days.
Is there more that MND and HDB can do to ease the cash flow burden of this particular group of young Singaporeans so that they can be financially secure to start their family?
Deputy Prime Minister Lawrence Wong has shared that HDB will roll out its first Plus project later this year. Can MND share more details and examples of the likely level of subsidies, as well as the broad pricing trends of Plus and Prime housing in the coming two to three years so as to ensure that both of these categories of flats will remain within the reach of Singaporeans from different income groups?
And how much additional subsidies will HDB have to allocate for the Plus and Prime housing in the coming years? I understand that HDB can only provide a range of estimates of additional budget, but those estimates will be helpful.
Mr Leong Mun Wai (Non-Constituency Member): Mr Chairman, the Progress Singapore Party (PSP) welcomes the Government's move to support the urgent housing needs of couples who are waiting for their BTO flats to be completed, with one-year rental vouchers under PPHS.
We are happy to see that the Government has further recognised that rental apartments play an important role in meeting the housing needs of our younger Singaporeans. However, the PPHS voucher scheme is temporary and may drive up rents for some groups of Singaporean tenants, such as single mothers, LGBTs and couples who do not qualify under PPHS.
We urge the Government to go further and consider PSP's Millennial Apartments Scheme as a new policy to develop rental apartments into a viable, alternative housing for younger Singaporeans.
PSP's Millennial Apartments Scheme is a strategy to make up for the inherent long waiting time under the BTO scheme and to address the current acute shortage of alternative housing options for married couples, young families or groups of singles. The long waiting time for BTO flats is widely regarded to have a significant negative effect on our Total Fertility Rate (TFR).
Millennial apartments are smaller in size, so HDB can build more flats on the same plot of land to ease the current housing pressure. The smaller quality rental flats are rented out on a two- to five-year basis for Singaporeans who are waiting for their BTO flats or singles who want to live independently.
This will provide medium-term housing stability for young Singaporeans while they figure out their life plans and longer-term housing needs. The Millennial Apartments Scheme is also a strategy to rejuvenate our Central Business District (CBD) and mature estates by creating a vibrant young community in each of them.
In place of the Prime and Plus Housing schemes, Progress Singapore Party recommends that affordable, high-quality interim rental apartments to be built at these locations to offer a broad range of young Singaporeans a chance to live in a prime area at least once in their lifetime. By concentrating young people together, we can even improve their prospects on dating apps that work by location.
By having our young people living, working and socialising in these locations, our CBD and surrounding areas can become more vibrant like Shibuya and Shinjuku in Tokyo or Tsim Sha Tsui in Hong Kong.
The older mature estates, such as Marine Parade, Bedok and Ang Mo Kio, need rejuvenation too. These estates were developed rapidly within a short period of time and their 99-year leases will consequently come to an end at about the same time. The demographic profile of these estates is also becoming older. We can start redeveloping these estates now, by redeveloping some older blocks of flats into Millennial Apartments.
We hope that the Millennial Apartments Scheme will be a game-changer that will relief the pressure on couples to rush to secure a flat and give young Singaporeans more choice to fulfil their aspirations. I urge all young Singaporeans to consider and decide for yourself whether Progress Singapore Party's Millennial Apartments Scheme is superior to what the People's Action Party Government has to offer today.
Mr Xie Yao Quan (Jurong): Chairman, I have said before that the current eligible age of 35 years old for singles to own HDB flats is appropriate. I still think so. That said, I have also called on the Government to consider co‐living facilities in the heartlands to allow young singles to live, work and play together before they move on to different phase in life, essentially short-term, flexible rental for young singles.
And HDB does not have to do this by itself. There is, today, a vibrant market with commercial players so HDB can partner private operators, but set standards, including in pricing and affordability; and take the lead in developing the market. This will further enhance housing options for our singles to meet their diverse needs and aspirations.
Mr Chua Kheng Wee Louis (Sengkang): Chairman, having a roof over one's head is a necessity in a person's life. Even as the Forward Singapore exercise ostensibly shows that the condominium is no longer part of the Singapore dream, having a place to stay, even on a rented basis, provides a sense of stability, security and shelter.
Over a year ago, I asked the Minister whether the Government would consider providing further market subsidies for qualifying applicants for schemes, like the PPHS and the Public Rental Scheme (PRS), in order to support young parents. I have also suggested that we cannot rely on the open market to be a catch-all solution for the people who are unable to avail themselves of such rental schemes.
At the time, the response from the Minister was that providing subsidies or grants for renting flats in the open market is likely to induce demand and drive up market rents, which will compound rather than help solve problems. As such, we have no plans to provide such rental subsidies. I am gratified that MND and HDB have finally changed its policies in response to feedback, even if it includes one brought up by an Opposition Member of Parliament.
I agree with the MND's plans to provide more varied rental options, such as piloting new service apartments and shared facility public rental housing and more importantly, provide subsidies for couples needing help in renting from the open market. These are the first steps on a broader path to meeting varied housing needs, something which I have raised in an adjournment Motion in Parliament in 2021. I would also like to thank the Minister for increasing his tolerance of potential distortionary effects from subsidies. I am sure the couples that stand to benefit from the subsidies are likewise appreciative.
Although the growth in rent has moderated, we cannot rest on our laurels. The need for more widespread rental options to support the wider population beyond specific targeted group remains. From demographic groups like S Pass holders who need a place to stay to individuals who need to move out on their own for varied reasons, the demand in the market for affordable housing, even if on a temporary basis, remains.
Even other Ministries are not blind to this problem. In August last year, the Ministry of Health (MOH) sought operators for a planned series of hostels for the foreign healthcare workforce, recognising that they needed support in finding affordable accommodation. Sir, this intervention is illustrative of how affordable rental housing is still very much a work in progress, despite efforts to the contrary. Seventy-percent of S-Pass holders currently reside in rented HDB flats.
We need to ensure that rental accommodation options are expanded to prevent the crowding out of local demand for HDB flats. To that end, I would like to ask the Minister the following: The Forward Singapore exercise has emphasised that there will be an affordable home for every budget and need; and that the public housing programmes need to be updated. In that regard, can the Minister share whether the rental programmes are also in line for updating and expansion beyond these pilots?
Ms Carrie Tan (Nee Soon): Mr Chairman, there is great comfort in having a nice home to rest and recharge in – physically, emotionally and mentally. For some people, a restful home may be an elusive concept if there is frequent conflict, arguments or violence in their families.
The roughly 50,000 households under the PRS today, do not have this luxury of a restful home because of space constraints. Another group is young singles below 35 that I meet often in my Meet-the-People sessions, who are unable to have a restful home because of chronic toxicity or conflicts in their familial relationships. The third group are single parents, who struggle to find resources for care in order to hold down jobs.
Local research has shown that the causes of inequality and poverty in Singapore is more complicated than we assume. More Singaporeans now recognise and have empathy for the physical and mental hazards of public rental living. An informal poll I conducted on my Facebook page, revealed overwhelming support for more to be done for public rental housing.
The Government can provide better options – co-living options for singles, communal living formats and better-designed public rental flats, so that restful, pleasant and supportive homes can be made available to everyone.
As I have shared in my earlier adjournment Motion on this topic, experience in other countries have shown that living environments have the power to increase self-esteem and confidence which in turn motivates individuals, contributing to positive rehabilitative outcomes. Commune-based living formats can foster effective mutual support and resource-sharing for those, who otherwise struggle by themselves, such as single parent families.
For young people, living apart from their families of origin can also help to individuate themselves successfully and healthily. Individuation is the development of a clearer sense of self, separate from our parents and others around them. It is critical in our maturing process and one's mental well-being.
Housing, therefore, can help us achieve social mobility and well-being outcomes, far beyond just serving the physical function of a shelter. We need to make affordable and pleasant housing options accessible for people in all life stages and circumstances.
I recommend MND to offer more co-living rental housing options for singles at all ages, and de-stigmatise public rental housing from the current image that is, \"only for the poor\". The rent subsidies can be tiered according to each tenant's household and income situation, with lease terms ranging from one to five years, with transition out to home ownership as the eventual goal.
That way, people of diverse backgrounds and circumstances can rent affordably when they need to, as a transition phase. This can bring benefits, such as better social integration and the pulling of diverse social capital that enhances social mobility.
Our public housing projects, such as Pinnacle@Duxton, have won international awards. I dream and I hope that our public rental housing, such as the one just down the road from it at Jalan Kukoh, will one day be no longer known as the slum of Singapore but as a rehabilitative and incubation space for those who eventually emerge from their difficult circumstances, like phoenixes from adversity.
Mr Muhamad Faisal Bin Abdul Manap (Aljunied): Sir, I will touch on four matters related to HDB's public rental scheme, PRS. First, on the Joint Single Scheme (JSS) Operator-Run, which was launched in December 2021. I would like to ask, how many applications HDB received in 2022 and 2023 and what is the success rate?
Second, I have encountered more residents seeking help to appeal for a PRS JSS unit but have faced difficulties finding a suitable co-applicant even after receiving a list of potential co-applicants from HDB. Other than the JSS-OR scheme, what other measures are HDB exploring to assist this segment?
Third, how many 3-room PRS units have been created to date? What is the occupancy rate and what are the eligibility criteria for a family wishing to apply for a 3-room PRS unit?
Sir, my final points relate to the challenges faced by single parents who are either unemployed or low-income earners. I have met many of whom, are anxious about housing for themselves and their children following a divorce. While waiting for their matrimonial flat to be disposed of, they are unable to apply for a PRS unit. But if they apply only after the matrimonial unit is sold, they may be in for a long wait before the application for a PRS is approved and a unit is allocated to them.
During the wait, they have no stable housing. In many cases, the financial proceeds from the sales of matrimonial units are insufficient for them to secure a new flat and they also cannot afford renting from the open market. Sir, would HDB consider granting single parents in such situation in-principle approvals, provided they meet the other criteria for a PRS unit?
Mr Xie Yao Quan: Sir, the Government has made major moves to help first-timers, especially parents and married couples to secure and afford a HDB flat. I would to ask, what is the Government's outlook on public housing demand in the next five years? I ask, with the cognisance that forecasting demand is far from a precise science and many people have got it wrong before.
Assoc Prof Jamus Jerome Lim (Sengkang): To date, the Government has approached the issue of urban renewal of public housing in two ways. The Selective En bloc Redevelopment Scheme (SERS), identifies projects for urban renewal. Since August 1995, HDB has identified a total of 78 SERS projects with an additional four in the pipeline. But economic viability of SERS is limited by whether a more intensive redevelopment of a given site is even possible.
Now, this then led to the Government's Voluntary Early Redevelopment Scheme (VERS). There is less clarity about how much compensation exactly this would entail. We have been told to stay tuned, since 2019. But HDB stated that the terms will be less generous than those offered under SERS. The main attraction of VERS then, is that it will offer leaseholders at least a vote to remain in their homes; although doing so, could inadvertently, impede more systematic urban renewal efforts as well as long-term town planning.
Now, while SERS offers non-trivial compensation to affected leaseholders, it has also attracted some controversy especially when residents prefer the status quo of remaining in their homes instead of forced relocation. In contrast, VERS is voluntary, but the Government runs into the difficulty of securing buy-in from residents.
While there is no indication to date as to the voting threshold required for selection, it is by definition more than 0%. In 2019, the Workers' Party released a working paper on alternatives to address the issue of lease decay and affordable housing. Our paper offered policy proposals, including a universal sale and lease buyback scheme, a more widespread SERS programme and an expanded public rental scheme. Our expanded SERS proposal will, however, be bound by similar challenges of ensuring economic viability and securing buy-in as the Government's own programme.
If more intensified redevelopment does not yield sufficient economies of scale in and of itself, the taxpayer will have to absorb part of the costs in the name of the public benefits of urban renewal and ensuring that the population, indeed, has a roof over their heads. One potential middle-ground approach between the largely voluntary nature of VERS and the compulsory stipulation of SERS, is to introduce moving voting thresholds for passage of a VERS project.
These thresholds would shift as the lease winds down, making an upvote easier when renewal needs become ever more pressing. For example, a flat with 50 years' lease remaining may require a 75% supermajority; but one with half the time remaining, could perhaps, only need a simple 50%. This allows homeowners to both have a say on whether they choose to move but at the same time, respect the need for systematic urban renewal.
Ms Nadia Ahmad Samdin (Ang Mo Kio): Chairman, in an expensive open rental market, the PPHS is often families' only practical option for finding a home ahead of their own, ahead of BTO completion. Many of my PAP colleagues and I have called for more rental housing diversity and support. I am grateful for MND's shifts in this regard. It is heartening that HDB has temporarily set aside the catered flats in Tanglin Halt for interim housing, allowing the number of PPHS flats to increase.
I would like to ask. HDB has committed to doubling its supply of flats under PPHS by 2025 and also announced a rental voucher to be used in the open market. What demand-side factors have led to these announcements and why the period of one year, given some BTO flats may take a longer time to complete? Can expectant parents qualify for both schemes and what is the Government's target average waiting time for families to obtain a flat under this scheme? Will the Government explore any kind of priority scheme?
Ms Hazel Poa (Non-Constituency Member): Mr Chairman, the BTO scheme was introduced in 2001 after the Asian Financial Crisis in 1997 resulted in HDB being left with a large stock of unsold flats. One major downside of the BTO scheme is longer waiting times of four years or more.
Young Singaporeans are marrying later and many of them want to have their own homes before marrying or having children. Furthermore, fertility declines with age. This means that the longer waiting time will have an adverse effect on our TFR. Although resale flats and private properties are options for couples to get their homes faster, their prices are much higher and beyond the reach of many. Our TFR has fallen to 0.97 in 2023. This is less than half of the replacement rate of 2.1 and has serious economic and social consequences. How can we adjust our housing policies to arrest the falling TFR and support parenthood?
PSP had proposed the Millennial Apartments Scheme to provide interim rental housing to young people to address this problem. My colleague, Mr Leong Mun Wai, has spoken on this in greater detail earlier.
PSP would also like to propose two other policy changes for consideration which can help young Singaporeans start their families earlier.
One, increase the number of flats with Shorter Waiting Times where flats are built in advance in a departure from the BTO approach to half of the projected annual demand based on marriage and immigration numbers. HDB is currently building about 20,000 units per year on average, but only 2,000 to 3,000 are Shorter Waiting Time flats.
Two, lower the age limit for singles to buy HDB flats to 28 and allow them to buy new 3-room flats. This way, when they find the right partner, they can start their family immediately if they already own a flat.
Low TFR has troubled us for very long. The political will to implement major changes is needed if we really want to turn it around.
Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang (Nee Soon): I am glad that single unwed parents are now allowed to get a public rental flat or buy a BTO flat. However, it is strange that single unwed parents do not qualify for the PPHS. Single parents who are divorced or widowed qualify for PPHS, so why not single unwed parents?
A single unwed parent recently approached me for help. She intends to apply for a BTO flat but like so many Singaporeans, she needs a place to stay while the flat is being built. It is especially difficult for her to rent a room in the open market as many do not want to rent to those with young children. There is also a cost factor. Renting from the open market for more than three years will deplete her savings significantly.
I know we do allow single unwed parents to obtain PPHS but on a case-by-case basis, but this adds stress to someone who is already stressed. Single unwed parents should be treated the same as others when applying for PPHS. We should end the discrimination.
Mr Murali Pillai (Bukit Batok): I welcome Deputy Prime Minister Lawrence Wong’s announcement that the Government will provide one-year PPHS voucher for eligible families to rent HDB flats in the open market. In my Parliamentary Question (PQ) filed in October 2022, I suggested, given the tight supply of PPHS flats, that these couples be provided with grants to enable them to rent flats from the market directly. This is because I met several couples who were balloted out and they were also unable to afford to pay rent.
MND, in its response, stated that such action will, and I quote, “likely induce demand and may drive up market rentals which would be counterproductive as it makes renting more expensive”. Given the Government’s decision, may I ask what steps are being taken to minimise the concern that MND expressed in response to my PQ? Given that the wait for BTOs is usually more than one year, how is it proposed that we deal with the “cliff” effect after the expiry of one year?
Mr Dennis Tan Lip Fong (Hougang): I speak again on the issue of lift upgrading for the six blocks of HDB flats in Hougang SMC, where there are still certain flats which do not have same-floor lift access, as I have done every year since 2021. HDB recently gazetted the Lift Upgrading Programme (LUP) for 10 units of HDB flats at Block 833 Hougang Central. I am glad that HDB has finally agreed to provide LUP to these residents of mine, though I am still none the wiser of why there was a change of mind.
I continue to speak for the remaining five HDB blocks in Hougang. This is a very real issue affecting a number of my residents, especially those with mobility needs requiring assistance to assess the stairs outside their units when they have to go out, not to mention inconveniences or risks when ambulances are dispatched. I have said previously that I would feel the pain when residents told me that their parents or grandparents had to be carried when accessing the stairs next to their unit. Residents also have to pay additional charges for delivery items.
Minister Desmond Lee replied to me at last year's Committee of Supply (COS) that as of January 2023, there were about 140 HDB blocks with units without direct access to lifts on the same floor and that they are due to technical and site constraints or high costs, some of which exceeded $100,000 per unit.
I would like to ask the Government to not just look at the issue of lift access from the angle of cost alone, something that could have been mitigated or avoided if HDB had tendered out lift upgrading projects consisting of the blocks with problematic designs together with other HDB blocks with no design issues for LUP. The Lift Access Housing Grant is not an option for many residents with whom I have spoken to on this issue. It is never easy to ask people to shift to a different address and it is definitely not an empathetic solution. Many residents still cannot accept HDB's explanation of the issue of cost.
I would also like to ask the Government to explain to affected residents of each affected block the true reasons for LUP not being available to that block. Is it due to cost, and if so, how much it would cost and how much would residents have to pay? For residents whose blocks have technical constraints, let the residents know. Please also inform residents of the alternative mechanical options available and the costs involved. And please inform the Town Councils so that they can convey the same explanation when asked.
Next, I would also like to convey some feedback arising from the recent LUP polling exercise at Block 833. One, there are residents in the same block who, while not eligible to vote, may be affected by the LUP construction. For example, their flat may be partially blocked by the new lift shaft, or they have other concerns such as privacy or other disamenity issues. May I ask that in future LUP exercises, views of other affected residents in the same block who may not be eligible to vote should also be sought and taken into consideration in advance during the design stage, before the actual polling and before a design is firmed up.
Two, HDB should have an information centre handling enquiries regarding the LUP at the HDB Hougang office instead of requiring residents to go to one at Serangoon North, since the Hougang office is just a short walk away.
Three, the LUP handbook should be given to residents in the same block much earlier than just one week before the main polling. I also hope that HDB can arrange for a copy of such handbooks to be delivered to the Town Council office at the time of delivery to residents, so that the Town Council and I can refer to it when we attend to residents' feedback on the LUP.
Next, Aljunied-Hougang Town Council was not included in the Working Committee during the design and implementation stage for the LUP. I would like to ask that the Town Council should be included in the Working Committee at the outset, so that it can give its technical input on the design and any considerations based on the Town Council's ground knowledge in managing the common space around the LUP location and certainly well ahead of any straw poll.
Mr Lim Biow Chuan (Mountbatten): Sir, I have several blocks of flats in my constituency which are about 55 to 60 years old. This will be at the Old Airport, Jalan Dua and Jalan Batu area. Sir, I get frequent request for assistance regarding the spalling concrete in the ceilings. Some residents complain that they had carried out repairs to the spalling concrete on several occasions, but the defects recur again and again.
There are also occasions when the slabs of concrete peel off from the ceiling and fall onto the ground. You can even see the steel reinforce bars on the ceiling. Sir, this is alarming and can be unsafe for the residents. I had previously invited HDB to consider some of these flats for SERS, but unfortunately, it was turned down.
Considering the age and conditions of these flats, may I appeal to HDB to prioritise older flats for Home Improvement Programme (HIP) too so that a more comprehensive upgrading works can be done for these flats? In this case, may I volunteer to MND for my block of flats to be prioritised for this HIP too? Then, the residents can then have some assurance that the living environment of their flats will continue to be safe and secure, and that their estate will remain vibrant.
Mr Gerald Giam Yean Song (Aljunied): Mr Chairman, the Lift Replacement Fund was introduced during the 2017 amendment to the Town Council's Act. It addresses the substantial deferred costs associated with lift renewals in our ageing estates. This provision ensures minimum disruption due to lift breakdowns for our residents, notably the elderly, young children and those with mobility challenges. Nevertheless, the current apportionment of service and conservancy charges and Government grants, which is 26% to the Sinking Fund, 14% to the Lift Replacement Fund (LRF), may be precipitating a skewed emphasis towards the LRF.
Looking at the 17 Town Council's latest annual reports, I noticed that for many of them, their LRF is expanding at a significantly faster pace compared to their Sinking Fund. The stipulated use of the LRF may be unduly restrictive. Currently, expensive lift components like their automatic rescue device, the main controller PCB, the emergency battery-operated power supply and the uninterrupted power supply can only utilise the Routine Fund, despite their considerable capital expense.
Hence, I would like to put forth three proposals to MND: first, rebalance the funding distribution between the Sinking Fund and the LRF, slightly increasing the Sinking Fund's proportion and reducing the LRF's proportion; second, broaden the permissible applications of the LRF to encompass all lift components with a lifespan exceeding 10 years; and third, permit Town Councils to transfer funds between the LRF and Sinking Fund to fund necessary cyclical works without compromising the original intent of setting aside adequate reserves for the two funds.
These recommendations seek a more efficient balance between addressing current exigencies and future preparations, assuring all residents benefit from dependable lift and escalator facilities.
The Chairman: Mr Ang Wei Neng, you can take your two cuts together.
Mr Ang Wei Neng (West Coast): Chairman, Mdm Er, a resident of Nanyang, recently approached me with a pressing issue regarding her living situation. Mdm Er and her husband purchased a segmented flat about eight years ago, appreciating its privacy and exclusivity despite its lack of direct access to the lift on the same level. However, their circumstances have changed significantly since then. Their seven-year-old son has been diagnosed with myopathy, causing muscle weakness and rendering him unable to walk independently. As he grows heavier, Mdm Er struggles to carry him up and down the stairs to reach the HDB lift.
Mdm Er's block is one of the 140 HDB blocks in Singapore with segmented flats. Many occupants of these flats purchased their homes when they were young and did not anticipate mobility issues. However, as they age, navigating the stairs to reach the lift becomes increasingly challenging.
While Ms. Er has attempted to apply for the Lift Access Housing Grant, she has encountered numerous hurdles. In addition, it is understood that MND has been hesitant to install lifts at these blocks due to technical challenges, although advancements in technology could potentially address these constraints.
Given Singapore's ageing society, I urge the Minister to allocate more resources to install additional lifts at the mentioned 140 blocks, starting with Nanyang perhaps. We can start a pilot. Even if residents are required to contribute more financially to cover the costs of these additional lifts as compared to other usual Lift Upgrading Programmes, many of them will still likely to support as they treasure their mobility and accessibility needs.
The rapid increase in general construction costs, which rose about 30%-40% from 2021 to 2023, with anticipated further appreciation in 2024. This poses significant challenges for various upgrading projects, such as the Neighbourhood Renewal Programme (NRP), Estate Upgrading Programme (EUP) and Revitalisation of Shops (ROS) Programme, including those in Nanyang. These rising costs have led to budget constraints and the need to sacrifice essential features in the approved projects. For example, in one of my EUP, I have to sacrifice building even the playground as well as these sports facilities for those who exercise.
In light of these challenges, I would like to inquire with MND regarding the frequency of budget reviews for these upgrading programmes. Specifically, whether MND is prepared to provide a one-time fund top-up for approved projects in the last two years to address the impact of escalating construction costs.
It is crucial to ensure that these upgrading programmes continue to effectively enhance the quality of living in our neighbourhoods, despite the financial challenges posed by rising construction costs. Therefore, proactive measures to review and potentially adjust budgets are essential to ensure the successful implementation of these projects and the well-being of residents.
Assoc Prof Jamus Jerome Lim: During last year's Committee of Supply, I shared data that volunteers and I had collected, showing that the difference between coffee shop food in Sengkang versus mature estates amounts to around 50 cents, which is significant for many families. I had suggested then, that the bidding for coffee shop spaces could be altered away from the current price quality method (PQM), to a system where the winning bidder would be awarded the price of the second-highest bid.
This could potentially contain the race to the bottom or race to the top, depending on one's point of view, behaviour of coffee shop operators; and, in turn, short circuit the pass-through of high tender prices to high rents; and, in turn, high rents to high food prices. I am pleased to see that in Sengkang, a new NEA-run hawker centre has opened up in Sengkang Grand Mall in Buangkok and another is slated to open at The Village in Anchorville.
I believe that increased competition among vendors will, at the margin, likewise help control the rapid rate of food price increases seen islandwide since the start of the pandemic. But both of these cannot be the full story. After all, if the Government truly believes that competition alone would be sufficient, it would not have ceased selling coffee shops to private operators since 1998.
It would not need to introduce a substantial weighting in the PQM that includes factors, such as whether budget meals are promised by bidders. Indeed, the Government's own statistics belie this. It was recently revealed to this House that among half of coffee shops owned by HDB, almost all of them did not choose to increase their rentals over the past five years. In contrast, there is no such assurance for private operators. And in our conversations with stall vendors, many have shared that back-breaking rent increases have forced them to either pass-through costs to their meal prices or risk giving up their tenancy altogether.
If we are unconvinced that rental increases may be well-contained by competition alone, it may make sense to return control of our coffee shop to HDB hands with the outright purchasing of existing units if necessary. In addition to being able to exercise greater control over rental price hikes, which it has already demonstrated a willingness to do, this will undoubtedly help Singaporeans who are struggling with expensive meal prices.
But MND can do more. The current strategy is for MND to content itself with working with the budget meal requirement into the PQM matrix and to publicise where one may purchase such cheap meals. But since the framework only requires that vendors offer at least one budget meal, in reality, this translates into each coffee shop offering only a small handful of very plain vanilla options, think fishball noodles or two-vegetables one-meat cai fan or kopi and teh-o. This quickly becomes limited and boring.
One alternative is to incrementally increase the weight placed on the quality of the bid for every additional budget meal the tenderer includes in its bid, or to receive a percentage discount on their final bid price that increases as the number of budget meals offered increases.
Mr Murali Pillai: Sir, in May 2023, HDB required all its rental coffee shops to compulsorily offer budget meal and drink options. These options are featured in HDB's BudgetMealGoWhere website. I have received positive feedback on this and would like to convey my appreciation to HDB.
In the older HDB estates, however, the budget meals and drinks options are still limited. This is because most of the coffee shops there are sold in the open market and not rented from HDB. In July 2023, I suggested that HDB impose the budget meal and drink requirement on such privately-owned coffee shops as a condition for the renewal of permission to use Outdoor Refreshment Areas. The Minister mentioned that HDB is studying the matter. To address current food affordability concerns, I suggest that the study be completed sooner. I also seek an update on the status of the matter.
Miss Cheryl Chan Wei Ling: Sir, in 2021, Urban Redevelopment Authority (URA) engaged the community extensively with its Long-Term Plan Review. The objective was to reimagine Singapore's future together, shaped by Singaporeans aspirations and visions. I personally participated in some of these engagements. It was gratifying to witness the premium that many Singaporeans placed on sustainability and the consistent emphasis of ensuring Singapore is liveable for the future generations.
Leveraging on these engagements, the URA is designing the Draft Master Plan 2025 that details land use for next 10 to 15 years. Saying Singapore has land scarcity is an understatement. Question is, how can we better utilise, transform and reallocate land parcels, visualise and plan future towns to fulfill the changing needs? There is no doubt that land use or exchange for different designated purpose of land parcels receive much scrutiny by the public today. It is even harder when we have to take into consideration the need to preserve our biodiversity or heritage at specific locations.
With more competing needs for land use, what approach is the Ministry adopting to rethink about land allocation, classification of use and preservation of heritage assets in the Draft Master Plan review?
The traditional way of viewing existing land allocation is through the demarcation of the Core Central Region (CCR), Outside Central Region (OCR) and Rest of Central Region (RCR). However, with the growing acceptance of work-from-home and evolving lifestyle needs, there is no longer a need where prime activities are conducted only in central region. People also wish for shorter commutes between where they work, live and play.
This can be seen in the drive for Jurong's transformation and Punggol Digital District. Blurring lines of work and leisure entails new options of how we define new land demarcation. \"Vertical zoning\" of used spaces and increased number of mixed-use developments may become more pronounced. So, what will future industrial areas be like? Can we support more economic activities and build industry verticals that are stacked in the same building or clustered in the same zones?
All these require long-term planning and support from the market-led forces. The infrastructures will also not be complete without the greenery, recreational and transportation nodes that provide connectivity between towns. With Singapore being one of the most densely-populated countries in the world, the decision to conserve native green spaces, regrowth of secondary forests and other forms of vegetated sites will have an impact on our environment. Such planning requires expertise from different domains and even tapping on global experts. As part of the Forward SG movement, may I ask the Minister, how is the Government intending to involve citizens and residents in Singapore as we plan for future land use?
Mr Dennis Tan Lip Fong: Mr Chairman, over the years, this House has raised questions about the urban heat island effect, with studies showing a difference of 7 degrees celsius between urban and less built-up areas of Singapore. Less has been said about the WetBulb Global Temperature (WBGT).
Both the urban heat island (UHI) effect and WBGT, are important indicators of heat-related stress on the human body at work or at play in Singapore. Researching the UHI and the WBGT brings about questions on ensuring liveability and a high quality of life for Singaporeans in the long-term. There are many factors that contribute to liveability but today, I would like to talk about population density as it is a factor that can intensify the UHI.
The overall population density of Singapore is around 8,000 persons per square kilometres. While this may not be near the population density of certain cities, however, given that Singapore is a country and not just a city, once we break it down further to measure the density of actual liveable space, such as by excluding roads, offshore islands or even industrial estates, the reality can be quite different. How do URA and HDB measure the population density of our towns and estates? For example, if and when HDB measures population density of a HDB town, does it use the total land area or the residential area? Taking this distinction from HDB's publication entitled \"Key Statistics – HDB Annual Report 2021-2022\".
Next, how do URA and HDB take into account population density for the building of our towns, estates and residential homes? URA and HDB should assess the population density of our HDB towns and private estates and consider whether we need to make any adjustment to the density of any of our towns or estates. Measuring density by estate is important because when you have high densities in certain regions over others, what the everyday Singaporean experience is the rush of the crowd where they live when they go about their day-to-day activity.
This is further exacerbated by MND's decentralisation strategy, which is to reduce congestion in Singapore by bringing jobs closer to homes. Higher population density is also a key contributor to a higher urban temperature. And while some of the urban temperature caused by UHI can be mitigated through infrastructure planning, the day-to-day rush observed by Singaporeans in denser locales is harder to control.
Does HDB evaluate and compare the population density of all HDB towns to ensure that each town's population density is at a comparable healthy level; and mitigation measures should, perhaps, be carried out to reduce the density in some of the towns with higher density?
For residents of the denser towns and areas, what is being done to reduce the UHI and the WBGT? Can we ensure that upstream planning norms also take into consideration the population density of estates rather than looking at greenfield or brownfield sites available for public and private housing launches? Ultimately, my question to the Government is this: how do we ensure that Singapore remains liveable for the everyday Singaporean, beyond those that have privilege to live in less-dense areas or estates like Bukit Timah or Sentosa?
Ms See Jinli Jean (Nominated Member): Chairman, they are the 20,000-over freelance riders and drivers on foot, two-wheels or four-wheels, who deliver convenience and everyday comforts to us. Delivery freelancers who I speak with in my capacity with NTUC's National Delivery Champions Association (NDCA), share their pride in delivering on time barring terrible weather or traffic.
In turn, how might we ensure that our living spaces are safe work environments for delivery persons?
For instance, gated residences, such as condominiums, often require visitors to register to enter. They might also have designated visitor parking spaces. Those of us who played hosts during the recent Lunar New Year, would surely have desired for your guests to receive a courteous experience at the security post and a safe and easy-to-navigate passage across the compound to your home.
We would not have wanted our guests to bear with the indignities of having to surrender excessive personal data to the security, traverse slippery and uneven surfaces, or locate specific units without visible signages or reliable mobile reception. We would also not have wanted our guests to risk their lives and property because they were disallowed from entering the compound and had to alight at the road.
Worryingly, these are recurring concerns shared by our delivery freelancers. They share that the feedback is often acknowledged by stakeholders, but seldom acted on.
NDCA is involved in a Tripartite Workgroup for Last-mile Delivery led by Urban Redevelopment Authority (URA) and Land Transport Authority (LTA) and comprising other delivery ecosystem stakeholders. We are hopeful that the Workgroup will be a longer-term platform to engender delivery-friendly infrastructure and workflow improvements. Nonetheless, safer, gracious and timely deliveries take more than just hardware.
In this regard, I would like to put forth three questions to the Minister. First, with deliveries becoming a mainstay, would the Ministry consider introducing incentives for mature properties that become delivery-friendly? Second, it is inevitable that disputes might arise between delivery persons and condominium representatives. Would the Ministry consider providing mediation support? Graciousness thrives in an ecosystem where care and consideration are mainstays. How might the Ministry foster care and consideration between condominium representatives, residents and external providers, such as delivery freelancers?
Mr Chong Kee Hiong (Bishan-Toa Payoh): Mr Chairman, in 2021, the Ministry invited Singaporeans to join in the Long-Term Plan Review to share their views on their vision for Singapore's development for the next 50 years and beyond. Based on the collected feedback from that exercise, MND is now working on the detailed land use plans for the next 10 to 15 years in the Draft Master Plan (DMP) 2025.
For DMP 2025, the Ministry is also conducting a public engagement exercise to gain a better understanding of the needs and aspirations of our people for their estates and our nation. Would the Ministry share the criteria for incorporating their suggestions and ideas for Singapore's land use plans? How will MND take into account the feedback from the public while drafting DMP 2025? Can MND provide an update on the main developments that we can look forward to? How is DMP 2025 different from previous master plans?
Given Singapore's limited land, with increasingly more competing uses and development priorities, such as for the expanding agri-food sector, housing, commercial buildings, light and heavy industries, greenery and parks, intensification of land use is the only way forward. We need to build up so that we can free up the land for our farms, reservoirs, parks and retain our nature reserves.
The convenience of being able to complete multiple tasks at the same location will allow residents to save on time as well as cost for commuting. Planning more mixed-use zones within our residential communities will allow us to achieve these objectives.
During a previous debate for Committee of Supply MND, I had advocated for \"whole-of-precinct\" and \"whole-of-estate\" redevelopment concepts for older estates. This approach would improve the land parcellation and road network for more optimal accessibility and connectivity. Intensification of land use is also achieved, where there is an integration of various public and commercial amenities. Take, for example, Tampines Hub, which hosts multiple Government agencies and a range of amenities, from medical to social, such as community health centre; family medicine clinic; sports facilities, including a gym and swimming pools; library; hawker centre; retail shops; and a community club.
Development of a town has been done mostly in a linear manner in the past. For example, the Bishan estate where I serve has many standalone amenities housed in mainly single-purpose buildings. Junction 8 shopping mall, which opened in 1994, is situated between the Bishan MRT interchange and the 35-year-old bus interchange. Within the vicinity are two old buildings: the Central Provident Fund (CPF) Bishan, completed in 1997; and Bishan National Library, completed in 2006. Bishan Swimming Complex was built in 1991. Bishan estate currently has no wet market or a hawker centre while a polyclinic is planned to be up by 2030.
A few condominiums were completed in Bishan in recent years. In the next two to three years, another 2,000 HDB flats will be added. With more households moving into Bishan, the redevelopment of the central Bishan area into an amenities hub would be highly desirable. As the Bishan estate moves into its fifth decade, it is an opportune time to regenerate Bishan Town Centre with an enlarged modern shopping mall that will incorporate the uniquely Singapore feature of wet market and hawker centre.
Medical, social and sports facilities, such as swimming complex, CPF Building, library and a polyclinic, could be further integrated with a bimodal transport interchanges of the Mass Rapid Transit (MRT) and bus. Such integration would enhance connectivity and accessibility, especially for the ageing cohorts.
Green plots in the vicinity could be included as part of the land intensification and integration project. From an environmental perspective, this considered approach can potentially reduce new construction requirements whilst the reduced commute for residents can also lower the carbon footprint from the use of transport.
Given that the holistic planning of a precinct will likely have impact on existing buildings, the Government can consider the selective application of Selective Enbloc Redevelopment Scheme (SERS) and Voluntary Early Redevelopment Scheme (VERS) where relevant.
VERS is presently reserved for select precincts that are 70 years or older. As the objectives of the redevelopment are intensification of land use and bringing more convenience to residents rather than rejuvenation, is it possible to have more flexibility in terms of the eligibility criteria for the age of the estate?
Other criteria, such as current density of the estate versus the ideal intensity and accessibility and availability of amenities, should be considered more relevant.
Prime Minister Lee had announced VERS in his 2018 National Day Rally speech. In his speech, Prime Minister Lee had mentioned that VERS would allow HDB to redevelop older estates in an orderly way, paced over 20 to 30 years, instead of four or five years at the end of the leases of many old HDB towns. Prime Minister Lee noted that the Government needs to work out the selection of the precincts, the timing of the redevelopments, compensations and how to afford the Scheme. It has been six years since the announcement. Would the Minister provide an update on the progress of the Ministry's deliberations over the details for the criteria and implementation of the VERS Scheme?
Mr Ong Hua Han (Nominated Member): Chairman, I urge MND to consider clearer and more direct financial assistance for persons with disabilities (PwDs) to cover improvement works in their HDB flats. I have two suggestions.
First, HDB actually allows PwDs to qualify for Enhancement for Active Citizens (EASE) even if they do not meet the age criteria. This needs to be clearly indicated on the EASE webpage for improved visibility. Second, could MND increase the list of improvement items under EASE, beyond things like slip-resistant floor tiles, grab bars and ramps, to cover more accessibility needs like induction stoves for the safety of the visually impaired?
MND must take steps to design housing policies that are inclusive and accommodate PwDs, enabling them to live independently and participate fully in society. We need to ensure that PwDs have access to housing options that are conveniently located near essential amenities. Access to things like MRT stations, healthcare facilities and community services is vital for PwDs to minimise daily friction. To this end, could MND prioritise PwDs for flats near these amenities?
Second, could MND consider implementing enhanced proximity housing grants for PwDs purchasing a flat near their parents or siblings, who provide essential caregiving support? Enhanced Proximity Housing Grant (PHG) would lessen the financial burden that comes with purchasing a home near family members, particularly when they might already be living in a comparatively pricier area.
Mr Kwek Hian Chuan Henry: Chairperson, Age Well SG is an important initiative that many PAP Senior Group Members of Parliament (MPs), including myself, have been championing. I would like to ask MND to provide more details.
First of all, with regard to EASE, when will HDB start rolling out the EASE 2.0 programme and what criteria will be used to select the precincts? And when does HDB expect to cover most eligible precincts for EASE 2.0? What are the likely features and expected cost to our citizens?
With regard to upgrading the public spaces of matured estates, will HDB partner with Town Council to do improvement works or at least provide a budget for Town Council to implement? What are the key features that will be enhanced and what is the anticipated timeline?
And if Town Council is involved, can HDB communicate the parameters to Town Councils soon so that Town Council can deconflict upcoming upgrading plans? This is because some of the Town Councils, including mine, have already started building many senior-friendly infrastructure. Therefore, if the funding can be used to build other types of senior-friendly features, such as upgrading the surrounding areas of Active Ageing Centres (AACs) and senior gathering points, which are outside the declared areas covered under Age Well SG, that will be much appreciated.
The Chairman: Ms Nadia Samdin.
Ms Nadia Ahmad Samdin (Ang Mo Kio): Chairman, as a rapidly ageing society in Singapore, the Government has made concerted efforts over the years to ensure that we can sustainably and compassionately address our seniors' needs. A growing number of seniors are expressing their desire to live out their golden years in familiar neighbourhoods or in spaces where they retain as much independence as their health conditions allow.
As such, efforts to make society more senior and caregiver-friendly start from revamping and reimagining our neighbourhoods and homes. This is not just a matter of barrier-free access or painting murals on blocks, but how can we also co-locate services closer to our seniors and caregivers? How do we build common amenities so that more neighbours can spot warning signs early and we can all be eyes and ears on the ground for seniors who are struggling with dementia, mental health, aggravated health conditions or even caregiver burnout?
I would like to ask: can the Ministry provide an update on the EASE 2.0 programme? Outside of homes, can public spaces be better curated to encourage intergenerational support within the community? Could the Ministry also provide an update on seniors' reception to things, such as community care apartments in Bedok? Are there plans to expand the community care apartments to new locations in the future?
Could the Ministry also provide details on the implementation, scope and eligibility of towns for Age Well SG? Given that several neighbourhoods are old and it would be costly to revamp our estates, what specific upgrades are envisioned to common spaces beyond aesthetic enhancements and how will these lead to an enhancement of our seniors' daily lives?
Ms Mariam Jaafar (Sembawang): Sir, my Woodlands residents have spoken to me about the lack of medical clinics that open late at Woodlands North Plaza. This is an issue if they are unable to get time off during working hours or if someone falls sick at night, especially if they are families with young children or elderly residents themselves. As a result, health conditions sometimes go untreated. Moreover, under Healthier SG, these general practitioner (GP) clinics will also offer a wide range of services – from routine check-ups to vaccinations. So, ensuring that GPs are available at convenient locations and at extended hours is not just a matter of convenience. It is a matter of equity, accessibility and public health.
Sir, I understand that GPs have their own considerations of manpower, costs and personal preferences and needs. So, HDB perhaps cannot mandate them to extend their operating hours. But could HDB provide incentives in the form of rental subsidies or experiment with formats, like shared clinic spaces or night relief GPs, until it can be made a tender requirement at the next renewal?
Some may say that this would be too expensive to give out incentives for clinics. But, in reality, this is not an island-wide issue. In many town centres, there is no shortage of such clinics. Rather than a broad policy, the Government could look at localised needs and apply the levers in a targeted way.
The same analysis could be done for other essential services and amenities, such as hawker centres. As the overall population gets more affluent, having lower-cost options on hand becomes particularly important to ensure no one is left behind. What is the Government doing to ensure the provision of such essential services in our neighbourhood commercial centres?
Mr Yip Hon Weng: Chairman, while the existing tender system for commercial units within HDB estates offers some variety through different categories like supermarkets, eating houses and other shops, it lacks centralised planning. This can result in an oversaturation of certain types of services, leaving residents lacking access to other essential or desired options.
I urge the Government to adopt a more centralised planning approach to ensure a diversity of services within HDB estates. Essential services, like clinics, pharmacies, eldercare and childcare facilities, should be prioritised. This would be followed by ensuring a balanced mix of retail categories, including F&B, grocery stores and shops for daily necessities.
HDB should consider residents’ demographics and conduct outreach activities to ensure offerings are relevant and accessible. A vibrant mix of shops and amenities not only enhances convenience but also fosters a sense of community and belonging.
Onerous tendering requirements, inconvenient invoicing processes, lengthy payment delays and bundled contracts create financial strain for many SMEs in today's high-cost capital environment. Can we leverage technology to digitalise the end-to-end payment process and expedite settlements? Can the Government also implement regular milestone payments on a quarterly basis, aligned with project progress, rather than paying a lump-sum only upon project completion?
Bundled contracts also raise concerns about limited flexibility and risk absorption, especially during unforeseen circumstances like the recent pandemic. Can the Ministry explore alternative approaches to mitigate these risks? Finally, can the Ministry elaborate on the Tender Lite initiative announced last year? How will it empower local contractors and SMEs, to participate meaningfully in the construction sector?
Mr Kwek Hian Chuan Henry: The Government has done a lot for the construction industry during COVID-19. However, the industry is facing a fair amount of challenges, with several major main contractors going bankrupt and an ongoing credit crunch in the overall industry. What more can the Government do to support contractors to tide through the current challenging industry conditions right now?
In particular, would MND work with key Government agencies, specifically the Land Transport Authority (LTA), Public Utilities Board (PUB), to consider policy adjustments, such as changing the framework to ensure prompt approval and to allow for partial disbursement of Variation Orders (VOs), especially for the big and prolonged projects that usually have high-value VOs? I believe there are a number of instances where agencies will approve large VOs at the tail end of the project period, due to the complexity of the project, which creates cash flow problems for contractors. As such, a prompt whole-of-Government review of VO process to allow for partial payment of large-ticket VOs would benefit the construction industry at this juncture.
Mr Don Wee (Chua Chu Kang): Chairman, in Mandarin.
(In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] The Building and Construction Authority (BCA) has set the Price Quality Method (PQM) for the evaluation of public sector tenders. These are construction tenders under the BCA Construction Workheads, which are estimated at $3 million and above.
This framework assigns a range of weightages and scores price and non-price attributes to evaluate the construction tenders. The tenderer with the highest combined PQM score would be selected for award. Would the Ministry consider a review of the scoring system to include points for local construction companies? This would give them a higher chance to take part in the larger construction projects and this would also support the development of capabilities by our local construction companies. I hope to see more local construction companies to win large infrastructural projects in Malaysia and Indonesia.
Miss Cheryl Chan Wei Ling: The Industry Transformation Map (ITM) is often keenly watched by industry players for it signals the strategic focus of the Government for the respective industries. In 2022, the built environment ITM was refreshed with a focus on improving the value-chain approach through digitalisation; with the incorporation of the Integrated Digital Delivery (IDD) in projects in the Built Environment sector as a case in point. In recent years, modular construction has been gaining popularity with results demonstrating its promise of improving completion rates over traditional construction methods. Further, this industry remains highly challenged by labour shortage with little signs of improvement in this respect ahead. Can the Government provide an update on the progress of the industry transformation after two years of its implementation?
Indeed, digitalisation has its promise of helping to enhance efficiency with companies such as BHCC Construction and Pan-United Corporation being beneficiaries of these technologies resulting in cost and manpower savings. Some also demonstrated on their production processes and workflow that embracing artificial intelligence and virtual reality enabled more productivity and workers improving their work skills while adopting digital technologies.
Despite advancement in technological developments, industry players have revealed that the Built Environment sector is still very traditional and has been a laggard in adopting technologies. Reasons for such are aplenty, ranging from adopting new technologies hindered by a mindset of “why fix it when nothing is broken” to outright resistance due to unfamiliarity of such technologies or concerns over long lead-time and high cost in embarking on digitalisation. I would like to know what mechanisms the Ministry have in place to monitor how companies have invested in technologies to become more productive and innovative? Should the progress be slow, will more efforts be put in by the Government to encourage technology adoption?
Mr Xie Yao Quan: Singapore has set a target to achieve net zero emissions by 2050. With buildings accounting for over 20% of our carbon emissions, what efforts have we taken to accelerate our transition to a low-carbon Built Environment? The bulk of buildings we have today is the existing stock of older buildings which may be less energy-efficient. Can MND provide further updates on how we are helping owners of such buildings to transit?
The Chairman: Mr Louis Ng. Please take your two cuts together.
Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang (Nee Soon): A recent report revealed that Singapore has lost 37% of our biodiversity. What we have left is precious and we must protect and treasure it. At the same time, I understand the need for development, the need to provide housing for fellow Singaporeans.
We must find the middle ground. The middle ground must be a strong Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Law to minimise the impact of our development.
This, however, is not just about embedding the EIAs in our planning permissions or issuing guidelines for developers. It is about enshrining the EIA in a specific piece of legislation, standalone, and ensuring that we enforce this strong piece of legislation. I have pushed for this for many years now and I am not sure what is holding us back from ensuring that we protect our remaining green spaces in Singapore. It is time to have a proper, strong and robust EIA Law in Singapore.
In our Adjournment Motion last year, together with Ms Nadia Samdin, we spoke about the rich biodiversity in the waters around Singapore. We shared about our passionate youth marine advocates.
At COP15, we committed to conserving 30% of our blue spaces. Our marine ecosystem deserve protection and they are also our protection against climate change. We need all the help we can get in our fight against climate change. It has been 10 years since we designated Sisters’ Islands as a marine park and it has benefited greatly from the protection. It is time to consider expanding this protection to other key areas, such as the waters around Pulau Ubin, Pulau Jong and Lazarus Island, to name a few. Will the Government consider designating more marine sites as Marine Parks?
The Chairman: Ms Nadia Samdin. Your two cuts together.
Ms Nadia Ahmad Samdin: Chairman, as our country continues to urbanise and develop, it is more important than ever for Singaporeans to have access to opportunities to connect easily with nature. Whether it is through admiring greenery while exercising on our park connectors or being able to live in harmony with native wildlife, who are equally part of our country too, appreciating a city in nature means understanding the trade-offs and both the upsides and inconveniences.
It would be hard to have trees without nests in them and correspondingly hear the uwu calls, or healthy longgangs without fishes and otters, or beautiful flowers without bees. It has been four years since MND announced its vision to transform Singapore into a city in nature. Can we have an update on the progress? What efforts has the National Parks Board (NParks) made to involve more members of the community in transforming Singapore, including developing an understanding and appreciation for nature and its impact on our lives?
A thriving city in nature necessarily entails more flora and fauna, including an increase in human-wildlife interactions. This is a good sign. It shows that our native biodiversity is growing. However, there have been calls asking for intervention to curb wildlife populations. What more can the Government do to manage human-urban wildlife tensions? Further, threats of animal-related diseases have increased in recent years. What key bio-surveillance efforts is the Ministry currently undertaking?
A thoughtful approach to preserving Singapore's blue spaces is essential. This offers not only new opportunities for Singaporeans to connect with our oceans, but also contribute to national goals such as coastal protection and flood resilience.
I would like to ask, following up from URA's plans last November to reclaim Long Island off East Coast Park, what steps will URA take to prioritise and comprehensively consider nature-based solutions in the reclamation and development process? And how does the Government expect this development to affect marine life in the Singapore Straits?
Enhancement works to Sisters Island are slated to complete this year. Could the Minister provide an update on when the park will be opened, how the public can access Big Sisters Island, and any visitor caps that will be imposed to manage the carrying capacity? Is the Government considering a second marine park in Singapore?
Finally, Tiny Away Escape was launched on Lazarus Islands in 2023. Has the Government assessed any impact on nature and wildlife on and around the islands? And what other pilot ecotourism concepts are being considered for the southern islands?
Mr Lim Biow Chuan: As Chairman of a Town Council, I spend quite a bit of time dealing with complaints about pigeon feeders. Residents complain about the feeding of pigeons and how the pigeon faeces makes a mess of their clothes, windows; how pigeons would fly or walk into the food centre and attack the food while residents are having their meals. We spend an inordinate amount of time dealing with the mess caused by pigeons due to the actions of a few inconsiderate pigeon feeders. The law on feeding of pigeons is clear. It is illegal, and pigeon faeces are a health hazard. All these issues could be mitigated if we have greater enforcement against pigeon feeders, and this was also reflected in a Straits Times article on 11 December last year.
Some of the residents who could tell me exactly which of their neighbour is throwing rice or bread onto the grass patch and to feed the pigeons regularly. But yet, when we pass the information to NParks, the usual answer is that they are unable to get evidence of the pigeon feeder. Sir, I am pleading with the Government authorities – let us get tough on the pigeon feeders. Fine them, jail them or even send them for mental health treatment if they are found to have compulsive behaviour and cannot stop feeding pigeons. Let us make the living environment better for all our residents instead of being held hostage by a few irresponsible pigeon feeders.
The Chairman: Mr Louis Ng. You can take your three cuts.
Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang: Science tells us that reducing food sources is the best way to bring down the bird population. NParks’ own survey in 2021 found that the reduction in food sources due to COVID-19 reduced the numbers of rock pigeons.
I know that gathering evidence of bird feeding is not easy. We can do more to help our enforcement officers. To tackle high-rise littering which similarly relies on enforcement through surveillance, we introduced a presumption clause. Where it is proved that littering acts have been committed from a flat, the owners or tenants will be presumed to have committed the offence unless they prove otherwise. Will the Ministry consider introducing a similar statutory presumption for the offence of wildlife feeding under the Wildlife Act? This will help our enforcement officers significantly, reduce the amount of bird feeding and address public concerns on this issue. It is a win-win solution.
In 2023, Singapore witnessed a staggering 79% surge in cases of animal abuse under investigation, the highest number in 11 years. This is not merely a statistic, it is a depressing reality that speaks volumes about our society’s graciousness and regard for life. This is a call to review our animal welfare and protection laws.
First, we need to address the inadequacy of penalties for acts of animal abuse. The current punishment for animal abuse is a maximum fine of up to $15,000 and/or an 18 months jail term for first-time offenders. In comparison, vandalism carries a penalty of $2,000 fine, imprisonment of up to three years and caning of between three to eight strokes for certain first-time offenders. Will the Government consider increasing the jail term for animal abuse so that we protect our animals as strongly as we protect our property?
Finally, this cat and mouse game is over. As promised by Senior Minister of State Tan Kiat How last year, we are not pussyfooting around the issue of keeping cats in HDB flats. As much as the agencies are tired of me asking repeated questions on this, I am also tired of asking this every year for the past few years. But this change in policy must make sense.
One of the reasons we banned the keeping of cats in HDB is because of caterwauling. I have experienced this firsthand when I used to live in Jurong West and I agree these cats make loud mating calls in the middle of the night. The solution is simple, sterilise the cats. Sterlised cats do not caterwaul. However, we are now proposing to allow the keeping of cats in HDB but not mandate the sterilisation of pet cats. We are setting ourselves up for future problems. In reversing the ban, we need to make sure we resolve the reasons for the ban in the first place.
Mandating sterilisation also ensures people do not end up with too many cats as the cats will start breeding. I hope the Government will hear the calls from animal welfare groups and ensure we mandate the sterilisation of pet cats as a prerequisite for the keeping of cats in HDB flats.
The Chairman: Ms Tin Pei Ling.
Ms Tin Pei Ling (MacPherson): Thank you, Mr Chairman. In Singapore, we have a large population of seniors and as an ageing population, this phenomenon will only increase. It is important for us to prevent loneliness as well as isolation, because all these, if allowed to continue, can lead to a serious deterioration for our seniors physically and mentally.
Therefore, it is important that in our living built environment, we design this with our seniors in mind so that as much as possible, they are able to live independently and gracefully. Even amongst our seniors, there are those who are more vulnerable but there are also those who are fitter. Regardless, as we all age, there will come a time where we need to be able to care for ourselves, even with caregivers, and to be able to move around independently, and lead meaningful life.
Therefore, I would like to ask the Ministry, how are they going to design new estates as well as old mature estates such that socialisation is enabled?
And two, for new estates, it is easy to design from scratch, but for the more mature estates where a lot of things are already built up. So, how are we going to refine, repair and enhance them so that they are safe for use and at the same time, encourage social gatherings of our seniors – from the void decks to the covered walkways to pavements and so on? Can we also pick up pace in enhancing these areas?
May I also ask for an update on Age Well Singapore?
The Chairman: Miss Cheryl Chan.
Miss Cheryl Chan Wei Ling: Chairman, 2024 marks the 10th year since the Municipal Services Office (MSO) was set up. MSO was established to improve the Government's overall coordination and delivery of municipal services. In my past speeches, I noted that residents have been using OneService App actively and commended on its ease of use and good response by the agencies. Back in 2021, it also saw the introduction of the Love Our Hood initiative in partnership with Mountbatten, Pioneer and Bukit Gombak Constituency Offices that seeks to provide residents and community stakeholders to co-develop community-based solutions to manage municipal issues and foster neighbourliness.
Can I ask the Minister provide an update on the progress of this initiative and any intention to further scale up the initiative for effective resolution of community issues? What were the nature of some issues that have been resolved in the past from such co-creation and are there any areas that could further be improved in order to allow more communities to benefit from them through best practice sharing?
Of course, communal living brings along with it some inherent challenges and a need for much tolerance and civic mindedness of the general public. Can we leverage the learnings from the Love Our Hood initiative?
I would like to suggest that MSO assist to look at a few perennial topics that have been consistently raised in this House. These include noise between units, second-hand smoking and the pigeon feeding.
I know my Pioneer Group Constituency (GPC) colleagues and I have been repeating this in this House several times, including what you have just heard from the earlier cuts.
MND and the Ministry of Sustainability and the Environment (MSE) have repeatedly responded about the past effort and how regulations alone have limitations in tackling the issues resolutely. Beyond imploring for residents to just exercise more consideration, should we not take the opportunity to have users or those possibly affected to co-create community solutions to address these municipal issues?
The Chairman: Minister Desmond Lee.
The Minister for National Development (Mr Desmond Lee): Chairman, I thank Members for their cuts.
I will speak on housing and our efforts to transform the built environment sector. My colleague, Minister Indranee Rajah, will cover our long-term planning, sustainable development, and our support for our construction firms. Senior Minister of State Sim Ann will touch on how we are working alongside residents and our community partners to improve our living environment. Senior Minister of State Tan Kiat How will share about our efforts to transform Singapore into a City in Nature. And my colleague, Minister of State Faishal Ibrahim will speak on what we are doing for low-income households and our seniors.
Sir, let us start with housing. We are firmly committed to supporting Singaporeans' aspirations to own their homes and determined that we shall remain a nation of homeowners.
HDB started selling subsidised flats to Singaporeans in 1964 under the Home Ownership Scheme. Today, 80% of our people live in HDB homes, of whom 90% own their homes.
During our Forward Singapore engagements, Singaporeans told us clearly that homeownership remains a key aspiration. So, we will honour this commitment and ensure that there are housing options for every budget and need.
Members will recall the significant impact that COVID-19 had on our construction sector as well as on our housing market. There were unprecedented supply disruptions and labour shortages, causing widespread delays.
We also saw very strong housing demand. This resulted in an imbalance in demand and supply, pushing up housing prices and rents. Application rates for new HDB flats rose to a peak.
To address this imbalance, we committed in 2021 to launching 100,000 new flats by 2025. As of February this year, we have launched more than 67,000 flats, or two-thirds of our commitment. We are well on track to meeting our 2025 target.
We have also ramped up private housing supply. In 2023 alone, we launched 9,250 units under the Government Land Sales, or GLS, scheme. This was the highest annual supply in the last 10 years. And for the first half of this year, 2024, we released land for 5,450 private homes on the Confirmed List. This is the highest supply on the Confirmed List in a single GLS Programme in over 10 years.
We are watching the market carefully and are prepared to inject even more housing supply if necessary to meet demand.
Across the public and private housing markets, a significant number of new homes have been completed. Last year, around 43,000 homes were completed. This is the largest number in a single year since 2018.
In parallel, we implemented three rounds of cooling measures since December 2021 to moderate housing demand, and to encourage greater financial prudence among homebuyers.
Our property market is stabilising. HDB resale prices rose 4.9% last year, less than half of the 10.4% increase the year before, in 2022. Price growth in the private residential market has also moderated, from 8.6% in 2022 down to 6.8% in 2023. BTO application rates went down, from a high of 5.8 applications per flat in 2020 to 2.9 applications per flat last year. Transaction volume in the private property market in 2023 declined by 13% compared to 2022 and is at its lowest since 2016.
Rents are also stabilising. The quarterly increase in public housing rents moderated to 0.4% in the fourth quarter of last year, down from 1.9% in the third quarter of last year. Private housing rents fell by 2.1% quarter-over-quarter in the fourth quarter of 2023. This was the first quarterly decline in over three years.
We expect the housing market to continue to stabilise this year. We will continue to launch a steady supply of new homes in various locations, so that there is a home for every budget and need. Amidst persisting economic uncertainties, geopolitical tensions and higher interest rates, we encourage buyers to be prudent in their home purchases to avoid over-extending themselves.
Let me now touch on how we will meet housing demand in the years ahead.
Miss Cheryl Chan asked how we will plan to address growing near-term needs. We are developing greenfield sites and brownfield areas, some of which have potential heritage significance. In doing so, we take great care to retain our identity and collective social memories. If we foresee major impact on sites with significant heritage, we will carry out studies in consultation with key stakeholders. We also pay attention to the environmental impact of these developments and carry out studies to minimise such impact.
So far, we have announced our plans to build new housing in various locations, including in more central parts of Singapore, such as Pearl's Hill, Mount Pleasant, Bukit Timah Turf City and the former Keppel Golf course.
Today, I would like to share our plans for another two areas.
The first is Chencharu in Yishun. With its development as a new housing area, we will provide more new homes and amenities in Yishun. We will build a variety of recreational, community and commercial facilities to bring greater convenience to residents, while adding vibrancy to Yishun Town. These will complement existing facilities at Khatib Central and HomeTeam NS Khatib. Future residents in Chencharu will be served by Khatib MRT and other connectivity initiatives.
We will launch the first BTO project of around 1,200 flats in June this year. Over time, we plan to build around 10,000 homes in Chencharu, at least 80% of which will be public housing. This will provide a sizeable supply of new homes, particularly for those who wish to live near their parents in the area.
The second area we are developing plans for is Gillman Barracks in Telok Blangah. Gillman Barracks has a storied history and is home to former colonial military buildings. Many of the former barracks are currently tenanted out for interim uses, with tenancies expiring progressively by 2030.
We are studying the possibility of redeveloping the site for a mix of public and private housing. Besides providing more opportunities for Singaporeans to live closer to the city centre, the new residential neighbourhood can build on the character and charm of the former colonial buildings. Residents will also have easy access to green and recreational spaces such as the Southern Ridges and Labrador Nature Park Network.
We will start environmental and heritage studies in the second quarter of this year. These will help us better understand the ecological and heritage significance of the site and to plan sensitively for its development. More details will be shared when ready.
As always, we will share our plans with Singaporeans, and hear your feedback and suggestions. My colleague, Minister Indranee, will elaborate on our efforts later.
We have been announcing new housing sites at a steady clip. This is underpinned by our long-term approach towards land use and infrastructure planning. In doing so, we adopt various long-term strategies to optimise and steward our limited land.
For example, we are studying major moves like the development of Long Island to tackle rising sea levels while creating new land and opportunities.
We are also freeing up land for redevelopment, such as through the relocation of Paya Lebar Airbase.
At the heart of these plans is the Government's commitment that public housing remains affordable, inclusive and fair for all Singaporeans and that Singapore remains a vibrant city, an endearing community and a cherished home for all of us.
Beyond developing a steady supply of homes, we have also made major changes to our public housing system to ensure that it remains affordable and accessible for Singaporeans. These improvements were made after consulting thousands of Singaporeans as part of Forward Singapore. Let me recap them.
First, as we build more flats in more central locations, we want to ensure that public housing remains affordable for more Singaporeans. We also want our estates to maintain a good social mix and that the distribution of subsidies to be fair. We have therefore introduced the new national housing framework of Standard, Plus and Prime flats, which will take effect later this year.
Mr Henry Kwek asked how we will ensure that Plus and Prime housing remain affordable and inclusive. We will provide additional discounts and subsidies for these flats, as well as grants such as the means-tested Enhanced CPF Housing Grant (EHG).
Mr Xie Yao Quan asked about how we will enhance housing options for singles. With the launch of the new HDB framework, singles will be able to buy new 2-room Flexi flats islandwide, Plus, Prime and Standard. This will take effect later this year.
We received many other ideas during our Housing Conversations too. We will continue to review our housing policies to support the aspirations of singles and other groups of Singaporeans.
For parents and married couples who are trying to secure their very first home to settle down, we implemented the First-Timer (Parents and Married Couples) priority category, in October of last year. This increases the chances of success for eligible married couples and parents in securing their first home from HDB, as they seek to start their families.
Mr Xie Yao Quan asked about the projected demand from this group. We are still monitoring the application and success rates since it only came into effect late last year. But so far, I am glad to see that many families have benefited.
Across our BTO launches in October and December last year, about nine in 10 First-Timer (Parents and Married Couples) applicants were issued a queue number within the flat supply available. For home buyers in the resale market, we increased the quantum of the CPF Housing Grant last year, to support First-Timers. Together with the EHG, as well as the Proximity Housing Grant, eligible First-Timer families can receive up to $190,000 in grants when they purchase a resale flat. We will continue to review our grants, paying particular attention to supporting our low-income households.
This year, we will make two further moves to support Singaporeans’ housing needs. First, we want to help young couples to settle down earlier, if they are ready to do so as a couple. In our Forward Singapore Housing Conversations, many young couples appreciated the support to help them buy their homes. This includes the EHG, as well as our efforts to ramp up Shorter Waiting Time flats, and of course, the First-Timer (Parents and Married Couples) priority scheme.
But some still face financial difficulties in booking a flat, particularly those who are still studying or in National Service (NS). As Mr Henry Kwek mentioned, there are also some young homebuyers who need to support their parents when they start work and find it hard to build up their savings. These young couples do not qualify for the EHG, which requires 12 months of continuous employment, as they have not yet started working or have only just started working. Furthermore, these couples are likely to face difficulties in qualifying for a sizeable housing loan at the point in time of application.
Today, we have various measures to help these young couples, who are full-time students or full-time national servicemen (NSFs), or who have completed their full-time studies or NS in just the past year. With your permission, Chairman, may I ask the Clerks to distribute a handout on our assistance for this group.
The Chairman: Please proceed. [A handout was distributed to hon Members.]
Mr Desmond Lee: Thank you, Sir. As they are circulating the handouts, let me just share that first, we allow such couples to book a new flat, while they defer their income assessment for the EHG and an HDB housing loan to shortly before they collect their keys. At this later date, they are more likely to be eligible for the EHG as well as a larger HDB loan.
We also extend the Staggered Downpayment Scheme (SDS) to these couples. They only need to pay half of the initial downpayment required for their new HDB flat, with the balance paid at the point of key collection. For those taking an HDB housing loan, they pay 5% of the flat price, instead of 10%. While those taking a loan from financial institutions pay 10% of the flat price, instead of 20%.
I am glad that many young couples have benefited from these measures. In fact, since 2018, more than 3,700 couples have tapped on the deferred income assessment, with support from the SDS, to ease their upfront costs and start their home ownership journey early.
We want to do more to help lighten the initial financial burden for such young couples. Since they have deferred their income assessment, they will only receive their EHG closer to key collection, and must rely on their own savings or support from family for initial costs of booking a flat. For some of them, the reduced 5% initial downpayment under the SDS is still a significant financial barrier.
To provide further support to these young couples who tap on the deferred income assessment, we will enhance the Staggered Downpayment Scheme. We will do this by reducing their initial downpayment to 2.5% of their flat price. This will apply whether they take an HDB housing loan or a loan from a financial institution. So, this means that those who take an HDB loans, from 5%, now 2.5%. For those taking loans from banks, from 10% to 2.5%. These couples will pay the balance downpayment at key collection, when they are in a better position to do so. This will take effect from the next sales launch in June this year.
To illustrate, let us look at the pamphlet in front of you. A young couple who is taking an HDB loan to buy a 4-room BTO flat in Bedok, a Mature Estate. They are tapping on the deferred income assessment as one of them is a full-time student and the other is a full-time NSman. Suppose the flat is priced at $480,000 before grants. Today, should they tap on the SDS, the 5% initial downpayment is $24,000. With our enhancement to the SDS, this will be further reduced to $12,000, which is more affordable for them. For couples who are ready to purchase a flat and have been saving up to afford the downpayment, we hope that this enhancement will help you to settle down and start your families earlier.
Ms Hazel Poa had suggested other ways to support our families and to tackle our nation’s declining TFR. I thank her for her suggestions. We have addressed them previously in this House. Let me explain again.
First, on BTO waiting times. Ms Hazel Poa suggested increasing the number of Shorter Waiting Time Flats launched in our BTO exercises. In fact, we are already doing so. As we have mentioned before, we had started planning for more flats with shorter waiting times of three years or less before the COVID-19 pandemic. These are flats that are built a year or more before they are launched. But we had to bring forward their launch dates to meet the immediate demand during the pandemic, to tide through the challenging period.
We are now ramping up on Shorter Waiting Time flats again. In February last year, we had shared that we would launch 2000 to 3,000 of such flats per year by 2025. But because of the hard work of my colleagues at HDB, we are now able to do this one year ahead of our target, to launch about 2,800 Shorter Waiting Time flats in 2024. As I said earlier, we launched our very first Shorter Waiting Time flat back in 2018. This was affected by COVID-19, and now we are getting back on track. We will continue to recalibrate our building programme over time so that Shorter Waiting Time flats make up a larger proportion of new flat supply.
In fact, waiting times of recent launches have generally come down too. The median waiting time for projects launched in 2023 was three years and 10 months. At the recent BTO sales exercise in February, more than 80% of the BTO flats launched have a waiting time of three and a half years or less.
Next, on expanding singles’ access to public housing. The PSP is proposing to allow singles to access public housing from 28 years old, and to buy 3-room flats. Many other Members of Parliament from both sides of the House have made similar suggestions, one time or the other. As I have mentioned earlier, we will be allowing singles to purchase 2-room Flexi BTO flats islandwide, Prime, Plus and Standard, from the second half of this year. We are working hard to ramp up our flat supply in order to meet the anticipated increase in demand from this move.
In fact, as I have explained previously in this house, if we had all the land and resources at this point in time to further expand singles’ access even further, or for that matter, expand access to other groups of Singaporeans, we would already have done so. But we also have to meet growing demand from married couples, from families, from seniors and many other groups of Singaporeans. If we were to adopt Ms Poa's suggestions now without being able to increase our flat supply correspondingly, BTO application rates will spike and resale prices will soar. Many people who want flats will not be able to get them, including the singles whom she is trying to help. This would be counter-productive to the PSP’s objective of supporting TFR. When young couples and families cannot get flats, it would make it even harder for them to settle down.
Our approach has instead been to design our public housing policies carefully to address the needs of every segment, while ensuring the stability and sustainability of our system. We are living, after all, in a small island city-state. For Singaporeans who plan to get married, please rest assured that we have a slew of support measures to help you settle down quickly, including priority access to BTO flats as an First-Timer (Parents and Married Couples) applicant. The enhanced SDS that we have just announced is another measure that will help you book a flat and settle down earlier.
Let me now turn to another group whom we would like to further support. These are families who have booked a flat, but need temporary accommodation while awaiting the completion of their flat. Today, we provide subsidised temporary housing for these families under the PPHS. Mr Louis Ng and Ms Nadia Samdin have asked for updates on the PPHS.
Since 2021, we have more than doubled our supply of PPHS flats to 2,000 units. We have also refined the PPHS eligibility conditions and allocation process to prioritise families in greater need. As a result, we have been able to better meet demand from eligible families. Application rates have dropped from over 20 times in 2021 in the peak of the COVID-19 pandemic, to 2.3 times in February this year. In recent exercises, all married applicants with children, including expectant parents, were invited to select a flat. We will press on with our supply ramp up to 4,000 units by next year.
Meanwhile, as Deputy Prime Minister Wong has announced in the Budget speech, we will introduce a PPHS (Open Market) Voucher for one year until our PPHS supply is ramped up to 4,000 units next year, to support eligible families who need to rent HDB flats or bedrooms on the open market.
Mr Murali Pillai noted the need to minimise distortion of the rental market. That is why we have scoped the parameters of the voucher carefully, to support these families while minimising the potential impact on the broader rental market. This voucher will be available to families who meet the PPHS eligibility criteria. Broadly, these are Singaporean families with a household income of $7,000 or less, who are waiting for their HDB flats to be completed. This allows us to target the PPHS Voucher at those with less income at their disposal, to defray their costs of renting. Each eligible family will receive $300 per month, regardless of whether they rent an HDB flat or an HDB bedroom. Payment will be made on a reimbursement basis.
Some may ask, why not a higher amount? The $300 quantum was carefully calibrated to provide some relief to eligible families, while mitigating the potential inflationary impact on the rental market for others. At $300 per month, eligible families will receive up to $3,600 if they qualify for the full year of support. The PPHS Voucher will be in place for a year starting from July 2024, and we will monitor the impact of the voucher on the rental market closely.
Mr Louis Chua has proposed to expand HDB’s rental programme, and Mr Leong Mun Wai too. Just last year, the PSP introduced the Millennial Apartments Scheme and shared that it was a way to build small, rental flats in prime locations near the central business district for younger Singaporeans to rent for a period of time. Today, they expand this scheme, I understand, to mature estates as well as to replace future Prime and Plus flats with Millennial Apartments instead.
This means taking back Mature Estate land and land in more central parts of Singapore with currently owner-occupied flats, and instead of building Prime and Plus flats with the concomitant restrictions to support owner-occupation, for people to buy. This means, under their scheme, replacing them with large numbers of rental flats for young millennials to rent out for a few years.
This, of course, in an island city state with limited land, will mean very significant trade-offs, and fewer supply for many other groups of Singaporeans, including those that will have to be displaced as a result of the redevelopment plans of the PSP.
In fact, today we already have a range of rental and co-living options in both the HDB market, as well as in the private market, as well as HDB programmes such as the Public Rental Flat Scheme, Interim Rental Housing, PPHS.
As I have said earlier, we will continue to study ideas shared with us during the Forward Singapore Housing Conversations, including the ideas that Members of this House have raised and continue to study how to enhance further the housing option diversity in Singapore. But as I have shared earlier, the vast majority of Singaporeans still aspire to own a home, if not now, then eventually. This was reaffirmed at our Forward Singapore engagements with over 21,000 Singaporeans.
And so, we are prioritising our resources to help Singaporeans achieve homeownership. This has always been our position, even as we seek to provide more diversity and choice in our market and a safety net for those who are not yet ready to buy their own homes. This is a continuous work in progress and I thank Members from both sides of the House for your good ideas. In fact, this will continue to be our commitment to Singaporeans.
Let me touch on how we are addressing the housing needs of our seniors. As our society ages, it is important that we transform our homes and estates to better support our seniors. To do so, we will spend $600 million on Age Well SG initiatives, to help our seniors age actively and independently in their communities.
At the estate level, we will upgrade our precincts to make them safer and easier for our seniors to move around in. We will also provide more precinct amenities, where our seniors can stay active and bond with other residents. At the flat level, we will introduce more enhancements through EASE 2.0, so that they feel safe and comfortable at home. My HDB colleagues have been working hard on the implementation details for these plans and some of these details are now ready. Senior Minister of State Sim Ann and Minister of State Faishal Ibrahim will touch on them later.
Mr Chairman, Mr Chong Kee Hiong and Assoc Prof Jamus Lim have also asked about VERS. Assoc Prof Lim focused on the mechanics of the scheme and the impact on home owners, specifically making a suggestion for lower voting thresholds for older flats. We will take note of his suggestion. While Mr Chong Kee Hiong also spoke about the wider context of urban rejuvenation and redevelopment.
Indeed, VERS should be seen as part of a bigger strategy for us to comprehensively plan for the redevelopment of our public housing, improve the environment and quality of life in our heartlands, create towns that further embrace “live-work-play” strategies, and bring jobs and amenities closer to our people. It is a big, complex, long-term task. It involves re-imagining all over again, the concept of public housing and reinvigorating our ageing HDB towns. In doing so, we have to take care of the current generation’s housing needs even as we cater for the needs of future generations.
We will need to carefully stage redevelopment in the older parts of the towns, while minimising disamenities to the residents in the newer parts. Some Singaporeans will need to relocate as a result of this, so we will need to work through the detailed mechanics and processes and the package for VERS. We will also need to ensure that there are sufficient homes available at the right time for them.
We are developing these details and plans and will announce more information and details in due course. This is the Government’s commitment to you. We have taken care of Singaporeans’ housing needs for the past 60 years. It is a work in progress. We will continue to do so for the next 60 years and beyond.
I thank all Members for your questions and suggestions on how we can continue to support Singaporeans' housing needs, be it singles, young families, seniors, families with persons with disability, our transnational families and more, as raised by Miss Cheryl Chan and other Members.
I will now turn to our built environment sector. Through our refreshed Industry Transformation Map (ITM), we have been helping our construction firms to digitalise, raise their productivity, and build more sustainably. Miss Cheryl Chan asked for an update. So far, we have made good progress in digitalising the sector by encouraging the adoption of Integrated Digital Delivery (IDD).
IDD connects different stakeholders in a building project via a “digital spine”. It enables greater collaboration throughout the project. Examples include the adoption of virtual environments to simulate real-world construction. The IDD adoption rate for new developments by gross floor area (GFA) has increased from about 45% in 2022, to 58% in 2023 and we are on track to meeting our target of 70% IDD adoption by 2025.
We have also shifted towards more productive ways of building, by raising the adoption of Design for Manufacturing and Assembly (DfMA) technologies. This enables the off-site prefabrication of building components in a safer, more productive, factory-like setting before they are shipped to the worksite and assembled.
Over the years, we have made moves to push for DfMA as the default method of construction in Singapore. For instance, it is a requirement for all developments on land sold under the GLS programme. We also enhanced the Buildability Framework in 2022 so that all large building projects of at least 25,000 square metres must adopt DfMA.
Our efforts are bearing fruit. The DfMA adoption rate for all new developments by GFA increased from 51% in 2022 to 61% in 2023. We are similarly on track to meet our target of 70% DfMA adoption by 2025. Minister Indranee Rajah will share more about our progress towards a more sustainable built environment sector.
We must continue to push the envelope, to ensure that our construction industry is well-poised for further transformation. To do this, we will enhance the Building and Construction Authority's (BCA’s) Contractors Registration System (CRS). Currently, firms that are bidding for public sector construction tenders need to be registered under the CRS. The CRS is also one of three gateways for firms to access foreign construction workers. The other two gateways are: BCA’s Builders Licensing Scheme (BLS), and the Singapore List of Trade Sub-contractors (SLOTS), which is managed by the Singapore Contractors Association Ltd (SCAL).
Today, the entry requirements to CRS, BLS and SLOTS are uneven. This means that some firms may find it easier to access foreign construction workers under certain gateways. While we recognise the need for foreign construction workers in the sector, the firms that are allowed to hire them should meet the same minimum standards. This should apply equally to firms, regardless of whether they undertake public or private sector projects.
As such, we will make this move. We will now require all firms hiring foreign construction workers to be registered under the CRS. CRS will become the sole gateway for firms to access these workers. This means that CRS will expand its reach. It will shift from being a public sector registry, to a nation-wide registry of construction firms. With this nation-wide registry in place, we can raise and harmonise quality, manpower and productivity, and innovation standards more effectively, across the entire construction industry.
We will do so progressively, to mitigate the impact to firms as well as to construction projects. So, for a start, the CRS entry requirements will be adjusted to keep pace with current tender prices and construction costs. So, to be registered, we will require a firm to have a minimum paid-up capital of $50,000 and a track record of $300,000 in total over the past three years, or about $100,000 per year on average. This is to ensure that firms that hire foreign construction workers have the minimum financial capability and experience to sustain their operations and deliver projects. We will give our firms time to meet these new requirements.
BCA will announce further details of the changes, including the implementation timeline, later this year. BCA has engaged key industry stakeholders, and they understand the impetus for these changes. Minister Indranee will share more details on other upcoming initiatives to support firms in their transformation journey. Chairman, in Mandarin, please.
(In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] This year marks the 60th anniversary of HDB's Home Ownership Scheme. Over the past 60 years, the Government has been committed to providing public housing for Singaporeans and supporting their dream of home ownership. We understand that Singaporeans have been concerned about the housing market in recent years. Some parents worry that their children may not be able to afford housing and some young couples are eager to receive their keys to start a family.
Through various Government measures, the housing market has recently began to stabilise. The rate of increase of housing prices and rent is easing and the application rate for BTO flats has also decreased. I believe that in the coming year, the situation will become more stable.
As the housing needs of Singaporeans evolve, our housing policies must also evolve in tandem, to allow Singaporeans to afford and own their own homes.
It was earlier announced that starting from the second half of this year, we will implement a new public housing classification framework to ensure that public housing remains affordable. Singles will have more housing options. They will be able to purchase new 2-room flats in any area. We have also introduced a new First-Time (Parents and Married Couples) BTO applicant category to help eligible families secure a HDB flat as soon as possible.
This year, we will provide more assistance to help young couples own their own homes. We know that for young Singaporeans who are still studying or serving NS, or those who have just graduated and finished NS, having to pay the downpayment of their flat when they have not entered the workforce can be financially challenging. Currently, they can pay for the flat downpayment in phases. They will first pay one portion when they sign the Agreement for Lease. The remaining will only have to be paid when they collect their keys.
To further alleviate their burden, we will reduce the initial downpayment to 2.5% of the flat price.
Starting from July this year, the Government will implement a one-year voucher to assist families who are waiting for their BTO flat to be completed and have to rent a flat in the open market. Eligible families can receive a monthly voucher of $300 to defray their rental expenses. Of course, we have also not forgotten the seniors. The Government will continue to rejuvenate HDB estates and neighbourhoods to provide a safer and more liveable living environment for the elderly, helping them to age in place and to enjoy their golden years.
We are also working hard on the preparations for VERS. Through VERS, we can redevelop the land comprehensively, better integrate elements of \"live, work and play\" into our towns and bring more employment opportunities and amenities to HDB estates. However, redeveloping HDB estates is a very complex task. As we redevelop ageing towns, we need to carefully balance the housing needs of future generations as well as consider those of the current generation.
We will generally need to redevelop the older parts of a town in stages and minimise the inconvenience to other residents. This also means that some people will need to relocate and we need to ensure that there will be enough housing units for them to move to. Due to its large scale and complexity, VERS will be an important project that will span several decades. We will ensure that every aspect of VERS is properly planned and will announce more details at an appropriate time.
(In English): Mr Chairman, providing good homes, planning for our land use and transforming our built environment sector – these are important areas that we must continue to forge ahead. The collective efforts of Singaporeans and our stakeholders: planners, construction firms, community groups and so on, have helped to shape our nation and make Singapore a distinctive city. We will continue to work with Singaporeans to build an inclusive, sustainable, and vibrant home for generations to come.
Mr Speaker: Second Minister Indranee Rajah.
The Second Minister for National Development (Ms Indranee Rajah): Mr Chairman, a small island-state, that is our nation, has thrived against all odds. With 734 square kilometres of land, we have been able to build homes for a nation and a globally vibrant economy, with a world-class airport and seaport, while protecting our greenery and our built heritage.
Through careful stewardship and deliberate long-term planning, we have been able to make the most of our limited land and continue to provide a quality living environment for Singaporeans. We have benefited from the foresight of our pioneer planners, who envisioned what we could become.
Careful stewardship and deliberate, long-term planning will continue to guide how we plan our land use to balance current needs and those of future generations. We are working closely with Singaporeans to shape our urban and built environment.
First, having engaged Singaporeans on our Long-Term Plan Review, we will now engage Singaporeans on our Draft Master Plan; second, we will develop sustainably and sensitively; and third, we will support our built environment firms in their transformation journey.
From 2021 to 2022, we engaged over 15,000 Singaporeans on the Long-Term Plan Review to map out strategies to guide Singapore's development for the next 50 years and beyond. We are now embarking on the Master Plan Review which translates these long-term strategies into implementable plans over the next 10 to 15 years.
Miss Cheryl Chan and Mr Chong Kee Hiong asked how the Government intends to involve Singaporeans in the Master Plan review. As announced by Minister Desmond Lee in October 2023 last year, we will be engaging a wide range of Singaporeans on the Draft Master Plan 2025. The four broad themes for the Draft Master Plan are: shaping a happy, healthy city; strengthening urban resilience; enabling sustainable growth; and stewarding nature and heritage.
Through our engagements, we will hear about Singaporeans' hopes and dreams for our city and see how we can make them a reality while working within our constraints. We will be engaging the public on significant plans for parts of Singapore. An example is the \"Long Island\" project, our plan to reclaim about 800 hectares of land off East Coast.
\"Long Island\" will be an opportunity to meet multiple needs for our existing and future generations. This includes protecting the low-lying East Coast area from sea level rise, strengthening our flood resilience and water supply, building new homes and creating new coastal and reservoir parks.
Ms Nadia Ahmad Samdin asked about the impact of \"Long Island\" on marine life. Today, agencies are already required to conduct detailed environmental studies for developments that may cause significant environmental impact and develop appropriate mitigating measures. \"Long Island\" will be no different. The studies for \"Long Island\" will consider surrounding marine habitats, such as intertidal flats and coral communities. We will work closely with the nature community, academics and researchers to explore nature-based solutions to minimise the environmental impact of the reclamation of \"Long Island\".
Senior Minister of State Tan will cover other aspects of how we conserve and plan our marine spaces. We have commenced discussions with some stakeholders and will progressively do so with others, including recreational interest groups, businesses, the local community and the general public.
These conversations, together with findings from technical studies, will guide the development of a shared vision for \"Long Island\". We will also be engaging the public on our islandwide planning strategies. For example, \"Play\" was one of the themes of the Long-Term Plan Review where many Singaporeans shared their desire for more recreational opportunities. To follow up, URA and agencies are developing a Recreation Master Plan.
As part of the Recreation Master Plan, we are working to activate and curate networks of recreational spaces across the island, incorporating sports, arts, nature, heritage and wellness.
These spaces will help keep Singapore liveable, amidst our densely built-up environment, something Mr Dennis Tan spoke about. These recreation spaces will be both indoor and outdoor, close to homes and well-connected via footpaths, cycling paths and park connectors.
Between the second quarter and third quarter this year, URA will hold a series of roving exhibitions across the island to seek the public's views on the planning of recreation spaces. The feedback received here will then feed into the Draft Master Plan. Through our engagements, we will reach out to a wide spectrum of stakeholders, including youths, interest groups, local communities, academics and industry partners.
Our engagements will encompass roadshows, focus group discussions, collaborations with professional bodies and competitions where people can submit their ideas. These engagements will culminate in the Draft Master Plan 2025 exhibition which will be held in the second half of 2025 at the URA Centre and selected locations around the island. Plans will be showcased at the exhibition for public feedback, before it is gazetted as the next Master Plan.
Our engagements will not end there. Beyond our Draft Master Plan engagements, we are continually committed to work with Singaporeans in the planning and designing of our spaces. This includes ways to facilitate safe and efficient deliveries, as shared by Ms Jean See, which we will study further.
We hope that through these conversations, we can all have a better understanding of the diverse needs and aspirations among Singaporeans and how to meet these, given our land limitations and emerging challenges, like climate change.
This leads to my second point. Even as we develop for the future, we aim to do so sensitively and sustainably. This is a key concern that many Singaporeans had raised in our past engagements.
Let me first touch on our strategies on the climate adaptation front. We continue to adopt creative solutions and new technologies to protect our island against the impact of climate change. Mr Dennis Tan asked how we are keeping Singapore liveable amidst rising temperatures and whether population density is considered in our planning norms.
Key factors that drive the urban heat island, or UHI effect, are building density and the types of human activity, rather than population density. For example, while Central Business District (CBD) and industrial areas have lower population density, they are temperature hotspots. To minimise the UHI effect, we have implemented a wide suite of cooling strategies, at various scales across the landscape. At the national level, greening Singapore remains a key strategy that brings many benefits, including providing shade, cooling our surroundings and enhancing our living environment. Senior Minister of State Tan will share more about our City in Nature efforts.
At the development and district level, we configure new towns and districts to optimise wind flow and ventilation, as well as to reduce heat gain from the sun. At the building-level, we are trialling cool coatings which reflect heat-generating radiation back to the atmosphere.
On climate mitigation, Mr Xie Yao Quan asked what efforts we have taken to accelerate our transformation to a low-carbon built environment. In 2021 and 2022, we raised minimum energy performance standards. This is so that new buildings are designed to be sustainable and existing buildings upgraded to meet higher sustainability standards.
We also launched the S$63 million Green Mark Incentive Scheme for Existing Buildings 2.0 in 2022, which provides support to building owners for energy efficiency retrofits. These efforts have enabled us to green about 58% of our buildings by GFA to date. To help meet our target of greening 80% of our buildings by 2030, we will be introducing the Mandatory Energy Improvement, or MEI, regime by the end of this year, as announced by Senior Minister of State Tan last year. The MEI regime is targeted at energy-intensive buildings. Building owners of such buildings will be required to conduct an energy audit and implement measures to reduce energy consumption. More details will be announced later.
We are also doing more to green the construction process. As mentioned in the Deputy Prime Minister's Budget speech and Senior Minister of State Low Yen Ling's Ministry of Trade and Industry (MTI) COS speech, we will be expanding the Energy Efficiency Grant, or EEG, to new sectors, including construction. This is a new grant for the construction industry and will support the cost of energy-efficient construction equipment. The grant is tiered as follows. Under the Base Tier, eligible local construction firms can receive up to 70% of funding support for pre-approved energy-efficient construction equipment, with a cap of S$30,000.
Under the Advanced Tier, firms that wish to do even more to reduce their emissions can receive funding support of up to S$350,000, inclusive of the support under the Base Tier. This advanced tier will allow firms to adopt energy-efficient equipment that is not pre-approved. The grant amount for this will be based on expected energy savings or up to 70% of the equipment cost, whichever is lower. We target to introduce the EEG for the construction industry by the end of this year. More details will follow.
Beyond driving greater sustainability, we must continue to transform the built environment sector in other ways. Miss Cheryl Chan asked about our efforts to encourage the adoption of productive and innovative technologies in the built environment. We have developed a system of incentives and grants to support investments in different types of technologies.
For example, the Productivity Solutions Grant has helped over 900 construction and facilities management SMEs adopt pre-approved digital solutions to date. We will also extend the Productivity Innovation Project, or PIP, scheme until March 2025. The scheme provides our builders and prefabricators with co-funding support of up to 70% of the costs of technologies, such as robotics and automation, capped at S$10 million.
Over the last six years, the PIP scheme has supported 78 firms with S$37.4 million worth of funding in investments. For example, Great Resources M&E Contractor Pte Ltd will be deploying automated drilling and anchoring robots onsite. This will enable the firm to increase productivity by at least 30%, with one-third less workers required. With less manual work and fewer workers onsite, they can also carry out this work more safely. I encourage firms to make use of the PIP extension to transform their processes.
The system of incentives I have just mentioned is targeted at helping individual firms transform their work. However, building projects involve many different parties across the broader built environment value chain. To encourage collaboration, we introduced the Growth and Transformation Scheme, or GTS, which supports alliances of developers, builders, consultants and other stakeholders to pursue best-in-class transformation outcomes together.
As of January 2024, both the CapitaLand Development-led and City Developments Limited-led alliances have started to implement their initiatives. For example, CapitaLand Development's upcoming Common Data Environment platform will facilitate upfront coordination and structured information exchange throughout the project. It will be the single reference point for key project information. The data collected can also be analysed to improve processes for future projects.
This initiative is expected to increase productivity by up to 50% over existing project workflows and reduce downstream abortive works. I commend CapitaLand Development and its alliance partners, including Woh Hup, Surbana Jurong and Threesixty Consultants, for their efforts and look forward to hearing more about their progress.
I also thank Mr Henry Kwek, Mr Don Wee and Mr Yip Hon Weng for their suggestions on how to better support our construction firms. Firms can tap on many existing incentives to grow their capabilities.
These include the sector-specific initiatives I spoke about and other broader schemes. For instance, Workforce Singapore's (WSG's) Capability Transfer Programme facilitates the transfer of capabilities from foreign specialists to locals. Companies can benefit from salary support, attachment-related costs and funding for equipment and venue costs for industry-wide projects.
The Government also does our part as a major buyer of construction services. For example, agencies are required to abide by strict timeframes so that firms receive payments on time. This includes regular milestone payments and partial payments when Variation Orders are progressively completed. Last year, more than 80% of public sector construction contracts were awarded to small- and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs). The Government will continue to conduct regular reviews to ensure that our procurement processes remain fair and cost-effective.
In conclusion, our plans for the future are a reflection of our collective ideas, hopes and dreams. Every stakeholder is critical in this journey, from our residents and nature and heritage groups, to our professional bodies and built environment firms. I urge each of you to actively participate in our stakeholder engagements, share your insights and contribute to the conversation that will shape Singapore.
The Chairman: Senior Minister of State Sim Ann.
The Senior Minister of State for National Development (Ms Sim Ann): Mr Chairman, I thank Members for their cuts. Building a quality living environment continues to be a priority for MND. We proactively upgrade and revitalise our neighbourhoods, housing estates and flats, in line with the evolving needs, lifestyles and aspirations of Singaporeans,
We will do more, together with our public and private sector partners, in three areas. First, physically upgrading our towns and flats. Second, ensuring that neighbourhoods have a range of affordable and accessible amenities and shops. Third, improving municipal service delivery and outcomes.
First, let me share how we are upgrading our towns and flats.
To better support ageing-in place, MND, MOH and Ministry of Transport announced a set of initiatives under Age Well SG last November. These include physical upgrading to enhance our neighbourhoods and flats to be more senior-friendly.
A key component involves extending the upcoming fifth phase of the Neighbourhood Renewal Programme, or NRP, to HDB blocks built up to 1999. This will benefit more than 100,000 additional flats, as previously, only blocks built up to 1995 were eligible. Under this new phase, we will build more senior-friendly amenities, such as therapeutic gardens with wheelchair-friendly planter boxes, fitness trails connecting senior-centric amenities and wayfinding features. These amenities enhance the safety and connectivity of our neighbourhoods while helping seniors stay active and navigate confidently around their neighbourhoods.
The first batch of precincts to be upgraded under the fifth phase of NRP will be selected by the end of this year.
Some older precincts have already undergone upgrading and do not qualify for NRP. We announced last November that HDB will roll out similar senior-friendly enhancements to more than 20 of such precincts in the towns of Ang Mo Kio, Bukit Merah, Queenstown and Toa Payoh over the next five years. The roll-out of these silver upgrading works will be progressive, starting with a pilot in Ang Mo Kio. To Mr Henry Kwek's question, HDB will engage Town Councils, the grassroots and residents on the implementation of these works. HDB will share more with Town Councils when ready.
Newer estates will also have senior-friendly amenities. In fact, they are designed from the start to be age-inclusive to encourage inter-generational bonding, a topic brought up by Ms Nadia Samdin. For example, HDB has introduced 3-Generation or 3G recreation spaces, with fitness corners and playgrounds placed side by side. Such playgrounds enable residents of different age groups to interact with one another. We also co-locate childcare and elderly facilities where possible.
To Mr Lim Biow Chuan's question, I would like to assure Members that there are inspection regimes in place today to detect and rectify building deterioration in a timely manner. The Building Control Act requires regular building inspections by professionals. These include checks for spalling concrete and structural cracks, for both common areas and within the flat. As for spalling concrete within the flat, if reported by residents, HDB will let the flat owner know about the Goodwill Repair Assistance Scheme, under which HDB will subsidise 50% of the repair costs.
In the longer term, every flat will be upgraded twice, the first when they are about 30 years old, through the Home Improvement Programme, or HIP; and the second, through HIP II, when they are about 60 to 70 years old. When undergoing HIP, flats will undergo repairs for spalling concrete and structural cracks, which HDB fully subsidises. HIP II will be offered when the first batch of flats reach their 60- to 70-year mark. HDB is currently working out the prioritisation and implementation details.
To Mr Pritam Singh's question on the challenges and delays in implementing upgrading works, various factors may contribute to delays, including unforeseen site conditions, manpower availability, cashflow issues and disruptions in supply of materials. For projects managed by HDB, HDB will work with the relevant contractor to understand the causes for the delays and render the appropriate assistance to get the project back on track. If the contractor can no longer fulfil its obligations, it may novate the contract to another firm, subject to HDB's approval. As a last resort, HDB can also exercise its right to terminate the contract and appoint another firm to complete the project.
Another challenge that we face is rising costs.
To Mr Ang Wei Neng’s question, we have been reviewing and adjusting programme budgets, taking into consideration prevailing macroeconomic conditions and changes in tender price indices. For example, in 2022, we increased the NRP budget by $850 per flat for then-ongoing NRP projects, in response to the impact of COVID-19. With the continued increase in costs, we are prepared to further increase the NRP budget. We will inform Town Councils of details when ready. We have also been flexible, acceding to ad-hoc appeals for additional budget due to increases in material and manpower costs.
Next, Members have also raised lift-related concerns.
First, on Mr Dennis Tan and Mr Ang Wei Neng's questions on the Lift Upgrading Programme, or the LUP. LUP has brought direct lift access to around 5,000 blocks and today, around 99% of all HDB blocks were either built with direct lift access or have benefitted from LUP. Members will recall that many of these blocks were built when our population was a lot younger and when physical mobility was not an issue. Because same floor lift access was not required as a condition of design, there were some blocks that were designed in such a way that the retrospective adding of lift shafts and lifts is technically very difficult or even unfeasible.
What HDB has been doing is to trial new technology and to apply new methods wherever possible. So, this has included, in the past, using machine-room-less lifts as well as the use of smaller home lifts to bring lift upgrading to blocks that previously were very difficult for us to add lifts to.
However, although we have worked hard to shrink the pool of blocks that cannot undergo LUP over the years, there remain some blocks where LUP is currently not feasible due to cost or technical constraints. In some of these cases, the cost can be more than $200,000 per benefiting household. Therefore, we have measures for households that urgently need direct lift access or those who live in blocks that cannot undergo LUP. We offer a Lift Access Housing Grant of up to $30,000 to help these homeowners buy a flat with direct lift access.
Mr Dennis Tan has made points on consulting ground feedback for LUP. I wish to clarify that HDB values the inputs of Town Councils when it comes to LUP works because HDB recognises that it is the Town Councils that will have to maintain the lifts when built. In the case of Aljunied-Hougang Town Council, it was involved in the LUP Working Committee formed for block 833, Hougang Central which I believe is in the Mr Dennis Tan's ward. In addition, HDB does take into account ground concerns from residents who might not be part of the benefiting units but feel affected by lift upgrading solutions or from the MPs whom they might approach. Usually, these concerns can be resolved, for example, by the addition of privacy fins.
Let me turn to Mr Gerald Giam’s suggestions relating to the Lift Replacement Fund, or LRF. The current minimum contribution rates for Town Councils' LRF and Sinking Funds help Town Councils set aside sufficient funds for various cyclical replacement works. The restricted use of these funds serves as a form of fiscal discipline. In particular, the LRF was introduced in 2017 because Town Councils had been significantly under-saving for lift replacements. Lift replacements are very infrequent but involve heavy draw-down of funds when they are due, as lifts built in the same period will need to be replaced around the same time. Hence, the LRF allows Town Councils to pay for any capital expenditure relating to lift replacements in HDB estates, including those raised by Mr Gerald Giam. We will continue to review the framework periodically to ensure that they keep pace with changes to the operating context.
Let me now turn to ensuring vibrancy of our neighbourhoods. I thank Mr Yip Hon Weng, Ms Mariam Jaafar and Mr Chong Kee Hiong for the suggestions they have raised.
HDB towns are designed to give all residents convenient access to amenities and shops, often within 400 metres of their homes. At the heart of every HDB town is a Town Centre, a key commercial hub providing a wide range of goods and services. We also have Neighbourhood Centres and precinct shops distributed across the town.
HDB also imposes trade mix controls to ensure that residents' basic needs are met. For town and neighbourhood centres, HDB allows for greater market flexibility as the larger number of shops provides sufficient opportunity for market forces to determine a good trade mix. HDB adopts the Price-Quality Method (PQM) tender mechanism to attract quality retailers whereby HDB considers factors other than tender bid prices, such as affordability, business concepts and community-centric initiatives.
To further enhance the vibrancy of our commercial precincts, we will be trialling the refreshment of commercial clusters through placemaking and trade curation at three pilot sites – Ang Mo Kio Town Centre, Bukit Gombak and Tampines West Neighbourhood Centres. As shared by my co-chair in the Heartland Digitalisation and Revitalisation Committee, Minister of State Low Yen Ling, this will be done in collaboration with MTI and Enterprise Singapore (ESG).
Our HDB and Town Council colleagues, alongside local stakeholders, will also be supporting MTI and ESG's Heartland Enterprise Placemaking Grant for heartland enterprises keen to champion ground-up placemaking events. HDB is also working on developing trade mix plans for these pilot sites together with residents, merchants and other stakeholders.
Finally, Singaporeans want more affordable cooked food options in their estates. Last year, I shared about our budget meals initiative in HDB-owned coffee shops. We have made good progress and I thank Mr Murali Pillai for tracking this initiative and giving his views on how we can improve it.
More than 130 coffee shops rented from HDB are already offering budget meals and drinks. More will come onboard as their tenancies are progressively renewed. By 2026, all 374 coffee shops rented from HDB will offer budget meals.
To the point that Assoc Prof Jamus Lim has made, I wish to clarify that for HDB coffee shops let out via PQM tender, we require at least six stalls to provide one budget meal each alongside two budget drinks. And for renewals of HDB-owned coffee shops that are rented out, we require four budget meals and two budget drinks. This ensures a range of food and drink options at affordable prices. I thank Assoc Prof Jamus Lim for his support of the PQM tender framework as well as the suggestions that he has made and we will refine the framework further if necessary.
In a related move, we launched BudgetMealGoWhere last year, an online platform that helps the public find coffee shops offering budget meals and drinks. With the help of GovTech, we also launched the Great Budget Meal Hunt in January this year, where the public can share their recommendations of affordable meals. The response has been enthusiastic. Since its soft launch in October last year, we have added over 290 user-submitted budget meals and drinks to the platform. We have received more than 1,900 recommendations and 2,800 verifications of budget meals from the public, which will be progressively added to the BudgetMealGoWhere portal.
As for the 402 HDB coffee shops that were sold and hence now privately-owned, we have been engaging them to join the Budget Meal initiative and are studying other measures, including Mr Murali’s suggestion to make budget meal provisions compulsory for privately-owned coffee shops who want to renew their Outdoor Refreshment Area (ORA) applications. HDB has started requiring new buyers of privately-owned coffee shops to offer budget meals when they take over the premises. We will study whether to extend these conditions further.
Next, l will share how we intend to work with the community to co-create solutions to deal with municipal issues in our estates.
More than 200,000 Singaporeans participated in the Forward Singapore exercise. When I sat in for some of these conversations, I was encouraged that many Singaporeans care about forging pro-social norms in the community and have concrete ideas on how to go about it.
At the same time, as Miss Cheryl Chan has pointed out, the Municipal Services Office (MSO) is celebrating its 10th anniversary this year. MSO has come a long way from our early days, focused on improving coordination of service delivery among the now 10 Government agencies and 17 Town Councils. Going forward, we will do more to deepen engagement with residents and community partners. We strongly encourage community partners to share their ideas and work with us to create norms which help us keep our living environment harmonious and well-maintained.
Through our various pilots, we are also developing new operating models that we can adopt to improve our response to municipal issues. I will share more on this later.
We will deepen engagement in two ways.
First, we will continue to leverage technology for convenient municipal feedback reporting by observant residents. Feedback providers can now use a range of digital channels, including the OneService app and LifeSG; or interact with Kaki, the OneService Chatbot, on familiar platforms like WhatsApp, Telegram and Instagram. Later this year, residents can look forward to giving feedback by providing only photos and location of the issue to Kaki, making it even more convenient to provide feedback on-the-go.
Second, we want to empower residents by lowering barriers for residents to initiate community action. MSO will continue to avail resources, advice and small-scale funding for residents to start their own projects that encourage pro-social norms.
For example, through our Love Our 'Hood co-creation projects, residents can develop and refine their ideas in workshops and subsequently implement them in their neighbourhoods. Residents can also seek funding by tapping onto MSO's Love Our 'Hood Fund. To date, 13 projects have received such support and we encourage residents with good ideas to apply.
Alongside such community engagements, MSO will continue to pioneer new operating models that improve the Government's response to municipal issues.
First, we have taken decisive steps to address a persistent pain point for feedback providers. Today, agencies occasionally close straightforward feedback cases ahead of the works being completed as their KPIs are weighted towards the speed of reply.
As part of our Resolution 360 (R360) initiative, we are addressing this disconnect. We now require more categories of straightforward cases to be closed not when agencies have instructed their contractors to take action, but only when the work has actually been completed with photo evidence where practicable. Such cases include requests for cleaning, local infrastructure maintenance and vector control. We applied this requirement to a small subset of agency-owned OneService cases in 2020 and by the end of the year, this will be required of all straightforward agency-owned OneService cases.
Second, we have reorganised the delivery of 10 common municipal services in Tampines. These common municipal services are now delivered by a single operator instead of individual agency contractors. It no longer matters \"which agency's issue\" it is, as service delivery will be seamless to residents. This is complemented by worker cross-training, empowering a combined team with operations technology and rewarding efforts to address municipal issues thoroughly, address root causes of recurrent issues and undertake preventive maintenance and repair.
The initial pilot has been encouraging. The speed of feedback resolution has doubled, while resident satisfaction has improved by 20 percentage-points, all while using less manpower. In our next phase of experimentation, we have expanded this to Pasir Ris-Punggol to see if we can achieve similar efficiencies over a larger area. If it continues to produce good results, we will scale this to more estates.
Finally, let me provide an update on our efforts on tackling neighbour noise disputes.
Last year, MCCY, MinLaw and MSO shared our multi-pronged, community-led approach to tackling neighbour noise disputes. Complementing this, MSO has set up an initial team of dedicated personnel, on a pilot basis, who will leverage stronger laws and technology to investigate and enforce against the small number of severe neighbour noise disputes.
As Members may have heard in Second Minister Edwin Tong's MinLaw Committee of Supply speech, we will also be enhancing the mediation framework and the Community Disputes Resolution Tribunals (CDRT) process. For example, the mediation framework will be adjusted to resolve more neighbourhood disputes at an earlier stage, including through mandatory mediation. The public expressed broad support for stronger Government intervention in these severe cases during consultations in 2023.
To Mr Derrick Goh's question, the initial pilot team is working closely with grassroots volunteers, HDB and other agencies to familiarise itself with case handling. It will be able to do more when we have legislated the requisite powers, alongside enhancements to the mediation framework and the CDRT process. We hope to complete this by the end of 2024 and I look forward to support from Members of this House when we do so. Chairman, in Mandarin please.
(In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] Starting from last year, the Government has gradually introduced a budget meal plan in the coffee shops owned by HDB. As for the 402 sold public housing estate coffee shops, we have invited operators to join the budget meal plan and are studying other proposals, including the requirement for private coffee shops applying to renew their Outdoor Refreshment Area applications to provide budget meals.
HDB has begun to require new buyers of private coffee shops to provide budget meals upon taking over the coffee shop. We will explore ways to encourage more operators to sell budget meals.
MSO launched the \"OneService\" App in 2015. Many residents who have used the app find it convenient and easy to use. However, some users occasionally observe that although the relevant authorities have responded saying they will address their feedback, the issues have not been thoroughly resolved.
MSO has gradually worked with the relevant Government agencies to raise the requirements, for them to treat residents' feedback more rigorously. As long as the issues reported by users are straightforward, Government agencies cannot simply instruct contractors to address the issues and then respond to users. They must confirm that the work has been successfully completed before closing the case and providing a response; and if possible, include photos to demonstrate that the issue has been properly resolved.
(In English): Chairman, back to English.
I have shared on our efforts to ensure our neighbourhoods and flats continue to meet residents' evolving needs and remain vibrant, even as they age. Concurrently, we will also deepen partnerships with the community to co-create and co-deliver solutions, as well as adopt new operating models for municipal services delivery.
Together, we strive to achieve improvements in Singaporeans' living environment.
The Chairman: Senior Minister of State Tan Kiat How.
The Senior Minister of State for National Development (Mr Tan Kiat How): Mr Chairman, greening has been a national priority since Independence in 1965. In our next bound of greening, we aim to make Singapore a City in Nature.
Ms Nadia Ahmad Samdin asked for updates on our progress.
First, we are establishing more green spaces and enhancing existing ones. Last year, we completed Lakeside Garden within Jurong Lake Gardens. This year, we will open the revamped Chinese and Japanese Gardens, thereby completing Jurong Lake Gardens. We also opened a new section of Pasir Panjang Park. This is one of the 13 parks along the Southern Ridges and West Coast that we will rejuvenate and link up with curated trails.
We are also making our green spaces more accessible and inclusive. Last year, we launched five therapeutic gardens in our parks. These gardens are more natural in design, bringing about greater sensory experiences that improve the well-being of visitors. We now have a total of 14 therapeutic gardens and are on track to achieve our goal of 30 such gardens by 2030.
Second, we are strengthening the connectivity between our green spaces. To date, we have established around 210 kilometres of Nature Ways and over 380 kilometres of park connectors, including the first phase of the Round Island Route. These efforts bring us closer to nature and strengthen our ecological resilience, by facilitating the movement of native fauna between habitats.
We are also curating other island-wide recreation routes, such as the Rail Corridor, Central Corridor and Coast-to-Coast trails. Just last month, we completed the Eastern Corridor. Singaporeans can now enjoy 18 kilometres of scenic land and waterscapes, as you walk, jog or cycle from Pasir Ris Park to East Coast Park.
Third, we are restoring nature into our urban fabric and safeguarding our rich biodiversity. Last year alone, Singapore added almost 40 hectares of skyrise greenery. This brings us to 190 hectares across the island – the equivalent of over 270 football fields. We are close to achieving our target of 200 hectares by 2030, and we have restored and enhanced over 40 hectares of forest, coastal and marine habitats since 2020. With this, we are halfway to meet our enhanced target of 80 hectares by 2030.
We have also been enhancing the Sisters' Islands Marine Park and we look forward to reopening Big Sister's Island to the public this year. Highlights will include a new coastal forest trail, tidal lagoon and specially designed subtidal biodiversity panels along the floating boardwalk. These will allow visitors to observe marine life up-close with minimal impact on the ecosystem.
Mr Louis Ng mentioned a target, adopted at the 15th Conference of Parties to the UN Convention on Biological Diversity, to conserve 30% of coastal and marine areas by 2030. Like the other targets under the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework, this is a global rather than a national target. Countries are expected to contribute according to their national circumstances, priorities and capabilities. Singapore is contributing through our efforts under our National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan, taking into account our unique circumstances as a small, densely populated city-state.
To Mr Ng and Ms Nadia Ahmad Samdin's question on additional marine parks, we will continue to carefully balance the different needs in planning for our sea spaces, such as recreation, shipping and aquaculture – with conservation, under the Draft Master Plan 2025.
Mr Ng has also asked if we will consider enacting a new EIA law. Today, environmental considerations are already taken into account upstream in the land-use planning process. Environmental studies are required for developments, which may cause significant environmental impact, and appropriate mitigation measures will be put in place and closely monitored.
We have been strengthening the EIA process over the years. For example, we have published detailed guidelines for biodiversity impact assessments and we are piloting the centralised management of EIA consultancy services under NParks. Let us monitor the effect of these changes, before we decide whether we need to take any further steps to enhance our EIA framework.
Ms Nadia Ahmad Samdin has also asked how we will involve even more members of the community in our efforts. The community's support is crucial to realise our City in Nature vision. As part of the OneMillionTrees movement, more than 100,000 members of the community have joined us in planting over 640,000 trees. Under the Nature Kakis Network, 140 passionate grassroots volunteers across 16 chapters and counting have been driving ground-up initiatives. We have also nurtured around 350 youth stewards through the Youth Stewards for Nature programme since 2021. Through such efforts, NParks aims to grow its volunteer base from 48,000 to 70,000 by 2030.
Sir, now, allow me to respond to Ms Nadia Ahmad Samdin on our wildlife management efforts. Public safety is our priority. As a densely populated city-state, we are very mindful that we need to carefully manage human-wildlife encounters to ensure that Singaporeans feel safe in and around our green spaces. That is why we take a proactive, comprehensive and science-based approach in managing wildlife populations. We partner the nature community to engage the public on how to responsibly interact with and appreciate nature through platforms, such as school assemblies, HDB's MyNiceHome roadshows and the Nature Kakis Network.
NParks adopts a range of targeted measures to manage different wildlife species, from pest birds, long-tailed macaques, otters, wild boars to crocodiles, as each species has its unique characteristics. There is no one-size-fits-all silver bullet. The range of measures includes habitat modification to reduce food sources, the translocation of animals away from urban areas and direct population control where necessary to protect public safety and/or reduce disamenities. We continually refine our approach based on ongoing research and international best practices.
NParks also conducts surveillance and enforcement against the illegal feeding of wildlife, such as pest birds, which Mr Lim Biow Chuan has asked about. For example, NParks deploys CCTV cameras and enforcement personnel at known feeding hotspots. With evidence, NParks will take enforcement action against the feeder. In each of the past three years, NParks has taken action against more than 170 cases of bird feeding, with actions ranging from warnings to prosecution, depending on the severity of the case.
Mr Louis Ng has asked if we will introduce a statutory presumption provision for wildlife feeding, similar to that for high-rise littering. Under NEA's presumption provision for high-rise littering, if there is clear evidence that an act of littering has been committed from a particular residential flat, the registered owners or tenants of the flat will be presumed to have committed the offence. Today, this provision can already be exercised where bird feeders throw food from high-rise windows, as such acts are considered high-rise littering. However, this provision is contingent on the ability to pinpoint the wrongdoing to a specific unit, that is registered to a specific individual or individuals.
As a large majority of illegal wildlife feeding cases take place in outdoor public areas, such a provision would not be applicable. Instead, as the main challenge in such cases is obtaining clear evidence that pinpoints the wrongdoer, evidence gathering remains key. To this end, NParks will step up surveillance at identified feeding hotspots.
We understand the disamenities to residents from pigeons, such as the soiling of public spaces and laundry. Tackling this issue requires a multi-pronged, multi-stakeholder effort. NParks, the Singapore Food Agency (SFA) and National Environment Agency (NEA) have been consistently supporting Town Councils on their pigeon management efforts. For example, NParks has been advising Town Councils on best practices for pigeon removal operations and has leaned forward to conduct live demonstrations. That said, we need to tackle the issue at its root, by reducing human-generated food sources in our estates.
In addition to discouraging and enforcing against illegal bird feeding, agencies have been working with Town Councils to improve food waste management, such as by encouraging the prompt clearance of leftover food from food centre tables and the proper closure of bins. In the coming months, we will step up our effort for Town Councils to better manage the pigeon population, especially in certain hotspots. Some ideas we are looking at include detailed guidelines on effective pigeon removal operations and conducting site-specific assessments and interventions to reduce food sources. We will share more details when ready.
We are also keenly aware of the interlinkages between human and animal health. Animals can carry diseases that can be transmitted to humans and vice versa. Bio-surveillance is a crucial line of defence against zoonotic disease outbreaks. NParks has been partnering fellow One Health agencies – MOH, NEA, SFA and PUB – on a range of efforts.
This includes the monitoring and analysis of animal health data and environmental indicators so that we can swiftly detect and respond to diseases, avert potential outbreaks, and safeguard both public and animal health.
We are also integrating our training and capacity building efforts and work closely together to investigate and manage disease outbreaks.
We will be stepping up research through a new $15-million Biosurveillance Research Programme. The programme will harness expertise and emerging technologies across multiple disciplines, such as genomics, disease modelling and vector biology, to improve our understanding of the key drivers of zoonotic disease transmission in Singapore.
This will help us to develop more effective upstream mitigation strategies, including a more effective system to monitor and detect animal diseases.
The research findings will also provide industry stakeholders and the wider public, including pet owners, with valuable insights on best practices for preventing zoonotic diseases. Researchers can look forward to grant calls later this year.
Sir, we are also raising standards for animal health and welfare. As announced last October, we will be establishing a Veterinary Council to regulate professional standards and practices in the local vet sector.
Mr Louis Ng has asked about our approach to tackling animal cruelty. We take a serious view of all acts of animal cruelty. The Animal and Veterinary Service (AVS) investigates all feedback and will take appropriate enforcement action. We are looking at the possibility of enhancing penalties for animal cruelty. as part of our ongoing review of the Animals and Birds Act. The review spans a range of areas, from enhancing protections for animal health and welfare, to strengthening safeguards on public health and safety. As such, we will need time to formulate the proposals, and to consult the public and relevant stakeholders. We will share more details when ready.
Importantly, we must start upstream. We will continue to work closely with animal welfare groups to promote responsible interactions with animals, through platforms such as Pets' Day Out events, school plays and webinars.
Last December, I shared our proposed cat management framework. A key proposal was to license and microchip pet cats and to allow up to two cats per HDB household. We closed our public survey on the proposed framework last month. We received a broad spectrum of views. For example, some called for mandatory pet cat sterilisation, while others did not support this. We are studying the responses carefully and will share more details when ready. Sir, let me say a few words in Mandarin.
(In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] We have made good progress towards our goal of transforming Singapore into a City in Nature. Last year, we completed Lakeside Garden within Jurong Lake Gardens. This year, we will open the revamped Chinese Garden and Japanese Garden.
Last year, we launched five therapeutic gardens, bringing the total to 14. We have also established over 380 kilometres of park connectors. These efforts bring us closer to nature and strengthen our ecological resilience. At the same time, to ensure that Singaporeans can safely enjoy our green spaces, we take a proactive, comprehensive and science-based approach to managing wildlife populations. We work closely with stakeholders to promote safe and responsible human-wildlife encounters.
We also recognise the interconnectedness of human and animal health. Diseases can be transmitted between animals and humans. Biosurveillance is a critical line of defence against zoonotic disease outbreaks. Through a new $15 million Biosurveillance Research Programme, we will step up research in this field. This programme will enhance our understanding of the key drivers of zoonotic disease transmission in Singapore and help us to develop more effective upstream mitigation strategies for our urban context.
(In English): In conclusion, in transforming Singapore into a City in Nature, partnerships are key. This will help us to better manage human-wildlife interactions and strengthen safeguards on public and animal health. We have made good progress, but there is more to be done. As we press on with our efforts, we will continue to collaborate with stakeholders and the wider community. Together, we can shape a green, vibrant and resilient Singapore that we are all proud to call home.
The Chairman: Minister of State Faishal Ibrahim.
The Minister of State for National Development (Assoc Prof Dr Muhammad Faishal Ibrahim): Chairman, I thank Members for their views on supporting the housing needs of seniors, lower-income and vulnerable households.
As Singapore matures and grows, we must do so inclusively and take care of the diverse and changing needs of our population.
Today, I will focus on two key areas: first, on uplifting our lower-income households and preserving social mobility; and second, on ensuring that Singapore remains a safe and comfortable home for our ageing population.
For lower-income households with no other housing options, public rental housing is a key social safety net. We recognise that shelter alone is not enough. For many of these families, complex and overlapping challenges, such as illness or unemployment, often get in the way. To address these challenges early, we pair rental housing with social support.
Since November 2022, all families with children enter public rental housing through the ComLink Rental Scheme. As of end January 2024, we have around 700 families on this scheme. These families are paired with a ComLink+ family coach soon after entry into public rental housing. Through early and sustained engagement with the families, ComLink+ family coaches can tailor their support to what each family needs, fostering stability, self-reliance and, ultimately, social mobility.
When these rental households are ready, we support them in their transition towards home ownership. Over the past decade, about 8,300 public rental households have progressed to home ownership. In 2023 alone, close to 950 households transitioned to home ownership, the highest in the last five years.
We have a range of measures in place to support both first-timer and second-timer rental households in making this transition. Like other first-timer Singaporean families, first-timer families in public rental can tap on the Enhanced CPF Housing Grant to receive up to $80,000 to support them in their purchase of their first home from HDB.
For second-timer rental families, the Fresh Start Housing Scheme boosts their housing budget and supports them in regaining and sustaining home ownership. The Fresh Start Housing Scheme has been enhanced in the past two years to help more families. We increased the grant amount from $35,000 to $50,000 and gave Fresh Start families who may need a larger flat the option to purchase more affordable 3-room flats on shorter leases. As of end January 2024, we have 101 families who have tapped on the Fresh Start Housing Scheme to book a new flat.
Besides the various housing schemes and grants available, HDB also has the Home Ownership Support Team, or HST in short, to provide one-to-one guidance to help rental households navigate the flat buying process.
One family that has benefited from HST's support and the Fresh Start Housing Scheme is Mdm Hazlinda Binte Tahar and her three children. Mdm Hazlinda has been living with her children in a 2-room public rental flat for a few years. Keen to regain home ownership, Mdm Hazlinda reached out to HST for help in understanding her family's housing budget and options. In December 2023, with HST's support and help from the Tenants' Priority Scheme, Mdm Hazlinda successfully booked a 3-room Sale of Balance flat, with a shorter lease of 50 years. With her CPF savings and the Fresh Start Housing Grant, she was able to complete the flat purchase without a loan. Mdm Hazlinda and her children are now looking forward to moving into their new flat, which will be ready by end 2024.
As of end 2023, HST has engaged close to 1,600 households. Of these, over 120 have moved into their new homes and another close to 100 families have booked their flats and are waiting to collect their keys.
We have also been looking into new ways to better support singles in public rental housing.
Today, under the Joint Singles Scheme, or JSS, singles must apply for a rental flat with a flat mate. While most JSS tenants can find a flat mate and live together without issues, we recognise that this may be difficult for some. This is why we have been exploring new typologies to improve the living experience of singles living in public rental housing.
Ms Carrie Tan, Mr Faisal Manap and Mr Louis Chua have asked for updates on these new typologies.
The JSS Operator-Run model, or JSS-OR for short, is an ongoing pilot from December 2021. Under JSS-OR, singles can apply for a rental flat without a flat mate. A social service agency appointed by HDB operates each site, including managing the flat sharing arrangements and mediating between tenants when disagreements arise.
Last year, we expanded the pilot to three new sites in Bukit Panjang, Bidadari and Sengkang. With these additional sites, HDB has assisted about 600 JSS-OR tenants as of end-2023 and can accommodate up to 1,000 tenants in total.
One tenant that has benefited from JSS-OR is Mr Lee, who is in his 70s. After the friend he was living with passed away, Mr Lee had to turn to public rental housing. At his age and with his medical needs, Mr Lee had trouble finding a flat mate to apply with under the JSS. With the help of a social worker, Mr Lee applied for the JSS-OR instead. After he was accepted to the Bukit Panjang site, the JSS-OR operator helped to pair him with a compatible flat mate and Mr Lee moved in in October 2023. Since then, Mr Lee and his flat mate have been getting along well. As demonstrated through Mr Lee’s experience, I am happy to share that the pilot has been progressing well. Mr Lee and many other tenants have shared their appreciation for the on-site social service agency whom they can approach for assistance when needed.
The model has also been effective in mitigating co-tenant conflicts. Over 95% of such conflicts were resolved through the on-site operators' early mediation and adjustment of flat sharing arrangements where necessary. Some operators have also gone the extra mile, for example, by organising activities to encourage interaction and bonding amongst tenants. We will further evaluate the pilot outcomes, before adjusting and expanding the model to meet the needs of the tenants and operators.
Another pilot typology is the Single Room Shared Facilities model, or SRSF. Through SRSF, we aim to give singles in public rental more privacy while making good use of limited space and preventing social isolation. HDB will open applications for the SRSF pilot in the second quarter 2024. Thereafter, we look forward to housing the first batch of successful applicants from around the third quarter 2024.
Let me now explain our efforts to adapt our homes to be more senior-friendly. This will support our seniors who wish to age in place, in their communities.
Miss Cheryl Chan, Ms Tin Pei Ling, Mr Henry Kwek and Ms Nadia Samdin have asked about Age Well SG, including on our efforts to support seniors with little or no family support. Let me share further details on our initiatives.
First, under Age Well SG, we had announced the expansion of the wireless Alert Alarm System, or AAS, to all seniors aged 60 and above living in public rental housing.
The wireless AAS is an emergency button that is linked to nearby Active Ageing Centres and CareLine, a 24/7 hotline that provides response to callers in distress. The feedback from seniors in rental blocks that currently have the wireless AAS installed has been positive. Seniors found the alert system particularly helpful during emergencies.
Last month, I visited Mr Abdul Rahim and Mdm Ernowati, an elderly couple staying in a 1-room rental flat in Jalan Besar. Mr Abdul Rahim suffers from heart disease. In the past year, the couple has activated the wireless AAS three times to call for help after Mr Abdul Rahim experienced breathlessness and collapsed at home. After activating the alert button, they were connected to CareLine staff who promptly alerted the Singapore Civil Defence Force (SCDF) to send him to the hospital. During my visit, both Mr Abdul Rahim and Mdm Ernowati shared that they felt more assured with the wireless AAS in their home. Its round-the-clock emergency response service allowed them to receive medical help promptly, especially when Mr Abdul Rahim collapsed late at night. Like Mr Abdul Rahim, about 800 seniors have received emergency medical assistance through the wireless AAS from end-2019 to mid-2023.
The wireless AAS expansion is estimated to benefit around 26,800 more seniors living in around 170 rental blocks. I am pleased to share that we will start to roll out the wireless AAS expansion from January 2025 and will cover three rental blocks per month. We will start with rental blocks with a higher number of seniors, such as in Bukit Merah and Kallang-Whampoa. We hope that, as a result of this effort, our seniors in public rental will feel safer when living independently at home.
Further, under Age Well SG, we had also announced the expansion of senior-friendly features offered under the Enhancement for Active Seniors, or EASE programme, to enhance the safety and well-being of seniors in their homes. The earlier announced features include rocker switches, home fire alarm devices, the widening of bathroom entrances and handrails at main entrances with steps.
In addition to the above, we will be introducing additional features targeted at improving bathroom safety and fall prevention for seniors under EASE 2.0. These include lowered bathroom entrance curbs, foldable U-profile grab bars and bidet sprays. Bathrooms carry a significant fall risk for seniors and we hope these features will help keep our seniors safe.
Mr Henry Kwek had asked when the EASE 2.0 roll-out would commence. I am pleased to share that households may apply for the new improvement items under the EASE programme from 1 April 2024. Households that have tapped on EASE in the past may apply again for the new items.
The EASE programme is heavily subsidised by the Government. Today, under EASE, a Singaporean household living in a 3-room flat only pays 5% of the costs of the upgrades, with the rest covered by the Government. The new features under EASE 2.0 will adopt this same subsidy structure.
A 3-room flat owner tapping on the full EASE programme, which includes a wheelchair lifter and the new EASE 2.0 features, can expect to pay only around $570, with the remaining cost of around $10,000 borne by the Government. Fuller details on the costs will be provided on HDB InfoWEB from 1 April this year.
Mr Ong Hua Han had asked if we would provide financial support to persons with disabilities, or PwDs, to improve the accessibility of their HDB flats. As with EASE, non-elderly families with extenuating circumstances, such as households with PwDs, can apply for the new EASE 2.0 features on a case-by-case basis.
With these new features under the EASE programme, we hope to assure our seniors and your loved ones that your homes will continue to be enhanced to meet your changing needs. Sir, allow me now to speak in Malay.
(In Malay): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] In his speech, Minister Desmond Lee shared the new measures that we will undertake to address the housing needs of young couples and families.
In our interactions with young couples, we have heard that many are very keen to book a flat and settle down earlier. This includes those who are still studying full-time, undergoing National Service or those who have just completed their studies or National Service last year.
Such couples do not qualify for the Enhanced CPF Housing Grant (EHG), which requires 12 months of continuous employment. We would like to continue supporting this group of young couples who are currently eligible for deferred income assessment and Staggered Downpayment Scheme (SDS). From June 2024, we will enhance the SDS to further reduce the initial downpayment to 2.5% of the flat price, with the balance to be paid when they collect their keys. We hope this will help more young couples to move forward with their marriage and parenthood plans earlier.
The second group of couples that we heard from through our engagements are those who have booked their BTO flat but need temporary accommodation while awaiting the completion of their new flat. Today, we provide subsidised temporary housing for these families who are waiting for their flat to be completed, under the Parenthood Provisional Housing Scheme (PPHS).
To meet the high demand for PPHS, we will double the supply of PPHS to 4,000 units by 2025. Meanwhile, to support more families that qualify for PPHS, we will introduce the PPHS (Open Market) Voucher to help those renting HDB flats or bedrooms in the open market. The vouchers will be in place for one year, from July 2024.
Each eligible family will receive $300 a month and the payment is on a reimbursement basis. This PPHS voucher will provide some financial assistance for young families who rent a home while waiting for their BTO flat.
For low-income families who are not ready to own a home and have no other housing options, we provide public rental housing to ensure that they have a safe and stable home. Over the past decade, about 8,300 public rental households have progressed to home ownership. From this group, nearly 950 have done so in 2023, the highest in the last five years. We hope that more public rental households will progress to home ownership in the coming year. We encourage these households to contact HDB if they need any help in the course of their home ownership journey.
As our population ages, one of our key priorities is to ensure that seniors continue to live safely in their homes and age healthily within the community. We will do so through key initiatives under Age Well SG.
First, we will expand the provision of the wireless Alert Alarm System (AAS) to all seniors aged 60 and above living in public rental flats. The wireless AAS is linked to nearby Active Ageing Centres and also CareLine, a 24/7 helpline that provides response to callers in distress. We will start implementing the wireless AAS expansion from January 2025. The expansion of AAS provision is expected to benefit around 26,800 seniors living in 170 rental blocks.
Next, we will expand the range of senior-friendly features offered under the Enhancement for Active Seniors programme (EASE), for all seniors. From 1 April 2024, seniors can choose to have lowered bathroom entrance kerbs, foldable grab bars and bidet sprays under EASE 2.0. This is on top of the features announced earlier such as the widening of bathroom entrances and folding shower chairs. The cost of these features will be heavily subsidised by the Government, at the same rate as it is now.
In addition, I am pleased to share that households that have tapped on EASE in the past can reapply for the new features.
Finally, we will rejuvenate our neighbourhoods to become more elderly-friendly through the upcoming fifth phase of the NRP. This will benefit more than 100,000 additional flats, comprising older flats built up to 1999. Residents can look forward to therapeutic gardens with wheelchair-friendly planter boxes and barrier-free walkways that link to senior-centric facilities.
With the expansion of wireless AAS for public rental flats as well as the launch of EASE 2.0 and the fifth phase of the NRP, we hope that seniors will feel safer living at home and ageing within the community.
(In English): To conclude, let me reaffirm our commitment to building an inclusive home for all Singaporeans. We will continue to build a home that responds to the diverse and evolving needs of our population, a home that integrates housing with social support to empower and uplift our lower-income households and a home that allows our seniors to age gracefully and safely within the community, in our neighbourhoods and homes.
The Chairman: We have time for clarifications. Miss Cheryl Chan.
Miss Cheryl Chan Wei Ling: Thank you, Chairman. I have two clarifications. The first is for Minister Desmond Lee. I am actually happy to hear that the Government will be providing support through the enhanced Staggered Downpayment Scheme, or SDS, to help young couples pay for the downpayment of flats. However, if you want to bring assurance to the young couples, I think it needs to go beyond just financial support. So, if they needed more comprehensive support, can Minister share with us what are some ways that this can be done so that we can also address the problem around the falling TFR?
The second clarification I have is for Senior Minister of State Sim Ann. In my cut, I asked about the MSO's Love Our 'Hood initiatives and also the fund that has been in place. I think the Senior Minister of State was probably tight on time just now, so you did not mention very much about some of the initiatives that have resulted in tangible impact in other neighbourhoods in your reply. I think having some insights to this will help others see how we can tap upon it and expand it across the island.
Mr Desmond Lee: I thank Miss Cheryl Chan for her question. Indeed the enhancement to the Staggered Downpayment Scheme is one mechanism by which we help young couples who are ready and prepared to settle down and set up family to get their flat faster. But we have to see the enhanced Staggered Downpayment Scheme in light of a whole range of measures that we have put in place to help young families, specifically, but also Singaporeans generally, get access to their first home.
The first, of course, is the ramp-up in housing supply. We make more flats available so that young couples who are looking for a flat in a location, not just in a Non-Mature Estate, but also in a Mature Estate, because they are looking to live nearer to their parents, nearer to their families, can find options. So, you are starting to see more BTO launches in more Mature Estates or in more central locations. That is one.
The second, of course, is to bring down waiting times. COVID-19 was exceptional. There were disruptions across the board but we have brought it under control and brought down overall construction time, firstly by catch up, and secondly by working with our contractors, with our suppliers in order to build more effectively and build more quickly.
We also, as I mentioned earlier, started in 2018 to launch Shorter Waiting Time flats. That means you meet this year's demand through your launches, but you start building some to be launched the next year. So, when next year comes, there will be a number of flats which have waiting time of below three years, two years plus. And actually, a lot of young couples say that is about right for them. We were ramping that up, but COVID-19 hit; and we are going back on track. And the overall mix of new housing supply will be a combination of BTO flats, Shorter Waiting Time flats, Sale of Balance Flats and open selection flats, and, of course, the resale market with grants.
We also help young couples through the First-Timer (Parents and Married Couples) scheme to support them amidst all the first-timers who are applying and this would be young couples who have gotten married and are trying to buy their very first home. That voice came out very strongly and there was a lot of agreement in all our Forward Singapore Housing Conversations that we should really support this group. Then, in addition to the priority, we even allocate priority to new flats under the Family and Parenthood Priority Scheme (FPPS). You will recall last year when we introduced the First-Timer (Parents and Married Couples), we also rejigged the Parenthood Priority Scheme to a Family and Parenthood Priority Scheme, so those first timers buying their very first home will be given first priority if applying for flats in Non-Mature Estates.
And grants. Last year we increased the CPF Housing Grants to help lower- and middle-income households trying to buy resale flats. Some young couples want to buy resale flats near to their parents. And, of course, temporary housing through the PPHS supply to help the lower- and lower-middle income young couples who are trying to set up family, waiting for their flats, a place to stay in the meantime.
So, we have to see the enhanced Staggered Downpayment Scheme in light of all these changes we have made, to continue to support young Singaporeans who want to settle down, buy their first home and start a family.
Ms Sim Ann: In response to Miss Cheryl Chan's clarification, indeed the MSO has been adopting a variety of methods to undertake community education. The Love Our 'Hood initiative has one example that Members might recall, and it is us working with the volunteers and grassroots leaders from Mountbatten. They call themselves The Mountbatten Parking Heroes and what our funding did was to assist this group of volunteers in designing and installing creative signages to deter illegal parking in specific spots in Mountbatten. This has gotten quite good results, because from 2021 to 2022, the feedback volume on illegal parking at specific intervention sites fell by some 26%. And when the initiative was reported in the media, it also got some attention from other communities that were inspired and wanted to do similar activities.
What the MSO has done is to share this playbook with other neighbourhoods that have similar illegal parking issues such as Bukit Gombak and Nee Soon South, and those that are interested can then take a leaf from this experience.
We also do community education in other ways. One was through the noise experiential lab that we set up last year and ran for a few months. Close to 900 persons visited it. It was set up in an HDB setting which allows visitors to explore how noise that is created through everyday activities can travel inter-floor and also to role-play the different interventions that residents could do, for instance by interacting with neighbours, asking them to keep their noise down, testing out the effects of, for instance, using mats or furniture, socks, and seeing the reduction in the noise experience by someone in another neighbouring unit.
So, this has also been helpful because the visitors have given us very useful feedback and they thought that this hands-on method is very good for internalising pro-social norms. In fact, we had very good feedback from young people and children.
Another way in which we support public education and community education is through working with AfAs. We have had a very positive experience on the AfAction on joss paper burning norms. We have included a wide variety of stakeholders. This includes cultural experts, includes representatives from religious organisations, from the media, from community volunteers, as well as even supermarkets that sell joss paper and related offerings. I think this method of leveraging cultural awareness and knowledge, and getting the information to the people who are making decisions that could have downstream implications on their neighbours, I think that has also given us insights which we can apply to other areas and other municipal issues.
The Chairman: Guillotine time is 3.05 pm. I counted, on hand, at least 12 Members who want to ask clarifications. So, it is impossible to meet everyone's request. So, again, my request, the same one: clarification short, and likewise, responses short. Ms Hazel Poa.
Ms Hazel Poa: Thank you, Speaker. I would like to thank Minister Lee for responding to my various suggestions. On the matter of the Shorter Waiting Time flats, I have acknowledged that the Government is building about 2,000 to 3,000 a year in my speech. I think my question is, because that forms only about 10% to 15% of the annual supply, why can it not be increased further to maybe about 50% of the supply?
Secondly, on the singles age limit, the Minister mentioned that if we do that without increasing the supply, it would result in a longer waiting time. Agreed. But I think the question here is, why do we say if there is no increase in supply? Actually, PSP did ask for ramping up the supply at the public housing debate in February of last year. So, can the Minister clarify why is it that there cannot be a further ramping up of supply?
Mr Desmond Lee: It is a very broad question, so I take heed Chairman's request to keep it short.
Shorter waiting time flats, 2,800 or thereabouts this year. So, one year ahead of our commitment, which was to start ramping up shorter waiting time from next year. Shorter waiting time flats work this way. You launch in a given year, you want to make sure that you are able to meet demand. We have been able to bring BTO application rates down from a peak during COVID-19, to somewhere around pre-COVID-19 levels.
But you do that and then also start building some in the year X to be launched in year X+1, that means, the next year, and you would have constructed a year or a year plus. That allows applicants who book a flat to be able to collect keys in two years-plus; in under three years or three years or less. Why can we not have 50% shorter waiting time flats this year? I think the answer is quite simple. We have still to meet existing demand in addition to doing the catch-up for all the delayed flats as a result of COVID-19. I think that really is the rate-limiting factor and, as we have explained previously in this House and to the media, when you want to launch a BTO project, it can take up to 10 to 15 years of lead time, of land preparation, of allowing the prior user to complete the use of the land; and for the land to be taken back, and so on and so forth.
When the sites get more infilled as you take more difficult sites, a lot more preparatory work has to come in; not to mention actual construction time: if you build on slopes, if the land is odd shape, if the geology requires extra piling and so on.
The other question that the Member asked is why can we not ramp up supply and that was what PSP has called, that is, ramp up supply generally, build a lot more than 100,000, build a lot more Millennial Apartments. In fact, do not build Prime and Plus flats. Take all the Mature Estates, central estates, central location, just build rental flats for millennials for three to five years. And why not lower the age ceiling for singles? Why not you ramp up the 3-room, and I am quite sure there will be many other requests that she will make in the course of the coming years to basically provide supply for every constituency of Singaporeans that feel that they want more support.
And as I have said many times, if land and resource were no constraint, we would certainly, as a responsible Government, want to meet genuine needs and there are needs on the ground, needs that Mr Louis Ng talked about, single parents and so on. And we meet most on those fronts, too.
Every group is subject to some form of cap, whether it is an age ceiling, whether it is an income cap, whether it is a nationality requirement, household requirement; first timer, second timer versus Nth timer. All these ensure that, with limited land and resources, you are able to cater to the broad masses of Singaporeans and different categories. And over the years, we have been able to make some adjustments over time to allow more access. And that is for BTO flats which are a supply of flats in addition to the overall resale market supply that is available out there.
And we are an island city-state, as Minister Indranee has said, with 730+ square kilometres, one of the most densely populated sovereign city-states in the world, the only island city-state in the world, and that means, unlike other cities, we do not just have to cater to housing and other amenities that city dwellers need; everything that the fully functioning sovereign state needs has to be within the city.
And if you go to other cities that are like Singapore, you will find that actually the airport is far, far away; its port is far away; the crematorium is far away; the recycling plants are far away. All the undesirable necessities of city life, sometimes, in bigger countries can be parked outside the city. But we have no such luck. Ours is the karma of an island city-state, and I hope that all Members here will be able to take this back to your constituencies to share as part of the building of our knowledge and DNA of Singaporeans, to know that, for us, it will always be the need to balance severe trade-offs and make the best of our limited land and resources. And for a city-state like ours to have 80% living in national housing and 90% of them owning their homes and you compare that to larger countries with severe housing shortages, even coming to Singapore to study what we do, and we share, I think we must accept that we have, as a result of years of discipline, done well.
If you want to find land to build, we have ample land. But land of the past, large green field sites, those are scarcer. We will have to make do with infill sites, we have to recycle the land, we have to rejuvenate, we have to work on brownfield sites, some of which have historical value. All these mean that land will become available to us in time and space. Do Members know what I mean? So, there may be a site that you have zoned for housing. Someone else is using that land in the meantime. The uses of the land will run out, whether it is for recreation, business, industry, horse racing so on and so forth, all these we will have to plan for it in the long term.
And as we say, you want to prepare for a launch, take 10 to 15 years, you also have to model as best as you can what your projected household formation is. And we are already starting to see for a number of years now smaller families, more singles living alone, more reconstituted families and so on, and we want to be able to make sure we meet not just the needs of the singles but the needs of many other groups as well.
So, all in, I make a call to Members from both sides of the House to recognise that, in Singapore, we are able to achieve public housing for the masses despite these tremendous limitations and it requires long-term planning, discipline, give-and-take and also a sense that we all have our needs, but we all also need to think of other groups of Singaporeans, especially the vulnerable ones.
The Chairman: Mr Chong Kee Hiong.
Mr Chong Kee Hiong: Thank you, Chairman. I have three short clarifications. For Minister Desmond Lee, can I have your views on intensification of land use and the Integrated Hub for Bishan to free up more land and also to improve connectivity and accessibility?
The second clarification is that there have been several announcements on the redevelopment of brownfield, which the Minister mentioned again, such as Kranji Turf Club and Bukit Timah Turf City in the past year. So, why is the Government redeveloping Gillman Barracks, which is another brownfield site?
My final clarification is for Minister Indranee. What new recreational options can Singaporeans expect under the recreation master plan? Are recreational options limited to activities that do not take up large tracks of land?
The Chairman: Minister Desmond Lee.
Mr Desmond Lee: The Member is right. Intensification is one of the strategies that allows us to fit all the needs and some of the aspirations of Singaporeans today and tomorrow into this one and only island city-state. And intensification is a strategy within the broader strategy of disciplined long-term planning, and Minister Indranee talked about the long-term plan review, plan every 10 years for a 50-year horizon. And then, every five years, plan for a 10- to 15-year horizon and look at the little coloured dots on the master plan and look at the numbers that go with it. Those are your plot ratios.
And so, intensification allows us, within limits of liveability, to make better use of our land. That is one.
The second strategy, of course, is mixed use. And the Member talked about the potential for more projects, like he mentioned Bishan, there is also Tampines Hub, there is also Heartbeat@Bedok, and many others, where land uses are stacked vertically instead of horizontally by giving each one parcel of land.
And, in fact, there is even a three-plus-one depot for three MRT lines converging and one bus depot all in, saving you lots and lots of land for other uses. So, intensification, multi-user. We also better exploit the underground, so the underground master plan has been around for a number of years. And for those of you who have been to the Jurong Rock Cavern, you know that it is a feat of engineering which allows us to free up valuable land on the surface for more important economic uses and use the underground caverns for storage of condensates.
So, all in, those are some strategies. Over and on top of that, we have the big moves, for example, the mention of \"Long Island\", which is many decades down the road. We have to start working on it now to provide a buffer against rising sea levels, more freshwater capacity, but also to create a lot of new land for future generations to exploit opportunities.
And, of course, Paya Lebar Air Base and the greater Southern Waterfront through moving out our ports. All these also create space and room for Singaporeans to live out our dreams.
In terms of brownfield sites, why are we planning for the redevelopment or the use of a brownfield site like Gillman Barracks when we are taking back Kranji Turf Club, as well as starting to develop Bukit Timah Turf City? As I said earlier, our aspirations are growing, our needs are also growing. With a fast-ageing population, there are both specific housing needs as well as amenities relating to ageing. And as our families' aspirations grow, you start to see fewer 3-Gen families, more nuclear households, more reconstituted households, more singles living on their own and a desire for greater space both within their homes, but also around the estate.
And the greater desire for higher order needs of life. And so, we will need to open up sites, including in Gillman Barracks, because these allow us to build homes for Singaporeans, closer to their parents, closer to their workplaces and closer to desirable parks and other amenities for Singaporeans.
The Chairman: Mr Pritam Singh. Sorry, I saw you raising your hand earlier. Mr Henry Kwek. Sorry Mr Kwek, I forgot to ask Second Minister Indranee for the second part of the reply. I was eager to get as many supplementary questions put in.
Ms Indranee Rajah: I will try to keep it as brief as possible. I thank Mr Chong for his clarification. It follows on actually to what Minister Desmond Lee said because the previous clarifications were all asking Minister Desmond Lee how can we have more and more buildings on this 734 hectare. [Please refer to \"Clarification by Second Minister for National Development\", Official Report, 5 March 2024, Vol 95, Issue 130, Correction By Written Statement section.]
But at the same time, in our conversations and as highlighted by Mr Chong, Singaporeans are also asking for more and more space, more recreational spaces, play spaces, places to breathe, places to walk. So, that is where the recreational master plan comes in. And that is where our agencies have actually been very creative.
URA and its partner agencies have been working very hard to devise different ways to carve out recreation out of this limited space and there are different ways in which they do it. So, one example will be to bring different activities into the same space, such as at Bukit Canberra and Heartbeat@Bedok. There are recreational facilities there. It is a one-stop community hub and residents can access lifestyle and recreational amenities, such as eateries, shops, outdoor facilities and so on. But another is PUB's collaboration with URA and NParks to have the PUB Active, Beautiful, Clean Waters (ABC Waters). That strings out the spaces, so that you do not concentrate it in one. It is a slightly different strategy.
So, going forward, the recreation master plan will focus on a variety of ways. They will look at curating a variety of recreational nodes and trails island-wide. They will also look at weaving play into our everyday spaces as well as involving the community in shaping recreational spaces. So, I encourage everybody to participate with their ideas and feedback.
The Chairman: Mr Henry Kwek.
Mr Kwek Hian Chuan Henry: Chairperson, I would like to ask Minister of State Faishal Ibrahim a clarification about EASE. First of all, I want to thank the Minister of State for sharing the good news on EASE 2.0, especially the fact that previous applicants can reapply. So, can MND share how many seniors have benefited from EASE 1.0 in the past? This number will help us understand potentially how many people would need 2.0 and then we can track the pace in which it rolls out to see whether any further push to get as many people to benefit this scheme is needed.
The Chairman: Minister of State Faishal Ibrahim.
Assoc Prof Dr Muhammad Faishal Ibrahim: Sir, I thank the Member for the supplementary question. As of 31 January 2024, I am happy to share that more than 309,300 households have benefited from the EASE programme and they did it in conjunction with the Home Improvement Programme, as well as direct application.
Mr Gerald Giam Yean Song: Thank you, Chairman. Sir, to Minister Desmond Lee, regarding the changes to the staggered downpayment scheme, with the changes, home buyers will still need to make the same total downpayment before key collection, albeit with a smaller 2.5% initial downpayment.
So, these enhancements do not actually reduce the price of the flat for young couples. So, has the Minister considered that these changes might actually result in more couples being unable to make the larger ballooned payments before key collection and then they will incur the penalties like losing the initial downpayment and being debarred for the one year before they can reapply for subsidised housing?
[Next, Take 19]
To Senior Minister of State Sim Ann, can I confirm that the Senior Minister of State said that the replacement of the lift components I mentioned in my cut, the ARG, the main controller PCB, EBOPs and UPS can be expensed from the Lift Replacement Fund for existing lifts? Can MND publish an exhaustive list of lift components which can be paid for using the Lift Replacement Fund so that it is clear to all Town Councils?
The Chairman: Minister Lee.
Mr Desmond Lee: Currently, if a young couple has been working, say, for more than a year, when they apply for HFE, they will have a sense of (a) how much EHG they will get; and (b) how much HDB loan they can get. Then, with that, they book a flat and pay between 5% and 10% of the downpayment, that is, 5% if they take the Staggered Downpayment Scheme HDB loan; 10% if you take a financial institution (FI) loan. That is already reduced, compared to other people who would pay 10% and 20% respectively.
For a group of young people, when we do a housing conversation, they approach us, they tell us their situation. These are young people who are ready to settle down and they say, \"Well, flats take a few years, but we are ready to settle down. We are getting older and we want to start a family.\" When they apply while they are studying, let us, say, in tertiary, for example, in polytechnic, ITE, university and they are about to graduate in a year or two and maybe one of their partners is doing NS or they have already both completed their studies or completed NS, they have not yet chalked up enough of a track record to assess their eligibility for grant and loan. They say, \"Yes, we can book but it is difficult, even with the Staggered Downpayment Scheme, to stump up the 5% or 10% respectively because we are not eligible for a grant or loan at that point in time.\"
So, we say, for them, \"Well, we will give you a deferred income assessment, that means, for your grant, it is not that you will get zero, you will get the grant, but we will assess it when you collect your keys.\" That has been helpful. We assess your loan eligibility when you collect your key. That is helpful because, by that time, they would have started working, maybe worked for one, two, three years, collect keys. But they want to book earlier and they are committed to settling down because they have known each other for a while. So, what we have done is do those things that I have responded to Miss Cheryl Chan on, priorities and all that. But when it comes to this particular kind of a micro issue that they face, but to them it is a big issue, we say, \"Well, we will reduce the downpayment even further because we know your grant eligibility will come later.\"
But to the Member's point that they will then have to pay up the rest anyway, it is true. But at that point in time, they would have worked, they would have accrued savings and CPF. They would have gotten the EHG if they are eligible as well as an HDB loan.
The Chairman: Senior Minister of State Sim Ann.
Ms Sim Ann: Under the Town Council's Act, section 47(5), Town Councils are already allowed to use LRF for any capital expenditure related to the replacement of lifts in residential or commercial property, including items that are replaced at less than 10 years' intervals and lift upgrading works under HDB's LUP in residential property or commercial property.
Examples of uses would include the replacement of lift position display panels, replacement of lift inverters, replacement of hoisting ropes and the sheaves of lifts and so forth. And the LRF can also be used for capital items, such as automatic rescue device and the main controller PCB, which Mr Gerald Giam has mentioned, which are not listed in the cyclical maintenance work schedule. And if the Town Councils would like to clarify or if they are in doubt, they can always check with us.
The Chairman: I will allow one last clarification. Mr Murali Pillai. Short one, please.
Mr Murali Pillai: Sir, I have a question for the hon Senior Minister of State Ms Sim Ann, in relation to eating houses that are stubbornly vacant, despite the best efforts of HDB to market them, what strategies may HDB have? I have two short suggestions. One is to bundle these vacant eating houses with others, so there is economy of scale, or for HDB to rent out stalls to, for example, home-based businesses.
The Chairman: Senior Minister of State Sim, short reply as well.
Ms Sim Ann: There may be some HDB-owned coffee shops that do not do well, perhaps due to low footfall. In such cases, where the stalls are concerned, generally, we leave it to the operators to decide how to attract new tenants. But if the entire coffee shop is not doing well, then, at the point of rent renewal, HDB is prepared to reduce rent if it is warranted. And if the operator returns the coffee shop to HDB, then, we will re-tender on the basis of PQM. Because we do not have a guide rent, therefore, if all the bids that we receive are lower than the rents we have gotten in the past, then, it is possible for the rents to go even lower.
The Chairman: We have reached our guillotine time. Can I invite Miss Cheryl Chan if you would like to withdraw your amendment?
Miss Cheryl Chan Wei Ling: Chairman, I will be brief, but I think this is the ninth year I have spoken on the MND COS and every year, we run out of time to clarify all the clarifications at the tail end. But I guess this is also a reflection of the uphill task and the challenge that we have in maintaining all the competing needs of usage in this very scarce land that we have in Singapore.
With that, I still want to thank all the Government Parliamentary Committee (GPC) colleagues who have spoken on this and also all the other Members in the House who supported and also gave a lot of suggestions on what else can be considered in MND. I would like to thank Minister Desmond Lee, Minister Indranee Rajah, Senior Minister of State Sim Ann, Senior Minister of State Tan Kiat How and Minister of State Assoc Prof Faishal Ibrahim and the entire staff team in the MND family. With that, Chairman, I beg leave to withdraw my amendment.
[(proc text) Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. (proc text)]
[(proc text) The sum of $7,713,567,200 for Head T ordered to stand part of the Main Estimates. (proc text)]
[(proc text) The sum of $11,610,741,000 for Head T ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates. (proc text)]
The Chairman: Order. I propose to take a break now.
[(proc text) Thereupon Mr Speaker left the Chair of the Committee and took the Chair of the House. (proc text)]
Mr Speaker: I suspend the Sitting and will take the Chair at 3.25 pm.
Sitting accordingly suspended
at 3.07 pm until 3.25 pm.
Sitting resumed at 3.25 pm.
[Deputy Speaker (Ms Jessica Tan Soon Neo) in the Chair]
[(proc text) Debate in Committee of Supply resumed. (proc text)]
[Deputy Speaker (Ms Jessica Tan Soon Neo) 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 W (Ministry of Transport)","subTitle":"A vibrant and sustainable home","sectionType":"OS","content":"The Chairman: Head W, Ministry of Transport. Mr Saktiandi Supaat.
Mr Saktiandi Supaat (Bishan-Toa Payoh): Mdm Chairman, I beg to move, \"That the total sum to be allocated for Head W of estimates be reduced by $100\".
Madam, our efficient and affordable public transport system plays a pivotal role for the mobility of Singaporeans and the economy. Many do not realise how important a role our land transport and public transportation plays. With the expected opening of seven Thomson East Coast Line (TEL) stations and a North East Line (NEL) extension to Punggol Coast this year, that will take us to almost 150 stations across six Mass Rapid Transit (MRT) lines across our island. Yet, we are still expecting to add another 100 kilometres to our 258-kilometre long rail network in the next 10 years or so.
I would like to ask the Ministry whether they can provide an update on our target of bringing eight in 10 households to within a 10-minute walk from a train station by 2030. And if I may add, what are the spending needs that will be required for this Budget and for the next few Budgets down the road?
Mdm Chair, I trust this 80%-target also takes into account the new housing estates that are planned to be completed in the upcoming decade as well.
As we add more stations to cater for the newly-developed sites, will we also be rationalising our train system and probably shut down certain stations possibly where footfall may have permanently plunged? Does our 2030 target also envisage the removal or subtraction of train stations?
Can the Ministry share the current and future enhancements to our last-mile transport connectivity to homes? For example, the use of autonomous vehicles in the future.
Finally, while it will certainly be good news for the eight in 10 households who can walk to their nearest train station within 10 minutes, I hope we do not forget about the remaining 20% of households who may not be near MRT stations. May I ask what the commitments will we make to this remaining 20%? This is especially important as our society ages rapidly and many of our residents become possibly less mobile down the road.
[(proc text) Question proposed. (proc text)]
Mr Saktiandi Supaat: Mdm Chair, the issue of the cost of living in Singapore has gained attention lately. Public transport cost is not immuned, with the recent public transport fare hike of $0.10 to $0.11 per journey. Causing some concern is the 15.6% fare increase that was deferred by the Public Transport Council (PTC) for future fare review exercises, meaning similar fare hikes may be expected in the subsequent years. The deferment of the 15.6% fare increase was only made possible by the Government's provision of an additional $300 million in subsidies in 2024 to make up the funding gap.
In addition, the Government also has made available public transport vouchers to help low-income households cover about six months of the fare increase.
Can the Ministry share an update on efforts to ensure our public transport system will remain affordable for Singaporeans over the next decade and more? What other transport welfare schemes could potentially be rolled out to help vulnerable Singaporeans?
Subject to budget constraints, can we consider introducing transport vouchers as part of the regular Budget cycle, akin to the Community Development Council (CDC) Vouchers, to help mitigate the impact of rising costs for Singaporeans?
I do note that our bus and rail services were already operating at a loss before the pandemic struck and ridership has yet to recover to pre-pandemic levels. What would additional transport welfare entail from a financial sustainability perspective?
Mr Melvin Yong Yik Chye (Radin Mas): Mdm Chair, the Ministry of Transport (MOT) launched the $100 million Rail Manpower Development Package (RMDP) in November 2019, to upskill and expand our rail workforce. With the extensive upgrading of our rail infrastructure then, continuous upskilling was needed to ensure that workers kept up with new technologies. I thank the Government for responding to the call by the National Transport Workers’ Union.
Five years on, the challenges remain. Our rail network is poised to grow significantly in the coming years, with the addition of at least 50 new train stations and several new interchanges. We will also see the completion of the Singapore-Johor Bahru Rapid Transit System in 2026.
Given that the COVID-19 pandemic had stymied training for about two years, I would like to ask how much funds remain in the RMDP, which is set to expire this year. I hope that MOT can extend, and perhaps even top up the RMDP, so that we can continue growing our skilled workforce to support the expanding and increasingly complex rail network.
The Chairman: Mr Gan Thiam Poh. You have two cuts, please take them together.
Mr Gan Thiam Poh (Ang Mo Kio): The Cross Island Line (CRL) will be our longest fully underground MRT line, serving the eastern, western and north-eastern corridors. When operational, its seven interchange stations will provide even more alternative travel routes for commuters. Phase 1 of the CRL is targeted to be completed by 2030. The target date for the completion of Phase 2 is yet to be finalised.
The CRL – Punggol Extension is expected to be completed by 2032, serving commuters travelling to Pasir Ris, Tampines North, Punggol and Sengkang. Would the Ministry consider lengthening the Extension to connect to Fernvale, Yio Chu Kang and Lentor stations for resilience purposes? This will provide more alternatives for commuters to switch to the TEL and NEL to travel to the west and north in the event of breakdowns and other circumstances.
At last year’s Committee of Supply (COS), I requested MOT to consider providing more city direct bus services during the morning peak hours. I am grateful that the Land Transport Authority (LTA) acceded to my appeal and had since provided an additional trip by SBS Transit City Direct Bus Service 671 to serve commuters from Sengkang to the Central Business District.
As noted by the Ministry, the ridership has been increasing as more residents move into the new Build-To-Order (BTO) flats at Fernvale. Residents still find that the additional trip is not quite sufficient. Hence, may I ask if MOT could consider working with private bus operators to provide additional trips during the morning peak hour?
Mr Eric Chua (Tanjong Pagar): I recently asked ChatGPT what it thought of the Singapore public transport system. Its reply: “Singapore’s public transport system is widely regarded as one of the best in the world”. Descriptors ChatGPT used include “efficiency”, “extensive coverage”, “integration”, “accessibility”, “cleanliness and safety” and “affordability”.
On accessibility, ChatGPT says: “Singapore’s public transportation system is designed to be accessible to people with disabilities and the elderly. Most stations and buses are equipped with facilities such as ramps and elevators to facilitate easy access.” In fact, all MRT and LRT stations in Singapore are barrier-free; all bus interchanges and 98% of bus shelters in Singapore are barrier-free; all public buses are wheelchair accessible; and most bus interchanges have baby care rooms for families with young children.
However, an inclusive public transport system goes beyond hardware. According to a May 2022 CNA article, the wheelchair ramp on buses has become a source of anxiety, especially amongst new wheelchair users. In the same article, Mikail Wong who became a wheelchair user not long before the article was published shared: “When I’m going to take the bus, other commuters might look at me. I feel paiseh. Am I hindering others?”
While we have definitely provided hardware that is more inclusive, how else can we grow a more caring commuter culture so that persons with disabilities, seniors and families with young children can use our public transportation system and amenities with just as much ease as the rest of us?
Mr Ong Hua Han (Nominated Member): Chair, MOT must ensure that prominent and informative captions or visuals accompany audio announcements, during times of service disruption. Could MOT also explore complementary forms of communication, such as text message alerts or mobile applications, to reach commuters who may not be able to hear announcements over the loudspeaker? This will work better than passive communication channels where the commuter has to search online or approach staff to find out more information.
Ms Yeo Wan Ling (Pasir Ris-Punggol): I seek an update from the Ministry regarding the review of the point-to-point (P2P) transport industry. The recent Public Transport Council survey revealed an overall improvement in satisfaction with P2P transport services. However, concerns persist, particularly regarding to the decline in taxi population and the increasing demand for P2P services, especially in a zero Vehicle Growth Rate environment.
Indeed, the environment has evolved for our P2P drivers. The introduction of ride-hail services and the use of apps for booking transport have changed commuter behaviours and preferences. The escalating costs of business which includes petrol prices, rental fees and maintenance costs have put immense pressure on our P2P drivers, many who have taken to driving upwards of 14 hours in a day to make ends meet. Our drivers are also reeling from the two years of almost no income and are catching up on rebuilding their nest eggs after dipping into their retirement savings to get by during COVID-19.
As we look to rationalising and revitalising our P2P business models – between ride-hail/street-hail, taxi/platforms – it is important to note that our drivers have also indicated their growing insecurities with their earnings, welfare and benefits with their platform partners. The lack of transparency when it comes to distribution of work, price fluctuations and campaigns do impact the earnings of our drivers. Some of our drivers say that they find themselves struggling to make ends meet due to hidden costs and unclear earnings structures. Indeed, unlike the true self-employed, our platform drivers are subject to management controls. In the review, can the Ministry consider putting in more safeguards to protect the earnings of our drivers, especially if we see a convergence of more drivers offering ride-hail services.
Mr Gan Thiam Poh: Madam, ride-hail cars are perceived to have contributed to rising Certificate of Entitlement (COE) prices in recent years. As private hire car (PHC) drivers can borrow up to 90% to 100% of the car’s market value compared to 60% to 70% for privately owned cars, there are concerns that more car buyers are registering their cars as private hire vehicles, so that they can secure higher loan amounts in order to afford them.
In January this year, MOT shared that the Government would not rule out the creation of a new separate COE category for ride-hail cars. It would carefully study the pros and cons first. Would the Minister share an update on its study on this issue?
Mr Saktiandi Supaat: Mdm Chair, in line with our car-lite vision, we have maintained a zero growth rate for cars and motorcycles since 2018. We need to cap our roughly one million vehicle population in light of Singapore’s constraints in land and carbon emissions. This has resulted in increasing COE prices, especially with rising incomes.
However, with the 2014 announcement of Electronic Road Pricing (ERP) 2.0 and the progressive roll-out of the new vehicle On-Board Units (OBUs) from November 2023, an alternative solution has emerged. It is argued that emissions, congestion and accidents are externalities of car usage, which can be tackled by distance-based charging instead of limiting car ownership.
LTA has stated that there are “no immediate plans to introduce distance-based charging”, even though the new system is capable of doing so. While distance-based charging could make ERP fairer by charging motorists for their road usage, rather than whether they go past a certain point, challenges include the reliability and accuracy of satellite-based tracking in Singapore’s dense urban environment and wider policy implications on high-mileage industries like logistics and transportation.
Our car-lite vision does not mean a car-free society. Would the Minister help explain whether they would introduce a distance-based charging, which allows us to increase the vehicle population, while achieving our car-lite vision?
The Chairman: Ms Poh Li San. You have two cuts, please take them together.
Ms Poh Li San (Sembawang): In order to temper vehicle population growth, the zero-growth rate policy for car and motorcycles was implemented in 2018, and will continue until next year, 31 January 2025. However, vehicle ownership may not correlate directly to road traffic conditions, nor compared to actual vehicle usage.
Can the Minister share if there are improvements in the present overall roadway traffic density and peak-hour conditions compared to pre-pandemic period? Can the Minister also share the trends in the transportation modal split over the past six years since the implementation of zero-growth policy? Has there been a decline in private vehicle usage, especially so as the PHCs have become prevalent in recent years? Does MOT intend to continue the zero-growth rate policy beyond January 2025?
There are some challenges getting vehicle owners to switch to electric vehicles (EVs). Firstly, the variety of models for commercial EVs is limited and the upfront costs can be much higher than internal combustion engine (ICE) vehicles. Secondly, the available duration for operations is limited for commercial fleets, including taxis and PHCs, due to the long charging times required. Lastly, a robust second-hand market is still absent, posing difficulties for financiers and operators to assess the risk of investing in commercial EVs. For new private car sales in 2023, what were the take-up rates of EVs, hybrid vehicles and ICE vehicles respectively? How do the statistics compare to those for commercial vehicle sales? Will MOT introduce more incentives to encourage take-up of EVs for commercial use?
Mr Ang Wei Neng (West Coast): I would like to begin by declaring my interest as the CEO of Strides Premier, a company that leases out 300 EVs from a total fleet of about 4,000 vehicles. I would like to extend my gratitude to LTA for their collaborative efforts with partners in installing slow chargers at Housing and Development Board (HDB) car parks, thereby contributing to the development of Singapore's EV infrastructure.
A crucial objective of EV conversion is to mitigate carbon emissions in Singapore. Therefore, it is imperative to prioritise the conversion of vehicles used for higher mileage. One prominent group of such users comprises taxi and PHC drivers, who typically cover a range of 200 to 300 kilometres per day during a single shift. If you are on double shift, it could be up to 450 kilometres. Given their extensive coverage, relying solely on overnight charging via slow chargers at the HDB car parks may not suffice to sustain their daily operations. Additional fast charging sessions during breaks, such as lunch or dinner, become necessary.
I propose that LTA strategically installs fast chargers near high-traffic hawker centres and major eateries to enhance operational efficiency for these drivers. Such a initiative would incentivise more taxi and PHC drivers to transition to EVs, thereby benefiting not only themselves but also contributing to the well-being of the planet.
Ms Yeo Wan Ling: The roll-out of EVs in Singapore has the potential to significantly impact P2P drivers. Our drivers rely on efficient and accessible charging stations to maintain their livelihoods. We seek clarification from the Ministry on the measures in place to ensure that P2P drivers have adequate access to EV charging stations. Has the Ministry conducted studies on high flow P2P locations and rest locations which are convenient and not out of place for our drivers? Together with locations where there are no parking fees, will these locations be prioritised in the roll-out?
Furthermore, the transition to EVs will require P2P drivers to bear additional costs, such as the upgrading of their current vehicles and purchasing or leasing EVs. Some PHC drivers may also experience penalties for the early terminations of their current rental contracts with rental companies. Will the Ministry consider providing financial support for our drivers during this transition?
The Chairman: Mr Lim Biow Chuan. You have two cuts, please take them together.
Mr Lim Biow Chuan (Mountbatten): Mdm Chair, two years ago, I urged MOT to look into making more charging points easily available. I asked that we look into having faster EV chargers. So, I am glad that within my constituency and many other parts of Singapore, there are more and more EV points being installed. Indeed, this is good a good sign as many car owners are conscious of the need to be green and sustainable, and hence, more residents are buying EVs.
May I ask MOT how many cars sold or imported into Singapore during the last two years are EVs or hybrid vehicles? Are we able to predict the sufficiency of EV charging points within the constituency?
Madam, any car buyer aiming to buy an EV should be able to know whether there are sufficient EV charging points in his estate before he commits to the purchase. May I also ask whether there will be any regulations regarding the use of such EV charging points?
What if an EV owner parks his car at a charging point for several days because he is away on holiday? He will be depriving other EVs owners use of the EV charging point.
Would the MOT be able to introduce chargers that can charge the EV within a shorter period of time, instead of the current four to five hours? And this would be essential, especially for high mileage drivers like taxi drivers or PHC drivers.
Madam, the recent release of statistics about the 131 fatal road accidents in 2023, compared to 104 cases in 2022, is a stark reminder to all of us that we cannot take road safety for granted.
I receive frequent complaints from residents that cars drive at high speed in residential areas, where there may be seniors or young children using the roads. I also received complaints about vehicles that do not slow down at zebra crossings, even though the zebra crossings are raised crossing. I have also seen motorcycles cutting across pedestrian footpaths, just to save on parking charges. I receive many complains too, that there are drivers who do not use their signal indicators, thus, causing near accidents, because the rear driver does not know that the front driver intends to make a turn.
Madam, I submit that LTA can do more to make our roads safer. Thus, I welcome the introduction of \"Friendly Street\", announced by LTA last December, because this signals to the public that road safety is important for all residents. But I wish to find out more whether the introduction of Friendly Street, has it actually resulted in safer roads for road users?
Would LTA do more to educate pedestrians to be more mindful of the need for road safety? After all, road safety should be the concern of all road users and not just motorists. Pedestrians who walk onto the zebra crossing without keeping a look out for cars, or pedestrians who watch videos or are obsessed with their mobile devices are taking unnecessary risks with their lives and this should not be the case.
Ms Joan Pereira (Tanjong Pagar): Chairman, one life lost is one too many. We should not take road safety for granted. Traffic accidents are avoidable if everyone plays his or her part.
The latest statistics published by the Traffic Police are sobering. Traffic accidents claimed the lives of 136 people in 2023, which is a 25.9% increase from the 108 deaths in 2022. We also saw an increase in the number of fatal accidents involving speeding, running red lights and drink driving.
As a society, it is time for us to review how we can improve safety on our roads, be it for pedestrians, cyclists or motorists. The Government has imposed stiffer penalties, stepped up enforcement and implemented traffic calming measures, to try to modify the behaviour of drivers.
Indeed, with the Traffic Police's announcement that they will be enlisting the help of their network of red-light cameras to catch speeding cases as well, I am hopeful that it can act as an effective deterrent against motorists who decide to speed when it appears that no one is watching.
I am also reassured by recent comments by LTA and the Traffic Police that ground assessments, and enforcement actions, are constantly and frequently conducted at accident and violation-prone hot spots.
There is now no time to waste. We need to put all errant motorists on guard as soon as we can. Perhaps then, everyone should drive or ride as though there are speed cameras everywhere, if this is what it takes to prevent yet another senseless loss of life or limb.
We have deterrent measures, but we also need to implement measures that can modify the behaviour of motorists. Therefore, I would like to call upon the MOT to consider investing more resources into prioritising the roll-out of additional traffic-calming measures, in high-risk or accident-prone areas. Even if the accidents did not lead to fatalities, a higher-than-usual accident rate may mean that it is probably a matter of time before something really bad happens.
Our vulnerable road user groups include motorcyclists and their pillion riders, who make up nearly half of all fatalities last year, and the elderly, who account for 20% of fatalities. For our elderly, LTA is already rolling out more Silver Zones, which have lower speed limits and other traffic-calming measures. With a greying population, we should expect that we may start to need more Silver Zones in the future.
It is commendable that LTA and Traffic Police also work closely with the wider community, including our schools and the Singapore Road Safety Council, on road safety campaigns. That must continue. I hope that LTA can expand its very important Safe Route to School projects to work with more schools, including private schools and preschools, as well as locations with a high density of enrichment or after-school care centres, to map out students' walking patterns and identify safe-walking routes.
What about illegal vehicle modifications? These modifications include non-compliant exhaust and lighting systems, as well as tinted windows. For illegal modifications that change the speed of or even compromise the handling of the vehicle, I hope that LTA can deploy more resources to catch these offenders.
Ask anyone who has been driving regularly on Singapore's roads for the past 20 years and you would likely get unfavourable comments about the behaviours of many of our drivers. This observation is borne out by the Traffic Police statistics showing a significant increase in the number of accidents where the cause was the motorist failing to keep a proper lookout, failing to have proper control of the vehicle or changing of lanes without due care.
Ask any driver too, and they will tell you that on a daily basis, they encounter pedestrians crossing the roads without checking for vehicles or are jaywalking and also many who are engrossed in their mobile phones, or even wearing noise-cancelling earphones.
Education campaigns, road design, penalties and enforcement are very critical measures in modifying the behaviour of our road users, but perhaps, we need to address the underlying issues, borne out of life in a busy, urban city where people always seem to be in a rush and have less patience on the roads.
How many innocent lives have to be lost before our society realises that everyone – be it pedestrians or motorists, needs to just slow down and pay full attention when on our roads? The time is high for a fundamental shift in mindset, culture and behaviours. The Government cannot do this alone, each and every one of us has an important part to play.
Ms Yeo Wan Ling: The Friendly Streets pilot, launched just last year, is a welcomed move as it builds gracious neighbourhoods and inclusive communities. No doubt, in a bustling new town like Punggol, with its park connectors, walkable precincts and penchant for sustainable cycling commutes, Friendly Streets will make our neighbourhoods more convenient, comfortable and safe for our pedestrians and cyclists.
Can the Ministry give an update to the learning points gleamed from the earlier Friendly Streets Pilot in Ang Mo Kio, Bukit Batok West, Tampines, Toa Payoh and West Coast? How will these streets be seamlessly integrated into our existing infrastructure, to ensure a cohesive and sustainable urban environment? Can Friendly Streets also be expanded to include better support for our delivery riders? And finally, in the roll-out plans for other new neighbourhoods, will proactive-mobility towns, like Punggol, be featured in next rollout of Friendly Streets?
Mr Ang Wei Neng: Chairman, currently, LTA solely focuses on constructing covered walkways within a 400-metre radius of MRT stations, and a 200-metre radius of bus interchanges and limited number of bus stops. However, this approach neglects many other major bus stops that are linked to town centres, markets, hawker centres, polyclinics and other essential amenities that are not situated near MRT stations or bus interchanges.
Since 2013, and on several occasions in this House thereafter, I have consistently urged LTA to consider expanding the covered walkway network to connect not only to MRT stations and bus interchanges, but also to other significant bus stops.
Given Singapore's hot and humid weather, coupled with occasional rain, as well as its ageing population, I strongly urge LTA to prioritise making the first-mile and last-mile walking journeys more accessible, more comfortable and more convenient at all major bus stops across Singapore. Enhancing the walking experience not only helps to improve public transport ridership, it also contributes to promoting a healthy lifestyle, meeting our Healthier SG objective.
Should LTA face financial constraints, I propose that MOT collaborates with the Ministry of Health (MOH) to leverage on the Healthier SG fund for more covered walkways. Improving the walking experience requires a coordinated effort across various Government departments and agencies.
Mr Muhamad Faisal Bin Abdul Manap (Aljunied): Madam, in MOT's COS 2022 debate, I had asked LTA to consider building sheltered linkways at pedestrian crossings, as part of a Silver Zone feature, towards further improving the safety of elderly Singaporeans when moving around the estate. I would like to seek updates on this suggestion.
I would also like to request that if LTA is to implement this suggestion, please do consider my ward, Kaki Bukit, for its pilot as it is one of the first few estates to have a Silver Zone. Sadly, Kaki Bukit does not even have a single sheltered linkway erected by LTA at pedestrian crossings, although I have previously sent written requests to LTA for such improvements.
Madam, in addition, I would like to suggest that LTA consider widening the pedestrian path at pedestrian crossing islands. With the increase in the use of PMAs by the elderly and physically disabled, widening such areas would enhance the safety and comfort for all users.
Finally, I would like to ask that LTA share the most common feedback LTA has received, regarding improvements to the Silver Zone features, as well as what LTA has implemented, in response to such feedback.
Mdm Chairman: Ms Poh Li San, you have two cuts. Please take them together.
Ms Poh Li San: Mdm Chair, MOT is one of the leading partners for the Age Well SG programme. Would the Ministry share details of the plans for the nationwide transformation of our transport framework and design, to enable the elderly to commute more conveniently and safely?
How does the Ministry intend to make use of the Age Well SG funding, to make it easier and more comfortable for seniors to move around in their neighbourhoods, so that they can continue to lead active lifestyles and age gracefully in their communities?
As there will be more Personal Mobility Aids (PMAs) and wheelchair users with the increasing number of elderly, does MOT intend to widen pedestrian and shared paths, and create parking spaces for PMAs, especially in older neighbourhood estates?
PMAs have been widely used in recent years, mainly by the elderly and those with mobility issues. However, there is a growing trend, including in Sembawang West, where some young people with no visible disabilities or health issues, are also using PMAs.
Some of them drive them at high speeds, with little regard for the safety of others in their vicinity. Most of them are using their PMAs to deliver food and other items, so they are probably rushing deliveries. Such errant and selfish behaviour threatens the safety of fellow walkway users, especially seniors and young children.
Hence, I fully support the recommendations tabled by the Active Mobility Advisory Panel (AMAP) in December 2023 to impose medical certification requirements and speed limitation on PMAs. Can the Ministry share the timeframe to implement these recommendations? Can seniors above a certain age, for instance, above 65, automatically qualify as eligible users, even without medical certification? Separately, what can owners who do not meet the medical criteria do with their PMAs if they are not able to use them anymore?
Mr Lim Biow Chuan: Mdm Chair, a few years ago, many pedestrians shared their concerns with me regarding the dangers they faced due to reckless cyclists on the shared footpaths. The situation has improved greatly with more enforcement by LTA officers. Many cyclists have also improved their behaviour to become more gracious when they see pedestrians on the shared footpaths.
However, lately, I have started to receive complaints about the use of PMAs by able-bodied persons who use these PMAs as a means of transport. They ride the heavy PMAs into shopping malls and at places where there are also pedestrians. And some ride the PMAs at a faster speed. This represents a hazard or danger to other users of the same space. Would LTA consider having clearer regulations regarding the use of PMAs before the situation deteriorates and then we would face the same problem that we had with PMDs. Other than regulations, may I urge LTA to do more to promote gracious behaviour among all commuters, including pedestrians, PMA users, cyclists, motorists and PMD users. There should be mutual respect for one another and we should not always take the attitude that we have the right of way all the time.
Mr Dennis Tan Lip Fong (Hougang): In the recent review of existing regulations for PMAs, such as mobility scooters, AMAP recommended a speed limit of six kilometres per hour and for users to be medically certified. I agree that there should be a reasonable speed limit, given the risk of collisions with pedestrians sharing the same path. Having said that, I also received feedback that a speed of six kilometres per hour is a bit too slow, especially for some seniors who are used to using mobility scooters to travel beyond their immediate neighbourhoods and the reduced speed would also mean longer travelling time for some. I understand that six kilometres per hour is tied to average walking speed, but I wonder whether the proposed speed can be slightly higher than six kilometres per hour, at least for wider or less busy paths.
AMAP has recommended to allow only users who are certified to have medical needs or walking difficulties to use mobility scooters. I hope this medical certification restriction will not be applied too rigidly. Some seniors may not be able to walk very far before they need to rest, due to declining physical ability, and not necessarily due to serious illness or diagnosed conditions with their lower limbs or spinal areas. PMAs do provide seniors with confidence to be out and about, which is a good thing. May I suggest the use of PMAs be extended to seniors reaching a certain age, for example, 67 or 70?
Like enforcement against illegal use of PMDs, such as e-scooters or hoverboards on roads or footpaths, which unfortunately we still see today, though less frequently than before, for the new measures to work effectively, there must be regular enforcement against illegal or unsafe use as well as against non-compliant mobility scooters, as the lack of enforcement will encourage non-compliance. Regarding enforcement efforts against PMAs able to travel beyond the prescribed speed, I note that for current e-bikes, though there may be officers at certain busy spots carrying out spot checks, we still see e-bikes exceeding the permitted speed limits, sometimes even on par with the vehicles travelling alongside them on the roads, far exceeding the 25 kilometres per hour limit. I hope LTA will consider more stringent enforcement measures to deter speeding for all mobility devices, including measures against shops that help to tweak the speed mechanisms of devices.
Regular enforcement must come hand in hand with good public education. LTA must consider how to push out the messaging on the new rules via mainstream and social media to achieve good public knowledge and consciousness. Public education should not be merely for the mobility scooter users, but for the public at large. Public knowledge of what is allowed and what is no allowed will, I believe, enhance compliance and encourage considerate use by all.
Ms Yeo Wan Ling: Madam, I declare that I am an Advisor to the National Delivery Champions Association. In our pursuit of safer and more inclusive public paths, we must also recognise the challenges faced by those who rely on PMAs for their primary livelihoods. As we consider strengthening regulations on PMAs, it is essential to approach this issue with empathy and understanding for all stakeholders.
The upcoming regulations aimed at enhancing safety and reducing misuse have raised concerns amongst our PWD food delivery and courier riders. Reducing speed limits for PMAs will affect delivery riders in terms of the number of orders accepted, in turn, affecting their livelihood for earnings. Has studies been done on the potential income losses for this affected group of riders? Will the Ministry consider some transitionary measures, including trade-in arrangements for non-compliant devices?
Some of our riders who use PMAs have long-term disabilities or are frail due to age or chronic illnesses. However, not all have medical letters or medical certificates to qualify for having a PMA. Some have medical letters which have expired or lapsed. In such cases, how can these riders be better supported to obtain the clearance for the use of PMAs?
Safety is a priority and gracious use of our walkways and roads are paramount. Implementation of strengthened regulations, however, must be fair and equitable for all stakeholders and our PWD riders’ interest must continue to be safeguarded.
Mr Gan Thiam Poh: Madam, the number of PMAs and PMDs has increased in the last few years. One reason is the jump in the number of seemingly able-bodied persons using them for transportation, especially for food deliveries. Many of them speed along walking paths, posing a danger to all pedestrians.
In December last year, AMAP recommended lowering the speed limit of all motorised PMAs from 10 kilometres per hour to six kilometres per hour and only allowing authorised retailers to sell PMAs with a maximum device speed of no more than six kilometres per hour. The panel also asked for enforcement to be stepped up with penalties. What has been the progress of the adoption of these recommendations so far to date?
Mr Gerald Giam Yean Song (Aljunied): Madam, footpath safety is a concern for many of my residents. Accidents often occur along footpaths due to a lack of awareness and courtesy among pedestrians, cyclists and PMD users. Some of my residents have suffered severe injuries as a result. I call on the Ministry to conduct more public safety education for all footpath users.
For instance, cyclists should be encouraged to sound their bell when they are some distance away from pedestrians to alert them of their approach and not wait until they are directly behind. Pedestrians should be educated to avoid suddenly changing direction without looking over their shoulders. Cyclists who disregard pedestrian safety should be taken to task.
By promoting a culture of mutual respect and responsibility, we can make our footpaths safer and more pleasant for everyone. This is not only a matter of convenience but also of public health and social cohesion.
Mr Ang Wei Neng: With the recent completion of new cycling paths spanning from East Coast Park to Pasir Ris Park, cyclists, especially those residing in the East, now enjoy added convenience. However, there remains a pressing need for more cycling infrastructure in the West, particularly for residents in the far-western areas like Nanyang. I, therefore, kindly request an update from MOT regarding the cycling path plan for the Western region, specifically in the Nanyang, Gek Poh and Pioneer estates, whether they have the progress of these plans.
One resident from Nanyang expressed his aspiration for a cycling path connecting his HDB void deck to Pioneer or Boon Lay MRT station, as well as to Jurong Lake Garden which was just completed last year, thereby providing seamless connectivity to the rest of the island through Park Connectors. I earnestly hope that MOT can work towards realising his dream earlier rather than later.
Mr Gan Thiam Poh: Madam, it has been reported that seven Malaysian and international consortia have submitted Request for Information (RFI) concept proposals for the Kuala Lumpur-Singapore high-speed rail (HSR) project; and that the Malaysian government is open to reviving the project. Would the Ministry provide an update on whether any discussions have been held with our Malaysian counterparts and what is the progress of the project to date?
Mr Ang Wei Neng: I would like to declare my interest as the advisor to the Singapore Port Workers Union (SPWU). In view of the resurgence of shipping activities post-COVID-19 and with the Maritime and Port Authority of Singapore (MPA) declaring a record annual vessel arrival tonnage at the Port of Singapore last year, I would like to seek an update from MOT regarding the readiness of our ports to accommodate the rising demand. Specifically, I am keen to know if the Mega Port Development in Tuas is on schedule.
In addition, I would also like to ask what is the current workforce size at the Tuas port as of February 2024? Are there any strategies in place to enhance connectivity for the benefit of port workers?
Meanwhile, I understand that many PSA port workers rely on chartered bus services provided at PSA for transportation. However, I am concerned about the sustainability of this arrangement in the long run. Therefore, I enquire if there are plans to introduce a feeder bus service connecting Tuas port with the nearest MRT station, which is Tuas Link MRT station, to address this concern. As we continue to develop the Tuas port, it is essential to prioritise the welfare of our port workers. I look forward to receiving updates on these matters from MOT.
Mr Melvin Yong Yik Chye: Mdm Chair, our maritime sector has been growing from strength to strength. In 2023, Singapore’s annual vessel arrival tonnage crossed the three billion gross tonnage milestone. Our container throughput also reached a new high of 39 million twenty-foot equivalent units (TEUs). What are MOT’s plans to ensure a strong pipeline of skilled workforce to support the industry’s continued growth? How does MOT plan to lower the training barriers so that our existing maritime workforce can upskill and reskill to meet the changing needs of the sector?
The continued growth in our maritime sector will be underpinned by the construction of the Tuas Mega Port, which will be the world’s largest fully automated port when it is completed. Can MOT provide an update on the development of the Tuas Mega Port? Are we on track for the target completion date?
We started Phase 1 of port operations at Tuas in September 2022. Today, we have some 800 workers working there and this is expected to double to about 1,600 workers by the end of this year. Understandably, there have been some teething transport issues, particularly in terms of public transport accessibility. In response, a working committee was set up last year to look into the transportation challenges.
Can MOT provide an update on the plans to improve public transport accessibility at Tuas Port? Can we expedite the construction of the viaduct leading to Tuas South before container traffic is expected to surge due to the operational start date of the Port Plus Hub some time in 2027, 2028? How does MOT plan to make the area around Tuas Port a better place to work so that workers will be attracted to join our maritime companies based there and help our maritime sector continue its growth story?
Ms Poh Li San: Mdm Chair, the maritime industry has embarked on a sustainability transformation and our decarbonisation efforts can be further accelerated. What is Singapore doing to catalyse the adoption of green maritime solutions?
The Energy Observer, the world’s first hydrogen-powered ship, docked in Singapore for a 10-day stopover in March 2022. Are there plans for subsequent phases of Tuas Port development to cater to maritime vessels using hydrogen fuel in the future? Also, how will the Government ensure the safety and supply of alternative marine fuels?
The Chairman: Mr Neil Parekh. You have two cuts, you can take them together.
Mr Neil Parekh Nimil Rajnikant (Nominated Member): Mdm Chairperson, in line with Singapore's Nationally Determined Contribution, we have set targets for our domestic harbour craft sector to achieve net zero emissions by 2050.
To achieve this transition, from 2030, all new harbour craft operating in Singapore's port waters will be required to be fully electric, capable of using B100 biofuels, or compatible with net-zero fuels, such as hydrogen. The ports will also be adopting electrified equipment and vehicles, energy-saving infrastructure and solar energy generation to offset electricity consumption.
We are enhancing port efficiency, which can improve the sustainability of the maritime sector on top of cost savings for businesses. Even the international shipping industry has responded by exploring the use of alternative fuels, such as hydrogen, methanol and ammonia. This is shown by the growing order books for methanol and ammonia fuelled new-builds and retrofits.
May I ask MOT: how is Singapore supporting maritime businesses in adopting greener solutions and being a global player in achieving these standards? Also, what measures are being taken to develop safety standards and operational procedures and prepare the workforce to handle these new fuels safely?
Recent events, such as the Russia-Ukraine conflict and United States-China geopolitical tensions have led to a reconfiguration of global supply chains. Additionally, the past few years have seen disruptions in the global supply networks with port shutdowns during the pandemic and the Houthi Attacks in the Red Sea and the droughts at the Panama Canal. Also emerging trends towards renewable energy and the economic growth of regions in Asia Pacific and in Latin America could lead to further adjustments in supply chain dynamics.
In response, many companies are shifting from efficiency towards resilience and moving away from \"just in time\" to \"just in case\", by diversifying their supply chains. In this regard, some of the strategies businesses are employing include shifting or commencing manufacturing in Southeast Asia. Our neighbours, Malaysia and Indonesia, are also attracting foreign investment for manufacturing.
While companies have also increasingly expanded their supply chain functions in Singapore, we are also seeing heightened competition from neighbours. With the robust connectivity and increased capacity at the port and airport in the future, Singapore is well-positioned to take advantage of the opportunities arising from these shifts. May I ask MOT: how can we help companies cope with disruptions and further strengthen Singapore's position as a supply chain hub?
The Chairman: Mr Saktiandi Supaat, you have three cuts. Please take them together.
Mr Saktiandi Supaat: Mdm Chair, the recent Red Sea shipping disruptions has added to ongoing disruptions in the Black Sea caused by the Ukraine war and concerns over dwindling water levels in the Panama Canal. Hundreds of container ships are re-routing from the Red Sea to go around the Cape of Good Hope at Africa's southern tip, adding around 10 to 15 days to their voyages.
At the same time, I am heartened to hear that our port received a record 3.09 billion annual gross tons in vessel arrivals and handled a record number of shipping containers in 2023. Presumably, that is not only due to our central location on these important trade routes, but also the safe and efficient operations of our port. The record vessel arrivals in 2023 has also helped us break the 2017 record for bunker sales, registering 51.82 million tons in 2023.
Yet, other indicators are also relevant if we are to serve as a \"catch-up\" port for ships that face delays in other parts of the world. A Statista report published in November 2023 showed that shipping vessels spent a median time of about 0.76 days in the Port of Singapore in 2022, a longer time spent within the port's vicinity compared to the previous years. How can Singapore enhance our port services to maintain the competitiveness of our port and continue facilitating the smooth functioning of supply chains amidst recent disruptions?
The transport sector provides a wide array of jobs, from operating our aviation and maritime hubs, to powering 6.4 million daily public transport journeys, to supporting those activities up the supply chain like maintenance and repair.
As we look to add more than 50 stations to our existing 200 MRT and LRT stations by 2030, hundreds to thousands of new roles will need to be filled. The move of port operations to the new Tuas Mega Port will also require manpower. Concurrently, our ageing population and reduction in foreign worker dependency could add to the supply crunch in the workforce. This is before we even consider the growth areas of green transportation and digitalisation.
Can the Ministry share what types of jobs in the transport sector are seeing supply constraints and emerging jobs that our workers can explore in the future? How are we addressing our human capital constraints going forward, especially in the transport sector?
On the aviation sector, we heard at last year's COS that Changi Airport's passenger traffic volumes, flights and city links stood at about 80% of pre-COVID-19 levels and were expected to return to pre-pandemic levels by 2024, if not earlier. How does Changi's current air traffic volume compare to pre-COVID numbers?
I have read other reports which are less optimistic. They name several stumbling blocks for Changi, including the strong Singapore dollar that discourages inbound travel, low-cost airline Jetstar Asia's sluggish recovery and regulatory issues hindering the recovery of flight capacity on the Singapore-Jakarta route. Our head start for being the first in Asia to reopen to international travellers is slowly disappearing, as airports in Incheon, Taipei, Bangkok and Hong Kong are fast catching up.
To safeguard our aviation hub status, we must pay as much attention to quality as we do to quantity. Post-pandemic, many aviation workers are either new to the industry or have returned after a significant break. As the travel volumes at Changi recover from COVID-19 disruption, may I ask the Ministry how is the aviation workforce coping and what plans do we have to future-proof the aviation workforce?
Ms Yeo Wan Ling: Singapore has been continuously building on its connectivity as a hub for business and trade. With the upcoming Tuas Port and Changi Airport Terminal 5, we are no doubt building capacities for the future by investing in state-of-the-art infrastructure, adopting innovative technologies and enhancing operational efficiency.
However, to fully realise the potential of our hubs, we must not forget that our workforce need upskilling and clear career progressions so that our hubs continue to be attractive and exciting to new entrants. Can the Ministry provide us with an update on the Tuas Port and Terminal 5 developments and how can Singapore prepare employees to enter the maritime and aviation sectors while smoothening the process for professionals making mid-career switches?
Mr Gan Thiam Poh: Madam, the construction of Changi Airport Terminal 5 was put on hold for two years due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Would MOT provide a progress update on its construction works and whether it is on track to be operational around the middle of 2030s? Would it be possible to expedite the construction process?
The Chairman: Ms Poh Li San, you have two cuts. Please take them together.
Ms Poh Li San: Mdm Chair, I would like to declare my interest as an employee in the aviation sector.
From 2026, travellers flying out of Singapore will need to pay a levy to support the use of greener jet fuel. MOT aims for Sustainable Aviation Fuel to constitute 1% of all jet fuel used at Changi Airport and Seletar Airport in 2026. The longer-term goal is for Sustainable Aviation Fuel to reach 3% to 5% by 2030 to help reduce Singapore's international aviation emissions by about 4%.
Singapore is the first country in the world to impose a Sustainable Aviation Fuel levy on passengers. The purchase of the fuel will be set at a fixed quantum, based on the Sustainable Aviation Fuel target and projected Sustainable Aviation Fuel price at the time of purchase.
How does the longer-term goal and the means for funding the higher cost of Sustainable Aviation Fuel adoption compare with other key aviation hubs? Is the increase in the supply of Sustainable Aviation Fuel on track to meet the 4% goal in 2030? How can the cost of Sustainable Aviation Fuels be available to Singapore be kept competitive given the increase in global demand for feedstock and biofuels?
MOT recently announced the $120 million upgrade for the Singapore Aviation Academy, which will boost its training capacity by 20% when it is completed in 2026. The Academy intends to update its courses on air traffic safety, safety and security and aviation management.
In view of the high traffic growth trajectory and the opening of Terminal 5 in the middle of 2030s, how does the Civil Aviation Authority of Singapore (CAAS) intend to recruit and train aviation professionals to support other roles, such as aeronautical and aerospace engineers for maintenance, repair, overhaul (MRO) functions, air cargo logisticians and ground handling operators? These functions are undergoing changes as more advanced technologies and new work processes are being deployed.
How is CAAS working with the Institutes of Higher Learning to ensure that the course curriculum related to aviation are updated with the latest industry standards and practices? Based on the projected number of graduates from the Institute of Technical Education (ITE), polytechnics and universities, will there be sufficient well-trained professionals for our aviation industry in the next 10 years?
The aviation industry is traditionally heavily male-dominated, with only about 20% representation by women globally, based on a recent Women Aviation International Advisory Board study. The representation in Asia Pacific and Singapore may be even lower. To tap on the other half of the talent pool, are there plans to encourage more women to join the sector and are there targeted initiatives, such as scholarships and internships, to attract and recruit more women to join the industry?
The Chairman: Minister Chee Hong Tat.
The Minister for Transport (Mr Chee Hong Tat): Chairman, I thank Members for their questions and suggestions. I also wish to thank Singaporeans for sharing valuable views and feedback during MOT's Forward Singapore (Forward SG) engagements and helping to shape our vision for Singapore's land, air and sea transport together. MOT is focusing on three areas for this year's COS: enhancing our liveability, living environment and livelihoods, by putting people at the heart of what we do.
Madam, transport is about connectivity, connecting Singapore with the world and our people and businesses with one another within Singapore. We are also preparing for future challenges, such as climate change and technological developments and to overcome our land, labour and carbon constraints. Let me start with how we are making Singapore more liveable through better connectivity and convenience for our people.
Core to this vision is our car-lite strategy, where Walk-Cycle-Ride are the main modes of transport. During the Forward SG exercise, many participants agreed this was the right direction to take in land-scarce Singapore, to meet our connectivity needs in a sustainable manner.
We have increased our Walk-Cycle-Ride mode share for peak period journeys, from 71% in 2016 to 74% in 2022, while the proportion who drove decreased from 29% to 26% over the same period. Singaporeans also shared their desire for a more inclusive and accessible public transport system, with good first-mile and last-mile infrastructure to support walking and active mobility and to prepare for an ageing society.
Our rail network is the backbone of Singapore's public transport system. Over the past decade, we have grown our rail network by 40%, with the opening of Downtown Line (DTL) and the earlier stages of TEL.
Many are looking forward to the fourth stage of TEL. The seven new TEL stations from Tanjong Rhu to Bayshore will improve connectivity and shorten travel times for residents in the east, such as those staying in Marine Parade and East Coast. Travelling from Marine Parade to Shenton Way will take 20 minutes via TEL, compared to about 40 minutes today.
TEL4 is currently going through rigorous testing to ensure system resilience and reliability before commencing operations. I am happy to announce that TEL4 will open for passenger service on 23 June this year. Commuters can enjoy free rides on TEL4 during the preview on 21 June.
Besides TEL, the North East Line (NEL) will be extended with the opening of Punggol Coast Station by end of this year. This station will provide a new link for residents in Punggol North, and enable convenient access to the Punggol Digital District and Singapore Institute of Technology Punggol campus.
We had earlier introduced six new trains, which will reduce wait times for commuters along the entire NEL. Minister of State Low Yen Ling and her residents will also be happy to know we will open Hume station on the DTL next year.
We will bring the MRT closer to more residents over the next few years, but our task is not without challenges as many projects were delayed by the pandemic. This includes the TEL Stage 5 and Downtown Line Stage 3 extension which will link these two lines.
We have tried our best to catch up and to overcome the construction challenges of tunnelling in close proximity to existing critical infrastructure. We will open Bedok South, Sungei Bedok and Xilin Stations in 2026.
LTA will also close the loop of the Circle Line and open three new stations in 2026 – Keppel, Cantonment and Prince Edward – between the existing HarbourFront and Marina Bay stations. To facilitate integration works, we are temporarily closing one platform each at Telok Blangah and HarbourFront stations from January to May this year. When we complete the full circle, commuters can enjoy more direct routes to the city centre.
Altogether, these expansion efforts up to 2026 will add 16 stations to our rail network.
To Mr Saktiandi Supaat and Mr Gan Thiam Poh's questions, these will benefit 90,000 more households across the east, northeast and central areas, bringing us closer to our target for eight in 10 households to be within a 10-minute walk of a train station by the 2030s.
Besides connectivity, the rail network must continue to provide reliable service. Last year, we completed major renewal works on the North-South and East-West Lines. This project took more than a decade, through close partnership between LTA, SMRT, manufacturers and contractors.
The Bukit Panjang Light Rail Transit (LRT), or BPLRT, is also undergoing a major renewal programme to be completed by 2026. Renewal works are progressing well and we will be putting new trains into service. To facilitate testing of these new trains, we will implement Early Closures on Fridays and weekends from late March to June this year. BPLRT has also been running on a single-loop service during off-peak hours and weekends since 2019.
I thank residents for your understanding and patience. Starting later this month, we will gradually resume double-loop service during more time periods.
Madam, besides major renewal projects, a strong daily operations and maintenance regime is key to rail reliability. Through Government investment and the dedicated efforts of our rail operators and workers, the MRT network has maintained a Mean Kilometres-Between-Failure, or MKBF, of over one million train-kilometres since 2019. This is comparable to some of the world's best metro systems.
While reliability has improved, operators' maintenance costs have increased. Our next goal is to work closely with operators to achieve high reliability while keeping costs sustainable. This includes developing our workforce and improving productivity.
Mr Melvin Yong asked about the Rail Manpower Development Package (RMDP). Through RMDP, rail operators have worked closely with the unions to train around 3,300 workers to pick up technical skills such as data analytics and condition-based monitoring. Another 700 workers will undergo similar training this year.
I want to assure Brother Melvin Yong and our workers that building a future-ready rail workforce will remain a priority. From 2024 to 2028, the Government will provide a Rail Reliability and Performance Incentive to the operators to incentivise them to keep up rail reliability standards, invest in workers and improve manpower productivity.
Mr Saktiandi Supaat asked how we will keep public transport affordable. We have explained this previously. Let me recap the key points.
The Government currently provides over $2 billion of subsidies for public transport every year. To keep fares affordable for commuters, the Public Transport Council did not grant the maximum allowable fare increase in the past two years. So, the Government provided additional subsidies of about $200 million and $300 million in 2023 and 2024 respectively.
Two million commuters, including seniors, students and workfare recipients, enjoy concession fares. We also provide public transport vouchers to help lower-income households.
Through these measures, we have kept public transport affordable for Singaporeans. Among lower-income households, spending on public transport as a proportion of household income has reduced from 3.1% in 2013 to 2.4% in 2022.
Keeping fares affordable without overburdening taxpayers requires us to optimise our resources. In some cases, this means redeploying buses and bus captains from trunk routes running parallel to new MRT lines, which have experienced substantial drops in ridership, to new feeder services for residents in new estates.
We will continue to balance evolving transport needs across different estates to serve more commuters while being financially prudent and keeping overall costs sustainable.
To complement our rail and bus network, we will make it more convenient to walk or cycle to transport nodes. As announced at this year's Budget, the Government will invest $3.5 billion in Age Well SG.
This includes $1 billion over the next decade to improve first-mile and last-mile connectivity in our neighbourhoods by expanding the Friendly Streets initiative and enhancing commuter infrastructure for residents. Senior Minister of State Amy Khor will elaborate on this.
We also want to promote safe usage of footpaths, which will become more important with an ageing population. We accept the recommendations from AMAP on the use of PMAs.
The panel had recommended certifying those who want to use mobility scooters, reducing the speed limit from 10 kilometres per hour to six kilometres per hour and imposing size limits for PMAs on paths.
Madam, I agree with AMAP's recommendations because they will help to enhance safety. There are trade-offs involved and we expect pushback from some PMA users, but we must be clear that between ensuring safety for residents and providing convenience for PMA users, safety must come first.
The Straits Times had an article on PMAs over the weekend. It quoted the views of pedestrians, including seniors and also PMA retailers. Many agree that a lower speed limit will make it much safer for the community. This is also the feedback that AMAP received from its focus group discussions and I believe many hon Members in this House would have heard similar views from our residents.
Demand for PMAs will increase as our population ages. This is why we must take action now so that we can give users and retailers sufficient time to adjust. Senior Parliamentary Secretary Baey Yam Keng will elaborate further.
Many Members have spoken on this matter – Mr Gan Thiam Poh, Mr Gerald Giam, Mr Lim Biow Chuan, Ms Poh Li San, Mr Dennis Tan and Ms Yeo Wan Ling. I am glad that Members from both sides of the House agree with our position that safety must come first and that enforcement is important to complement the engagement and education efforts.
Public paths are used by many pedestrians, including seniors and young children. Cyclists and PMA users should be considerate, slow down and give way to pedestrians. It is not right to jeopardise public safety for personal convenience. Safety must come first.
The large majority of cyclists and PMA users do pay attention to safety and I thank them for doing their part. For the minority who endanger the safety of other path users, we will take enforcement action against them. Those who ride recklessly on paths can be fined up to $10,000 and/or imprisoned for up to 12 months.
I would like to express my appreciation to our enforcement officers, or \"path protectors\", for their hard work to engage and educate path users and to enforce against errant individuals. Your job is not easy, but it is an important mission to protect the safety of all path users. So, please continue to do it well, without fear or favour. We will support you and we will back you up.
Madam, complementing trains and buses is point-to-point transport, which includes street-hail taxis and ride-hail services. These provide the convenience of direct journeys for commuters who do not own cars. Senior Minister of State Amy Khor will provide an update in her speech, including how we are making taxis more viable to improve street-hail services for commuters such as our seniors.
On private vehicles, Mr Saktiandi asked if introducing distance-based charging would allow us to increase total vehicle population by a certain percentage, while still achieving our car-lite vision. Some commentators have made similar suggestions.
This idea is not new. In 2002, the Economic Review Committee recommended, \"a gradual lowering of car ownership taxes accompanied by an increase in COE supply and shifting towards a better balance between ownership charges and usage charges\".
With the ERP system in place in 1998, vehicle ownership taxes were reduced during the 2000s. In 2002 and 2003, the Government released an additional 5,000 Category E (Cat E) COEs on top of the allowable vehicle growth rate, or VGR. However, it is not feasible to only rely on usage-based charges to prevent traffic congestion as these would have to be set at very high rates, which might not be acceptable to many car owners.
Usage-based charges need to work in tandem with ownership controls and other measures like parking charges to achieve a more balanced and sustainable outcome for all stakeholders, while ensuring smooth traffic on our roads.
Mdm Chair, MOT is open to reviewing the idea of having a one-off increase in our total vehicle population spread over a few years, which is accompanied by higher usage-based charges to prevent traffic congestion.
This includes location- and time-based charges like our current ERP system, as well as the possibility of having distance-based charging in future, which some commentators have suggested. But I hope Members recognise that the trade-offs are not straightforward and need to be studied carefully before a decision is made. For example, some stakeholders such as taxi, PHC and delivery drivers will likely pay higher usage-based charges as they drive longer distances. We will need to examine the impact on these groups, though usage-based charging is in principle a fair approach.
Let me turn to our living environment. As we expand our transport network, we must continue to reduce the carbon footprint so that our transport system becomes more sustainable.
There are some no-regrets initiatives that reduce both emissions and costs. These we will pursue. However, other measures require us to balance our climate goals with cost and competitiveness considerations while we move in tandem with global developments.
We launched the Sustainable Air Hub Blueprint at the Changi Aviation Summit last month, an important step in our journey to achieve net-zero emissions by 2050. MOT announced a target of 1% Sustainable Aviation Fuels uplift in Singapore from 2026. Our goal is to raise the Sustainable Aviation Fuel target beyond 1% in 2026 to between 3% and 5% by 2030, subject to global developments and the wider availability and adoption of Sustainable Aviation Fuel.
As Ms Poh Li San noted, our approach differs from the volumetric mandates imposed in Europe, or the incentives-based approach in the United States. What we collect with our Sustainable Aviation Fuel levy from 2026 will be used to centrally procure Sustainable Aviation Fuel on behalf of airlines operating at Changi Airport.
This provides cost certainty to airlines and passengers when there is volatility in Sustainable Aviation Fuel prices and ensures a level playing field for all airlines operating out of Singapore. Importantly, we hope it will encourage fuel producers to invest further in Sustainable Aviation Fuel production facilities in Singapore and the region.
For maritime, we will introduce a new sustainability pillar under the Maritime Cluster Fund to catalyse first-mover adoption of sustainable solutions. MPA will set aside $15 million till 2030 to co-fund qualifying costs for adopting pre-approved sustainability solutions. Small and medium enterprises (SMEs) can receive 50% co-funding, while non-SMEs can receive 30% co-funding, up to $30,000 per solution.
In his Budget speech, Deputy Prime Minister Wong announced two other schemes to support sustainability initiatives in the maritime sector.
First, maritime companies can tap on the Energy Efficiency Grant by end-2024, which will provide two tiers of support for energy-efficient equipment. Under the base tier, they can receive up to 70% co-funding for pre-approved energy efficient domestic port and harbour craft equipment until March 2026. Across both tiers, they can receive up to $350,000 per company.
Second, from April 2024, harbour craft owners and operators may apply for loans through the Enterprise Financing Scheme – Green. This provides enhanced risk-share of 70% for loans by participating financial institutions for green solutions.
On Ms Poh Li San’s question on green maritime solutions, we are preparing Singapore for a multi-fuel future that will include hydrogen and its carriers like ammonia and methanol. MPA successfully conducted the world’s first ship-to-containership methanol bunkering operation last year. We are developing a national standard on methanol bunkering to support commercial-scale operations.
Last December, MPA issued an expression of interest (EOI) for interested parties to submit proposals for the supply of methanol as a marine bunker fuel in Singapore. The Energy Market Authority (EMA) and MPA have shortlisted six consortiums whose proposals will be further developed to provide low- or zero-carbon ammonia solutions for power generation and bunkering on Jurong Island. As the world’s leading bunkering port, these are crucial steps to prepare Singapore for the transition to cleaner maritime fuels.
Madam, I spoke earlier on enhancing Walk-Cycle-Ride as a key pillar of greening our land transport sector. The other is electrification of our vehicle fleet.
Ms Poh Li San asked about the take-up of cleaner-energy vehicles. In 2023, more than 18% of new cars registered were EVs. This is a 50% increase from 2022. Hybrid car sales have increased from 39% in 2022 to 47% in\t2023. So, together,\tnearly\ttwo-thirds\tof\tcars registered in 2023 were cleaner-energy models.
In the first two months of this year, 30% of cars registered were EVs and almost 50% were hybrids. So, altogether, about 80% of new cars are now cleaner-energy vehicles.
The efforts to expand our charging network in HDB car parks are key to support a growing EV population. Over one in three HDB car parks are now equipped with EV chargers. By end of 2025, every HDB car park will be equipped with EV chargers. These will support overnight slow charging, which remains the main strategy for our charging network. This is adequate for most drivers.
However, as Mr Ang Wei Neng and Mr Lim Biow Chuan noted, high mileage fleet vehicles, such as taxis, private hire vehicles or light goods vehicles, often need a mid-day top-up. They require high-powered fast chargers, which are now mostly located at commercial spaces such as shopping malls. But these are not the usual rest spots for many fleet drivers.
The Government will kickstart the deployment of fast chargers at HDB town centres and JTC’s premises, which are frequented by fleet drivers during their breaks and also close to amenities such as hawker centres and coffee shops. We recently launched the first fast charging points at Toa Payoh HDB Hub and Oasis Terraces in Punggol in January, and will deploy fast chargers at Boon Lay, Redhill, Kallang Bahru, Tampines, Woodlands and other areas. 54.\tIn total, there will be 120 fast chargers installed at about 60 carparks under this initiative.
Finally, let me speak about how the transport sector improves the livelihoods of our people.
Our aviation and maritime sectors are important sources of good jobs for Singaporeans. They are also key enablers for many other sectors in our economy, including manufacturing, finance and tourism. Asia Pacific is projected to be the fastest growing region for air travel over the next two decades. Changi is well-placed to ride on this growth.
We reopened the expanded Terminal 2 in November last year. This increased Changi’s annual capacity to 90 million passengers across all four terminals. We are on track to break ground on Terminal 5’s construction next year. When completed in the mid-2030s, T5 will add another 50 million passengers to Changi’s annual capacity and further strengthen Singapore’s aviation connectivity.
Works have also resumed on the Changi East Industrial Zone, to be completed in the mid-2030s. This will double Singapore’s air cargo handling capacity from about three million tonnes per annum today to more than five million tonnes per annum.
Our seaport also broke several records last year. Annual vessel arrival tonnage crossed three billion Gross Tonnage, and Singapore’s container throughput reached 39 million 20-foot equivalent units. We are currently the second-largest container port in the world and the world’s largest transshipment hub port.
Our maritime sector’s growth has remained robust going into 2024. In January, our Singapore Registry of Ships surpassed 100 million Gross Tonnage for the first time and our container volumes have further increased compared to the strong performance in 2023.
Tuas Port now has eight berths. We can look forward to three additional berths commencing operations at Tuas Port by end-2024. There are currently 800 workers at Tuas Port, and as pointed out by several Members, this number will grow as operations ramp up.
Mr Ang Wei Neng and Mr Melvin Yong asked about connectivity for our workers to Tuas Port. Madam, this work is ongoing and we have been making progress. We will continue to work closely with our tripartite partners and Government agencies to improve the transport options for our workers. For example, we have improved road conditions in Tuas, and extended the operating hours of Bus Service 248M. For the Tuas Road Viaduct, LTA will expedite the construction timeline and we will manage traffic demand during the construction.
Beyond increasing our capacity, we need to preserve our trusted position as global aviation and maritime hubs, as companies respond to shifts in international supply chains and trade networks. Mr Neil Parekh spoke about this earlier.
Given our trusted reputation and strong connectivity, Singapore is well-placed to capture opportunities arising from these trends. MOT is working with other Government agencies and industry partners to further strengthen Singapore’s position as a node for international trade and as a leading global supply chain hub. This will be a priority for our Ministry over the next few years.
Through regular engagements with industry, we have identified collaboration opportunities to optimise inter-modal connectivity through our seaport and airport.
Just to give one example. Currently, the time taken for an air-sea inter-modal transshipment may exceed five days. There are two main reasons for this. First, logistics providers face uncertainty in the arrival and departure times, and to be prudent, they factor in buffer periods between arrival and departure of goods. Second, for smaller logistics providers, especially our SMEs, booking of flights and preparation of permits are still largely manual and last-minute changes in vessel or flight schedules, especially in the current environment, will add to the duration.
Madam, we want to at least halve the dwell time. I have told my colleagues that our stretched target is to enable the goods to depart Singapore on a connecting flight or vessel within 24 hours of its arrival. If we can do that, it will reduce time and cost for logistic providers and their customers, and importantly, we allow Singapore to differentiate ourselves from the competition as a trusted and efficient multi-modal logistics hub. We do what other people cannot do.
I am pleased to announce that DB Schenker, PSA, Cargo Community Network, SATS, Singapore Airlines Cargo and the Singapore Aircargo Agents Association have decided to come together to form an Alliance for Action (AfA), together with MOT, to co-develop solutions that can overcome the current bottlenecks and achieve our shared targets. There are many entities involved because there are many moving parts in these operations. But that is also why we need to bring them all together and work closely. And that is one of our strengths in Singapore – the ability to work beyond Government; with our industry, with our unions, through the AfA, and to deliver results and get things done.
We will also continue to engage industry players to identify more collaboration opportunities to review our rules and enhance our processes, which can support new business models and innovations.
Next, we will lower barriers for workers to upskill, reskill and transition to new roles into and within our transport sectors. Mr Melvin Yong spoke about this earlier. We expect demand for aviation professionals to increase steadily given the growth in air traffic and opening of Terminal 5.
To Ms Poh Li San’s question on our recruitment and training plans, we have intensified our talent attraction efforts, showcasing the variety of exciting careers available at the OneAviation Careers Fair and roadshows. Last year, we launched the Work-Study Diploma in Customer Experience Management in Aviation, adding to the 1,800 graduates from our aviation and aerospace-related programmes every year. Aviation employers like SATS and dnata continue expand their targeted intake of ITE Work-Study Diploma students to 90 this year, which is more than double that of 2023.
Ms Poh asked about the plans to encourage more women to join the industry. Madam, there are many talented women in the aviation industry, including Ms Poh, and they are handling important roles across fields like engineering, customer service and air traffic control. In fact, about 40% of our 500 air traffic controllers are women. CAAS will continue to work with partners such as the Women in Aviation Singapore Chapter to encourage more ladies to join the sector.
Ms Yeo Wan Ling and Mr Melvin Yong asked how we ensure a strong pipeline of skilled maritime workers. Our Career Conversion Programme lowers barriers for employees seeking to move to new or enhanced roles by equipping them with new skills, as their companies undergo business transformation. The programme was expanded to cover functions in the maritime digitalisation, decarbonisation and cybersecurity spaces. It has also been enhanced to allow 100% on-the-job training, based on industry partners’ and employees’ feedback.
Beyond recruitment, we are working with our tripartite partners to develop our workers’ capabilities and skillsets to seize new opportunities. For maritime, the Tripartite Advisory Panel, convened by the Singapore Maritime Foundation (SMF) and supported by MPA, has completed its year-long review with industry partners and IHLs to prepare Maritime Singapore’s workforce to upskill and transform alongside industry developments. A key success factor will be our strong tripartite process to identify skills relevant for employers and employees and develop courses providing workers with these in-demand skills. And this is important to achieve a win-win post-training outcome for employers and workers. MPA and SMF have established a Joint Office for Talent and Skills to drive this effort.
To Mr Neil Parekh’s question, as we press on with maritime decarbonisation and digitalisation, we must equip workers with skills to work efficiently and safely onboard vessels powered by green fuels. MPA will work closely with our tripartite partners to provide the training infrastructure.
Singapore can also play a part in training the international maritime community in selected key capabilities, to grow the maritime ecosystem of talent, ideas and companies here.
For aviation, we launched the Air Transport Industry Transformation Map 2025 last year. CAAS, in partnership with Workforce Singapore, has launched a year-long sector-wide manpower study to plan for the future of the aviation workforce. CAAS is working with the IHLs to incorporate emerging areas such as automation, artificial intelligence and sustainability into their courses. We are expanding the adoption of automation and assistive tools for workers at scale across the airport, making jobs more age-friendly and reducing barriers to entry. And we hope this can help us to attract and retain more workers.
Next, we recognise that business costs have increased due to global inflation and a tightening labour market. We have been reviewing our rules and processes to help businesses reduce avoidable costs and save time. Members may recall I shared some cost-saving measures for businesses during the Ministry of Finance's Committee of Supply last week, and also during the Singapore Maritime New Year event earlier this year.
I believe it is important for Government agencies to be pro-business and to continually improve our rules and processes, to help our businesses innovate new ideas, and enable them to save time, save money and save effort. It also provides useful opportunities for the public, private and people sectors to work in partnership and to tackle challenges together, which is what we want to encourage under Forward SG.
Coming back to supply chain connectivity, we will streamline land transshipment procedures so that instead of two permits – one for import and one for export – companies transshipping goods via land checkpoints will only require one permit. This will be implemented in the first quarter of 2025 because we need to make system changes and legislative amendments. It will help companies to save cost and save time. Aggregated across the industry, we estimate potential savings of up to $2 million per year. There will be even higher savings if the volume of goods transshipped via our land checkpoints increases in future.
Additionally, we are allowing Malaysian trucks and drivers that meet relevant safety, security and operational requirements to directly access our container terminals to handle cross-border containers. So, there is no need for double-handling. PSA commenced a pilot with one company last year and has now expanded it to all eligible companies. More than 300 containers have been handled under this arrangement so far and I expect the volume to grow over time. It has helped to reduce manpower and business costs for logistics companies, which they can then pass on as savings for their customers.
At our seaport, Singapore rolled out Phase 2 of digitalPort@SG last year. This includes a Just-In-Time Planning and Coordination Platform, which provides incoming vessels with their estimated time of berthing, allowing them to route their journeys more efficiently and save on fuel costs and time. Marine services providers can optimise their resources to minimise waiting times for customers. Again, we want to do something that will differentiate us from other ports and this is one potential area. Through the use of technology, through the use of data sharing amongst the ecosystem, we are able to do this. In many other ports, they may find difficulty in implementing something like this.
We are also going to complete the 5G coverage in our port waters by mid-2025 and this will allow more seamless provision of marine services. All of these can help our vessels to come to Singapore to “catch up” on delays and if they experience some route disruptions elsewhere, they will turn to Singapore as a trusted, reliable hub.
Madam, we envision a home, our home, where Singaporeans enjoy a range of accessible, reliable and affordable transport options in a very liveable city; where we are proud of our clean and green living environment; and where our businesses create good jobs that improve the livelihoods of our people. Singapore has some key strengths that allow us to achieve these aspirations: our ability to plan long-term and prepare ahead of time; our strong tripartite partnership with industry and unions that has been built on a high degree of trust over the years; and our openness to investment, to ideas, to talent from around the world to complement our Singapore core. Together, I am confident that we can chart a brighter future for Singapore and all Singaporeans for many years to come. [Applause.]
The Chairman: Senior Minister of State Dr Amy Khor.
The Senior Minister of State for Transport (Dr Amy Khor Lean Suan): Chairman, let me share how we will build a more inclusive and friendly transport system, for a more liveable and sustainable city. As the Minister earlier announced, we will set aside $1 billion of additional funding to expand the Friendly Streets initiative and build more commuter infrastructure. Let me elaborate.
At last year’s COS, I announced the Friendly Streets initiative to make walking in our neighbourhoods safer and more comfortable, and roads more pedestrian friendly. Ms Yeo Wan Ling asked about the progress of this initiative. We began with five pilots, developing the Friendly Streets features with localised task forces comprising grassroots leaders and agencies to address needs on the ground. Works have already started at Bukit Batok West, Ang Mo Kio and Tampines, and will start at Toa Payoh and West Coast in the first half of this year. Residents will benefit from traffic-calming features, such as road humps, and inclusive features, such as barrier-free crossings and upgraded bus stops. Having sat in the taskforce meetings, I am heartened by the passion of stakeholders to create safer and more inclusive roads.
We will expand the Friendly Streets initiative to all HDB towns by 2030, as well as to private estates with high-activity areas and key amenities nearby. Starting this year, we will begin engagements on 10 more Friendly Streets in Bedok, Buangkok, Bukit Panjang, Choa Chu Kang, Jurong East, Pek Kio, Punggol, Holland/Buona Vista, Sembawang and Tiong Bahru/Havelock. These locations have a higher proportion of seniors or young families. We will work closely with the community to implement features to meet residents’ needs. For example, the upcoming Friendly Street in Sembawang will provide young families in the area a safer and more comfortable walk between the MRT station, bus interchange and Bukit Canberra Community Club.
Next, in support of Age Well SG and Healthier SG, we will do even more to support walking as the first and last mile mode of commuting. Ms Poh Li San will be glad to know that we will enhance our commuter infrastructure over the next decade: first, by building more covered linkways; second, by upgrading more bus stops with senior-friendly features; and third, by retrofitting more pedestrian overhead bridges (POBs) with lifts. Besides helping seniors stay socially connected and active, these will create more comfortable commutes for all.
Today, we have around 285 kilometers of covered linkways built by LTA connecting major transport nodes to key amenities within a 400-metre radius. Mr Ang Wei Neng will be glad to know that we will now expand this parameter, to also build covered linkways to connect MRT stations to more Friendly Streets that are largely within an 800-metre radius, and also to some key amenities nearby. LTA will conduct site studies to identify suitable locations for these covered linkways, including evaluating the many requests for covered linkways, such as Mr Faisal Manap's.
We will also upgrade more bus stops to better accommodate seniors and those with mobility challenges. Under LTA’s Bus Stop Infrastructure Enhancement Programme, we have upgraded 255 bus stops to be barrier-free and senior-friendly, and expect to upgrade another 105 bus stops by 2025. We will go further to make even more bus stops senior-friendly, especially those near healthcare institutions or in areas with many seniors. These bus stops will have more seats with arm and back rests, rain screens and wheelchair-friendly waiting areas.
Since 2013, we have also retrofitted 87 existing POBs with lifts, where at-grade crossings are unfeasible. To manage the high costs of retrofitting works, we prioritised those near major transport nodes and healthcare institutions. Going forward, we will expand our coverage to retrofit more POBs at areas with many seniors.
In addition, we will continue with road repurposing to prioritise road space for pedestrians and cyclists. So far, we have completed four road repurposing projects at Havelock Road, the Civic District, Kampung Admiralty and Tiong Bahru. In end-2023, we started works to pedestrianise Choa Chu Kang Terrace and Yung Sheng Road.
We will embark on two new road repurposing projects at Zion Road and Sims Place in 2024. Along Zion Road, we will widen footpaths and create a new cycling path by repurposing up to two of six road lanes, to improve the walking and cycling experience. We will also expand the bus shelter and provide sheltered connectivity towards Zion Riverside Food Centre. Stakeholders we engaged have welcomed the proposals. Along Sims Place, we will repurpose two of four road lanes to widen the footpath and create a cycling path, and construct a high covered linkway to provide shelter to amenities such as Sims Vista Market and Food Centre.
Ms Joan Pereira and Mr Lim Biow Chuan spoke on the importance of road safety. Indeed, this is one of the reasons why we introduced Friendly Streets. We have also taken active steps to enhance road safety over the years, such as by improving the design of roads and raising road safety awareness. LTA and the Traffic Police work closely with schools, the community and the Singapore Road Safety Council to engage all road users. LTA also regularly reviews traffic accident data to identify roads where we may need to put in additional safety measures such as traffic calming measures and pedestrian crossings.
[Mr Speaker in the Chair]
Taken together, our efforts to expand Friendly Streets, build more commuter infrastructure and repurpose roads will make the first and last mile of our journeys safer and friendlier, for a more inclusive commute. But most importantly, we agree with Ms Pereira – everyone has an important part to play in ensuring road safety. The Government cannot do this alone.
Next, on point-to-point (P2P) transport. Ms Yeo Wan Ling asked about the P2P sector review announced in September last year. MOT and LTA have been engaging relevant stakeholders on how we can enhance the availability, reliability, and inclusivity of P2P services. This will especially benefit our seniors, persons with disabilities and families with young children.
The P2P landscape has evolved, with private hire cars and ride-hail services becoming more common. Between 2020 and 2023, the proportion of street-hail rides, where commuters flag a taxi along the street or at a taxi stand, declined from 23% to 12%. Over the same period, the number of taxis also declined from 15,800 to 13,600. Despite this shift, taxis and street-hail services continue to play an important role, particularly for certain commuter segments and in certain locations.
First, taxis are an important supply of rides, especially late at night when it is often more difficult to secure a PHC. Second, taxis are important in serving commuters who may be less familiar with ride-hailing apps and prefer to flag down taxis, such as our seniors. And third, taxis are often critical in locations such as airports and ferry terminals, to serve both locals and tourists. As Minister earlier announced, we will introduce measures to facilitate a stable supply of street-hail services and taxis.
Currently, taxis incur higher operating costs as they are subject to more stringent regulations compared to PHCs. For instance, taxis have a statutory lifespan of eight years and must undergo more frequent inspections due to higher mileage. Taxi operators must also meet certain service standards, such as maintaining a call-booking system. We will update the regulatory regime to reduce the operating costs of taxis and rationalise the inspection regimes for taxis and PHCs.
First, we will extend the statutory lifespan of taxis to 10 years, up from the current eight years. We can do this as our taxi fleet is highly roadworthy. In 2023, taxis have a first inspection passing rate (FIPR) of 99.5%, well above the 98% passing standard for taxi operators. Extending the statutory lifespan will allow taxi operators to spread the vehicle cost over a longer period of time. LTA will work with taxi operators to ensure that cost savings are passed to the drivers.
Second, for taxis less than three years old, we will reduce inspection frequency from once every six months to once a year, to reduce the downtime. These newer taxis are very well maintained, with an FIPR of 99.8% in 2023.
Third, for PHCs that are more than 10 years old, we will increase inspection frequency to half-yearly, up from yearly currently. In 2023, among PHCs aged above 10 years old, the FIPR was 84.5%. The higher inspection frequency will ensure that older PHCs are roadworthy to serve commuters.
Fourth, we will gradually remove the call-booking requirement for smaller taxi operators, given the high cost relative to the low utilisation rate. We are mindful that a small segment of commuters, comprising about 1% of P2P trips, still rely on this service. Hence, ComfortDelGro, which currently fulfils more than 99% of call-booking trips, will continue to offer this service.
Another important way to ensure the supply of taxis is to maintain the pool of Taxi Driver's Vocational Licence (TDVL) holders, as they can choose to drive either taxis or PHCs. In our engagements, drivers gave feedback that they found it easier to obtain a PHC Driver's Vocational Licence. To encourage more prospective P2P drivers to take up the TDVL, we will streamline the curriculum to reduce effort and cost to obtain a licence.
Even as we improve supply, we recognise that more commuters and drivers have come to rely on P2P operators for their commutes and livelihoods. To minimise the impact on commuters and drivers due to service disruptions or operators exiting the market, we will introduce two new sets of measures.
First, we will introduce baseline standards for operational disruptions. We will require operators to inform LTA, commuters and drivers upon confirmation of any systemic incident that could impair P2P services within an hour. They will also be required to submit an incident report outlining measures taken to resolve the incident. Further, ride-hail operators will need to develop and regularly review their contingency plans to mitigate future incidents.
Second, we will double the notification period for P2P operators that intend to exit the market. P2P operators will have to provide an exit plan to LTA at least 120 days before surrendering their licence, up from the current 60 days. In addition, operators will need to inform the public at least 60 days prior to their licence surrender date. This will provide sufficient time for commuters and drivers to cash out their electronic wallets and transit to other platforms.
We are also working on how ride-hail services can better cater to the needs of wheelchair users and families with young children.
Currently, all taxis are able to fit a foldable wheelchair. They are also exempt from child seat requirements so that families with young children can street-hail a taxi. As PHCs are always pre-booked, commuters can indicate their needs in advance. Hence, PHCs are not required to be able to accommodate a wheelchair and are not exempted from child seat requirements. This sometimes causes friction and inconvenience between wheelchair users or families with the matched PHC drivers.
We will work with ride-hail operators to make it easy for commuters to indicate that they have a foldable wheelchair or require a child seat when booking a trip. Currently, not all ride-hail apps provide these options upfront and commuters have to make a separate request which might be missed.
We will also require ride-hail apps to indicate if a matched vehicle can accommodate a foldable wheelchair or carries a child seat. This will apply to all bookings, so that commuters with such needs are alerted, and can cancel and rebook an appropriate vehicle if they forget to request for one. If in spite of these measures, PHCs with insufficient boot space or no child seat are matched to commuters with such needs, operators will allow drivers to cancel the booking without penalising them.
Taken together, these measures will benefit both commuters and drivers. For commuters, it will be easier to indicate their needs and rebook an appropriate vehicle if wrongly matched. Drivers will be allowed to cancel a booking without incurring a penalty if the commuter had omitted to indicate their needs or booked the wrong service. This helps to avoid misunderstanding and inconvenience to both drivers and commuters. The changes will be implemented towards the end of this year, as part of operators' licence renewal. We will also monitor the matching rate for such commuters and the availability of PHCs that meet their needs.
Our work does not end here. The P2P sector will continue to complement public transport. We have heard other feedback relating to the longer-term stability of P2P supply, including the suggestion for a separate COE category for PHCs from Mr Gan Thiam Poh and other Members of this House. While this is possible, there are trade-offs that need to be studied carefully.
We will address this and other concerns in the next phase of the P2P review later this year. For example, we intend to work with ride-hail operators to make their apps more senior-friendly and explore providing pick-up points that both taxis and PHCs can use. Finally, we will look at whether operators with larger market share should be subjected to higher regulatory standards, to continue safeguarding the interests of commuters and drivers.
Mr Ang Wei Neng, Mr Lim Biow Chuan, Ms Poh Li San and Ms Yeo Wan Ling asked for updates on EVs. Minister had earlier shared our good progress in EV adoption and charging availability. As EV users increase, we must shape a gracious EV culture early, by fostering good charging and parking practices. On this, I had a fruitful discussion in January with EV drivers, EV charging operators (EVCOs) as well as carpark owners. Concerns were raised on the misuse of EV charging lots by non-EVs and the hogging of lots.
Carpark owners and EVCOs have taken steps to address these concerns. For example, at public carparks, parking a non-EV in an EV lot is an offence which incurs a penalty of $70. Some EVCOs have started to notify users when their vehicles are fully charged and another vehicle is waiting and impose idle fees for lot hogging after charging.
Several interesting issues and suggestions were raised, such as allowing drivers to reserve charging lots in advance. Many also agreed that drivers should not be expected to shift their vehicles for overnight charging.
Stakeholders felt that more public education would encourage drivers and the motor industry to switch to EVs. This includes educating users that charging an EV beyond 80% becomes less efficient and that users can charge EVs based around their daily schedules, at their workplace and homes.
LTA will collate and share these insights as educational materials later this year, to enhance general knowledge of EVs and instill good EV charging behaviour. We will work with the industry to review other suggestions to enhance the EV experience. Chairman, in Mandarin, please.
(In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] MOT will set aside $1 billion to expand the Friendly Streets initiative and build more commuter infrastructure. Riding on the support by residents, we will expand the Friendly Streets initiative to all towns by 2030, to make walking journeys in our neighbourhoods safer and more comfortable and the roads more pedestrian-friendly.
In the next phase, we will begin planning for 10 more Friendly Streets, with engagements starting this year. In addition, we will also enhance our commuter infrastructure in three ways over the next decade by building more covered linkways, upgrading more bus stops with senior-friendly features and retrofitting more pedestrian overhead bridges with lifts. This will make commuting safer, more convenient and comfortable for everyone, especially the seniors, persons with disabilities and families with young children.
Apart from infrastructural enhancements, we also conducted a review of the P2P sector. During our engagements for the P2P review, we noticed that more commuters now prefer ride-hail services. However, street-hail services and taxis remain crucial in meeting the needs of commuters, such as seniors who may be less familiar with using ride-hailing apps or those who prefer to flag down taxis.
Hence, to improve the viability of street-hail services and taxis, we will be introducing some measures to reduce the operating cost. These include extending the statutory lifespan of taxis and reducing the frequency of inspection of newer taxis. To taxi drivers, we will work closely with taxi operators to pass on the cost savings to you. To commuters, we hope that the suite of measures announced today will serve to ensure a stable supply of taxi service for you so as to enhance the commuting experience for everyone.
(In English): Chairman, in conclusion, we will continue to work towards our goal of a more inclusive and friendly transport system by transforming our streets, improving P2P services and fostering responsible EV charging behaviour. [Applause.]
The Chairman: Senior Parliamentary Secretary Baey.
The Senior Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Transport (Mr Baey Yam Keng): Chairman, one of our key focuses this year is to enhance liveability through our transport system. We do this by balancing multiple considerations, such as connectivity, safety, inclusivity, while also promoting gracious behaviour.
To enhance connectivity, we are pressing on with the expansion of our cycling path network. We are on track to meet our target of 1,300 kilometres of cycling paths by 2030. LTA will construct cycling paths in 23 towns and estates island-wide this year. Mr Ang Wei Neng will be pleased to know that this will include estates in Jurong West. With that, all 27 HDB towns and estates will have cycling paths by the end of this year.
While we are expanding our cycling paths island-wide, it is not possible to build dedicated paths for different users everywhere given our limited land. We would often need to share paths. When doing so, the safety of all path users is critical. Where necessary, we will step up our public education efforts, tighten our regulations and carry out appropriate enforcement.
Mr Gerald Giam may wish to know that we take a multi-pronged approach to shape desirable behaviours and norms among all path users. One is through targeted efforts, such as the Path Safety Programme for schools, and wider public education campaigns, like the Move Happy Graciousness Campaign.
We also work with stakeholders, such as the Singapore Road Safety Council, or SRSC, and the Traffic Police, to educate Singaporeans on path and road safety tips through posters, events and social media. The Chairman of SRSC, the Chief Executive of LTA and the Traffic Police Commander are also members of AMAP. On the ground, our Active Mobility Enforcement Officers and volunteer Active Mobility Community Ambassadors also reach out to path users and the community to promote gracious behaviour.
Mr Lim Biow Chuan, Mr Dennis Tan and other MPs had asked about regulations on the use of PMAs. As earlier mentioned by the Minister, the Government accepts AMAP's recommendations on PMA regulations. They were put up after careful consideration and in consultation with various stakeholders. In arriving at this decision, the Government's key consideration is to ensure that users with genuine needs for PMAs continue to be able to use them while ensuring the safety of all path users.
We had engaged key stakeholders, including the National Delivery Champions Association, food delivery platforms, PMA retailers and social service agencies working with seniors and persons with disabilities, or PwDs. Various members of the public have also written in to share their views and concerns. We would like to thank all stakeholders for their feedback.
Generally, stakeholders understood the intent of AMAP's recommendations and supported them. Nonetheless, there were some concerns raised and these have been invaluable in our assessment of AMAP's recommendations. They will also help us better implement them. I will address these concerns later in my speech.
Let me first assure Ms Poh Li San that we are targeting for these regulations to only come into effect around 2025, after amendments are made to the Active Mobility Act. This will give affected retailers and users at least one full year from today to make transitory arrangements.
In fact, we had first announced that AMAP was reviewing the PMA regulations back in 2022. AMAP completed its review and published its recommendations in December 2023. We will announce the specific implementation timelines later, but let me assure Members that ensuring a smooth transition is a key priority.
Our footpaths today are mainly used by pedestrians, with the exception of some wheeled devices, such as bicycles and PMAs. And among these, PMAs are the only motorised devices allowed, and they are typically larger and can even be more than five times heavier than bicycles. We allow them to access more locations, such as void decks and lifts, as we know that they are used by those who are less mobile. In this context, there is a need to ensure that PMAs are used by those who really need them and in a safe and responsible manner. This is what our regulations aim to achieve.
First, the speed limit of all PMAs will be lowered from 10 kilometres per hour (km/h) to six km/h. Some have shared that this may be too slow. For some perspective, 10 km/h is running speed, whereas our typical walking speed is between four and six km/h. Six km/h is a brisk walking speed, that is definitely not an average walking speed, as mentioned by Mr Dennis Tan. It is a speed that even some able-bodied people may not be able to sustain for an extended period.
We understand that many existing PMAs have a speed limit of 10 km/h. There is no need for existing users to stop using or replace their current devices; they just need to ride no faster than six km/h. When they next replace their PMA, the new device should have a speed limit of six km/h.
Meanwhile, there are various ways for users to gauge their speeds and ensure they are within the limits. They can use free mobile applications or get a speedometer for less than S$10. More simply, if you find yourself riding faster than those walking around you, you are likely to be above the limit.
Secondly, we will align PMA dimension restrictions on public paths with the rules in place on public transport. This follows the principle that PMAs are meant to replace walking and that they are welcomed on public transport for longer commutes. However, given space constraints on buses and the maximum weight that can be supported by our bus ramps, these PMAs must be within stipulated dimensions.
Going forward, PMAs used on public paths should not exceed a width of 70 centimetres, a length of 120 centimetres, a height of 150 centimetres and a laden weight of 300 kilograms. This will allow users to seamlessly transit between public paths and public transport.
We do know that a small proportion of users need larger PMAs due to their physical conditions. Enforcement officers will exercise discretion if they are used on public paths. However, due to physical limitations as mentioned above, these oversized devices will still not be allowed on public transport.
Before I move on to talk about the certification requirement, it is important to make a distinction between the two main types of PMAs, which are mobility scooters and motorised wheelchairs. Generally, we have received feedback about the misuse and abuse of mobility scooters, which are three- or more-wheeled devices steered by a handlebar at the front of the device, whereas a motorised wheelchair look like a wheelchair. To address this, only users who are certified to have relevant medical or physical needs, such as walking difficulties, would be allowed to use mobility scooters.
The new regulations will not be onerous for users. First, this regulation will only be applied to mobility scooter users, which means those using motorised wheelchairs will not be affected.
Second, we will also recognise existing forms of certification so that users need not obtain a separate one. For instance, PwDs and seniors with mobility scooters subsidised under the Assistive Technology Fund and Seniors' Mobility and Enabling Fund, will not be required to obtain additional certification.
Third, we will work with the relevant agencies to identify other forms of certification and keep the process of obtaining them simple.
Lastly, let me emphasise that these regulations will only take effect after legislative amendments are made around 2025. We will provide a transition period to give users ample time to obtain certification. There is no need for users to rush to obtain certification. Enforcement officers will also exercise discretion on the ground.
Ms Poh Li San and Mr Dennis Tan asked whether we can automatically qualify seniors above a certain age to use PMAs. We do not intend to do so, as there are many seniors today who have no difficulty walking and we want to encourage them to keep walking to stay active and healthy. This is in line with our Age Well SG initiative, to enhance our commuter infrastructure for walking, as announced by Senior Minister of State Amy Khor earlier. Chairman, I would like now to continue my speech in Mandarin.
(In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] In recent years, the public has raised many concerns and feedback regarding the misuse of PMAs. These PMAs are intended for use by individuals with mobility difficulties, but they have been misused by able-bodied individuals. This not only excludes those who genuinely needs these aids, but their misuse has also led to faster and more reckless driving of these PMAs.
To ensure the safe and sustainable use of PMAs, the Government will implement three measures.
First, users must hold a medical certificate to continue using mobility scooters. Users of electric wheelchairs will not be required to have a medical certificate. Let me say that again: only users who use mobility scooters need to have a medical certificate. Users of electricity wheelchairs do not need a medical certificate.
Second, the speed limit for PMAs will be reduced to six km/h, which is similar to the speed of brisk walking.
Third, to facilitate users to board public transport, PMAs must comply with the dimensions allowed by public transport. We understand that some users, for various reasons, such as medical needs or body size, need larger PMAs. Exceptions will be allowed with a medical certificate. I also want to reiterate that for safety reasons, PMAs should only have one seat and are for single-person use only.
These new regulations will come into effect around 2025, after the amendment of the Active Mobility Act. The Government will ensure that users and retailers will have sufficient transition time to comply with these new regulations and to ensure that the new regulations do not impose unnecessary burdens on those in need.
(In English): Mr Chairman, from now to implementation next year, we will continue to engage stakeholders and help affected users understand the new rules and to transition smoothly. Ms Yeo Wan Ling would be pleased to know that we will also work with the various platforms and agencies to support the small number who are currently using PMA for livelihood purposes.
In the meantime, retailers will be able to clear existing stock, but they should stop bringing in new PMAs that do not have a six km/h speed limit. Individuals who do not have walking difficulties should refrain from purchasing PMAs.
This term, AMAP will continue its momentum to promote active mobility in a balanced and sustainable manner through two key priorities.
First, AMAP will review the weight criteria for active mobility devices. Over the past few years, we have received suggestions to increase the weight limit for these devices. A recent study done by a team at the Nanyang Technological University also suggests that some PABs, which are within the current weight limit, may not be as stable, making them potentially less safe.
Particularly, PABs equipped with small wheels or built with small frames tend to be more prone to skidding and could increase the risk of accidents. This will be studied very carefully, considering the various trade-offs that must be made, including the impact on other path and road users.
Secondly, AMAP will focus on promoting the wider take-up of active mobility as a healthy and sustainable mode of travel, with gracious user behaviour and safety in mind. This could include rides in the community or larger-scale events, such as the upcoming Car-Free Sunday.
Engagement efforts will focus on fostering mutual understanding among various path and road users, for example, through ongoing dialogue with cyclists and motorists to promote a culture of safety on roads. AMAP plans to engage the elderly, PwDs, young children and many more in its outreach efforts.
While we review regulations and expand our cycling infrastructure, it is equally important for us to behave graciously, not just on our paths, but on public transport as well. We can all play a part to make daily commutes a pleasant experience for ourselves and others.
To encourage gracious and caring commuting, new audio announcements have been implemented at public transport nodes in 2023. They will be rolled out across approximately 2,000 buses that are equipped with speakers from the second quarter of this year.
These new audio announcements will include messages to encourage commuters to offer their seats to those who need them more and to make space for wheelchair users, serving as timely reminders for us to look out for more vulnerable commuters.
I previously announced the introduction of a visual communication tool which uses illustrations of common scenarios, such as “ticketing” and “emergency”, for non-verbal commuters to obtain assistance. This would be deployed at MRT stations and bus interchanges to allow public transport staff to better understand the needs of these commuters. I am happy to share that LTA had concluded their trial and is working on enhancing the communication card to address ground feedback and to better suit the needs of users.
Besides hardware improvements, Mr Eric Chua would be happy to know that we are also pressing on with efforts to promote an inclusive and caring commuting culture, and propel the Caring SG Commuters movement. To date, we have worked with over 100 partners, including schools, social service agencies and corporates. Over the past year, they partnered with our public transport operators on several initiatives to grow a more caring commuter mindset.
For example, our partners supported SBST’s \"Travel with Confidence\" programme, which offers a Travel Buddy service. Volunteer Travel Buddies help commuters with disabilities navigate the public transport system by sharing useful travel information and practical tips. Go Ahead Singapore has collaborated with Metta School to develop publicity materials, creating awareness of the challenges faced by Metta students during their commute and how others can lend a hand. Since 2021, Tower Transit has offered a Public Bus Confidence Course to help people with mobility challenges board, travel on and alight buses safely. Over the years, they have run the course for more commuters with disabilities, to help them gain confidence to use public transport. PTC, MINDS, Youth Corps Singapore (YCS) and SMRT co-created the Travel Makers programme to instill confidence in students with intellectual disabilities to be able to take public transport more independently. Under the programme, volunteers guided MINDS students from their schools back home via public transport.
Mr Ong Hua Han asked if information and support would be provided to PwDs and elderly during times of train disruption. In such an event, station staff are deployed to guide and assist commuters. In addition to public announcements, related information is displayed on Passenger Information Displays and physical signages. Rail operators are also exploring the use of more digital display screens in stations to serve as visual aids for commuters.
Beyond these initiatives, individual acts of care can make a big difference. When an elderly man in his 60s fell unconscious at Canberra MRT station, Dr Lee Wei Sheng and Mr Kelvin Tan stepped forward to resuscitate the man, taking turns with the station staff to administer cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) until the paramedics arrived. The elderly man has since recovered. Such proactive and selfless acts make a profound impact on people’s lives.
Every commuter can play a part in looking out for others. The Caring Commuters Champions initiative, launched in 2021, aims to train volunteers to better assist fellow commuters in need. I am happy to share that more than 14,000 volunteers have completed the training as of December 2023. I would like to encourage more commuters to be certified as Champions by participating in the online training course. You too can make a difference to your fellow commuters.
Chairman, ensuring everyone can undertake their daily commute safely and with ease is part of what makes Singapore a liveable city. This is also in line with the shared desire, among many participants of the Forward SG exercise, for a more inclusive transport system. To make this a reality, it is vital for all of us to join hands, show consideration and concern for fellow travellers to create a journey that is not only efficient but delightful.
The Chairman: We have time for clarifications. Mr Saktiandi Supaat.
Mr Saktiandi Supaat: Thank you, Mr Chairman. I have a few clarifications. The first clarification is for the Senior Parliamentary Secretary. With regard to the PMA announcement, I wish to seek clarification. Can he elaborate a bit more, as he mentioned that there will be help for the transition for some PMA users, existing PMA users and probably those who may need PMAs going forward, until the legislation is passed? If the Senior Parliamentary Secretary can share a bit more on what that transition process would be and whether there would be publicity material in the vernacular languages, for example, to some of these PMA users who are using it now and probably will use later on.
The second clarification, Mr Chairman, is on the Alliance for Action or AfA, which the Minister mentioned. I think it is very positive that we are working with partners to collaborate to see improvements in the maritime sector. May I ask the Minister how and when that would lead to sizeable improvements? And whether the disruptions in the Red Sea – which was one of the motives why the AfA was probably triggered – have any impact on Singapore's port operations and performance?
Lastly, just a short one, to ask Minister, in terms of human capital, whether we have adequate supply of workers to meet the post-pandemic demands across all sectors for air, land and sea, whether there is any substantial concerns about supply going forward? The Minister shared a little on that earlier, but whether he can shed further light on it.
Mr Baey Yam Keng: Two years ago, we announced that we are reviewing the use of PMAs. With the acceptance of the AMAP recommendations today, we are saying that the rules will come in force only next year, because the rules need changes to the Active Mobility Act. All in all, there will be three years for users, would-be users and retailers to understand the new rules and to make the changes.
For now, users of PMAs, based on current guidelines, need not do anything. They do not have to stop using, they do not have to replace their PMAs. There are, of course, clear violators of PMAs. For example, as mentioned, PMAs should have only one seat. Those multi-seater devices, they are not PMAs, they are technically PMDs. They need to get registration, they need to pass a test, they need to go for the online mandatory test, for example. So, there are these differences.
The key is that there is another year before the new regulations come into force and the public should have enough time to understand. We take the Member's reminder that we should use vernacular languages to ensure that as many people as possible understand. And not just people who need them, but also the children or family members who will know how to advise them better.
Mr Chee Hong Tat: Mr Chairman, I would like to thank Mr Saktiandi for his clarifications. To his first clarification on the AfA, this is something that we started on earlier, under the Future Economy Council, chaired by Deputy Prime Minister Heng Swee Keat, where he encouraged us to work with industry players, work with unions, to identify areas where we can come together and translate good ideas into implementation. So, the focus must be on something very actionable. Instead of doing this by ourselves, we thought we would ask the industry, \"What are some of the pain points and what are some of the regulatory hurdles and process improvements that you would like to see that will help you to do your business better?\" That was the starting point. We talked to a few groups of industry leaders, trade associations, our union leaders; and from there, we identified and we prioritised what are some of the ones that we thought we would start with first, and then we formed the joint task force and then we worked on it.
I cannot give Mr Saktiandi a time frame in terms of exactly when we can finish this, but we approach some of these projects with the objective of \"ASAP\". Because the sooner we can come together and finish our review and come up with actionable items that we can implement, the better it is for everybody. If we need to split it up into a few stages, we will do so, because there may be some low-hanging fruits that we can do first, to help improve some of the processes. I think we will take that approach, a very practical, action-oriented approach.
Indeed, I think the Red Sea disruption is something that has triggered a further review by a lot of companies on their supply chains. But if I may say so, this process started even before the Red Sea disruptions, because the COVID-19 pandemic was the first major disruptor. During the COVID-19 pandemic, we saw how supply chains were disrupted and then, along the way, a ship blocked the Suez Canal. We went through a few rounds of this and what we found was that the critical thing that Singapore can play a role in is to offer ourselves as a catch-up port, for shipping lines that were delayed elsewhere, to turn to Singapore as the trusted, reliable port where they could re-organise their supply chains and do some catching up. So, this time round, same thing. We will do the same for the Red Sea disruptions.
To the second clarification from Mr Saktiandi, I think this is one of the key constraints that we are grappling with – besides land constraints, carbon constraints, it is labour constraints. In a tight labour market, we often cannot find enough workers, like public transport. Brother Melvin Yong will be very familiar. We work very closely with the operators and with the unions to attract more bus captains, bus technicians. Not easy. We have sign-on bonuses. We have different, different ways to try and attract and retain our essential workers. But we will keep trying, because we believe it is important for us to have a Singapore Core in our essential services. The other thing that we will continue to do is job redesign. We need to look at how we can make the jobs more palatable, more attractive to Singaporeans and especially to our young, to get them to join our industries.
Then, the training, skills upgrading, productivity improvement. I think that is the other very important area.
We will make full use of the good measures that Deputy Prime Minister announced during the Budget Statement – SkillsFuture and many other good initiatives – and use our tripartite partnership to work together, make full use of those schemes that have been announced and translate those into good outcomes.
The Chairman: Again, I request for clarifications and responses to be short. Mr Gerald Giam.
Mr Gerald Giam Yean Song: Thank you, Sir. Sir, many footpaths were built before bicycles and PMDs became a popular mode of transport for work and recreation. I understand that the minimum footpath widths have been widened recently from 1.5 metres to 1.8 metres. Can I ask if there are plans to widen all existing footpaths, and if so, what is the timeline for this?
Secondly, the Senior Parliamentary Secretary said that more audio announcements are going to be made to remind commuters to be more considerate. I appreciate the objective of this, but I urge the Ministry to not contribute to the din of loud announcements on MRT trains and platforms. So, can visual cues be used instead?
Mr Baey Yam Keng: When bicycles and PMAs are allowed on footpaths, we have the dimension restrictions. As mentioned earlier, PMAs cannot be wider than 70 centimetres in width. That would allow, technically, even on a 1.5-metre-wide footpath, two PMAs to cross, to use it at the same time, side by side.
Where possible, we will look at improving the infrastructure. So, as mentioned, the target of 1,300 kilometres of cycling paths, that would be even more useful as it can separate the different users. At the same time, we also need all users to be gracious and look out for one another – cyclists, riders and pedestrians. I think it was Mr Giam who talked about having to look out, even pedestrians, to make sure that they do not just keep on looking at their mobile devices while walking. This is where everyone can play a part so that our public paths are safe for all users.
On the Member's second question about the audio announcements, we play these at MRT stations and the 2,000 buses with speakers. For the buses especially, it is not something that is on the loop, playing every few minutes. For those with specific messages to encourage commuters to give way to wheelchair-bound passengers or to give way when there is an elderly boarding the bus. When the Bus Captain sees a vulnerable commuter boarding the bus, that is when the Bus Captain will play the audio announcement, so it will be timely and a reminder to fellow commuters to look out for others.
The Chairman: Mr Ang Wei Neng.
Mr Ang Wei Neng: Chairman, I have one clarification for Senior Minister of State Amy Khor. I want to declare my interest as the CEO of Strides Premier. We welcome the announcement to extend the lifespan of taxis to 10 years in order to make taxi operations more viable. However, I am not really sure if these new measures are too little, too late. I hope not because I hope that the next phase of the P2P industry review will provide more good news.
One of the biggest advantages of PHCs over taxis is that the PHC drivers can allow his friends, relatives or family members to drive the PHC when he is not driving his PHC for business. But a taxi driver cannot. I would like to ask Senior Minister of State Amy Khor how could MOT further level the playing field between a taxi and a PHC? Otherwise, we will continue to see the demise of the taxi industry.
Dr Amy Khor Lean Suan: I thank the Member for his question. First of all, the extension of the statutory lifespan actually came about because of our dialogue and discussions with the drivers' associations, the operators as well as with the taxi drivers and unions. This is one of the feedback they have given about the fact that while a taxi's statutory lifespan is eight years, a PHC has no statutory lifespan. And indeed, when we looked at the data, they are well-maintained, highly roadworthy and this is what we have done.
But having said that, as I have said earlier, this is just the first part of our review of the P2P sector. These are feedback that have been given and we think that these are changes that we can make quite quickly which will help some way in terms of reducing operating costs. And we are working with the taxi operators to make sure that these savings, barring some increase perhaps in maintenance costs of the older vehicles, as much as possible, would be passed on to the taxi drivers.
With regard to differences between PHCs and taxis, by nature, the two complement each other and they work on slightly different models and approach. That is the reason why we are also looking into how we can maintain a stable and adequate supply of taxis because they provide some services to complement the PHCs. They are quite different because the taxis are really focused on providing services, street-hail, for instance. They do this throughout all times of the day, whereas PHCs, you can see that their operating model, it fluctuates. More PHCs come out during the peak periods; off-peak, not so many. And we do need to make sure that there is supply throughout the day.
So, we are not looking at levelling the playing field, but we are looking at how to make it more attractive for prospective drivers to decide to take up taxis. We are also looking at how we can work towards the two complementing each other.
The Chairman: Dr Dennis Tan.
Mr Dennis Tan Lip Fong: Chairman, I have two supplementary questions, one for the Minister for Transport. As the Minister has shared, it is good to encourage and make available the uses of different sustainable fuel options like methanol in the busy port of Singapore. However, I think we are the top bunkering port in the world and there are many other ships that come here to take on bunkers.
What efforts are being made to encourage ship owners, firstly, within our registry of Singapore and, secondly, ship owners that use our facilities both in and outside port limits, to encourage them to switch to more sustainable options? May I take the opportunity to compliment the existing work that has been done by the Global Centre for Maritime Decarbonisation, but I look forward to the Minister's clarification.
The second question is for the Senior Parliamentary Secretary. Can I just echo my colleague, Mr Gerald Giam, on his concern about the width of certain footpaths? Indeed, not all footpaths are as per the measurement that the Senior Parliamentary Secretary just shared. Actually, just two days ago, I was at a traffic junction when I saw a PMA stop in the middle of the road and was trying to gesticulate to get the attention of a cyclist who stopped right at the traffic light, trying to cross the other way. Then, I realised what happened after a couple of seconds – the PMA rider was trying to ask the cyclist to make way so that he can get on to that little island before he crossed onto the subsequent zebra crossing. So, there are footpaths in Singapore that may not be able to allow two devices.
Could I ask that LTA do a more comprehensive review of footpaths and consider, in the longer run perhaps, or in the medium term, how footpaths can be expanded to provide for safe and better usage of all devices as well as pedestrians?
Mr Chee Hong Tat: Mr Chairman, the question about bunkering, first of all, this is something which the International Maritime Organisation (IMO) has already set as a target that they want the international shipping industry to move towards. So, there is already that impetus for shipping lines to look at how to reduce their carbon emissions gradually over time. Of course, we are mindful that this process has to be gradual because ships that are already built, they cannot, overnight, be switching to cleaner fuels. So, you have to do this in a gradual way.
When they replace their existing vessels with new builds or when they upgrade their engines, that is when they can put in the option for the ships to take cleaner fuels or to take dual fuels. So, we will continue to work closely with IMO and with the industry and our unions to prepare for this process. There are a few pieces here that are important. I will be brief, Mr Chairman.
First is that we need to make sure that the infrastructure is there. So, both the shore-based infrastructure as well as when they come into our ports, the availability of the service, both shore-to-ship as well as potentially ship-to-ship kind of services, will be available.
Second will be to look at safety because, as Mr Neil Parekh mentioned earlier, we need to train our workers to be ready for handling these cleaner fuels. Just to give an example. Traditional bunker fuel, if there is a spill, it goes into the water, you have an oil spill. But if you use ammonia, actually, it goes into the air and instead of having an oil spill, we will have a plume cloud. So, it is very different. And the way we handle these emergency scenarios, our workers need to be ready, our security and emergency services need to be ready.
If I may just comment quickly, Mr Chairman, before I invite the Senior Parliamentary Secretary to reply to Mr Dennis Tan's second question. We will try our best to improve the footpath infrastructure. If Members could look at different places around Singapore, one of the things is we have been working closely with PUB to cover up the open drains and then to widen the footpaths, where possible, so that we can then have a pedestrian lane and a cycling lane. This helps to be able to separate the different devices so that we give pedestrians and also cyclists, PMA users, greater assurance, greater peace of mind when they use the paths.
But having said that, it is not always possible because there are areas where, due to space constraints, site constraints, we may not be able to do that. So, the key is where we cannot do that or even where we can do that, people need to use the paths responsibly and safely, and be considerate and gracious.
The Chairman: Senior Parliamentary Secretary Baey, anything to add?
Mr Baey Yam Keng: Just to say that that is why we are promoting the gracious path-sharing culture. That is more important.
The Chairman: Ms Poh Li San.
Ms Poh Li San: Chairman, I have a question for Minister Chee. Singapore is the first country in the world to impose a Sustainable Aviation Fuel levy on passengers. With the cost burden of Sustainable Aviation Fuels fully loaded on passengers from 2026, how can airlines then be incentivised to be fuel-efficient in their operations? For example, the airlines, why would they choose to uplift Sustainable Aviation Fuels from Singapore instead of cheaper non-Sustainable Aviation Fuels in other airports?
Mr Chee Hong Tat: Mr Chairman, I think what Ms Poh has raised is, indeed, the difficult trade-offs that we grappled with when we were thinking about how to move forward on this issue of Sustainable Aviation Fuel. To do nothing, I think, is not the right solution because the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) is moving in this direction, setting a target for the international aviation industry to reduce carbon emissions.
Domestically as well, we know we have committed to a target of net-zero by 2050. It is important for Singapore, as an international aviation hub, to be able to offer Sustainable Aviation Fuel for airlines that want to uplift such fuel as part of their service because airlines also want to be able to demonstrate to their customers that they are doing the right and responsible thing.
But the key here is: how do you do this in a way which can be, on one hand, good for the environment, improve sustainability, but on the other hand, does not jeopardise your economic competitiveness? So, there are a few considerations.
First is to take a gradual move rather than to take a big jump and then, to monitor closely what is the adoption regionally, globally, and move in tandem with global development so that there is a, I would not say level playing field, but at least there is a more even playing field compared to if we were to jump too far ahead of our competitors. So, that is one consideration.
The second one is how do you increase supply because, today, one of the key constraints is that there is not enough supply of Sustainable Aviation Fuel. How do you, through a move like this, incentivise the producers to invest in new production facilities in Singapore and in the region? Just to give Ms Poh some assurance, we have looked at this carefully. If it is a 1% uplift of Sustainable Aviation Fuel, an economy class ticket to Bangkok will go up by $3; to Tokyo, it will go up by $6; and to London, it will go up by $16.
So, yes, the cost will go up. But the feedback from airlines and from passengers is that this is something which they think is wearable, is reasonable and they think that this is something which allows them, both the airlines and the passengers, to do their part for the environment.
The Chairman: One final clarification. Ms Yeo Wan Ling. But you have got to keep it real short.
Ms Yeo Wan Ling: A clarification for Senior Minister of State Amy Khor. In the review of the P2P sector, can the Ministry give clarity on the use of taxi stands for both PHCs and taxis, and what are the roll-out conditions and timeline for this? Will this also affect airport pick-up points?
Dr Amy Khor Lean Suan: I mentioned earlier that this is one of the areas that we are looking into in the next part of the review.
For taxi stands and taxi stops, the difference is for taxi stands, taxis can queue there to wait for passengers. Taxi stops are just for pick-up and drop-off. So, one feedback and idea that we are looking into is whether we can allow PHCs to also use the taxi stops to pick up and drop off passengers; no waiting. Taxi stands, a bit difficult because for PHCs, it is a booking, so, you have to wait for your passenger; unlike taxis where you just queue and then, you just pick up whichever passenger is at the queue and you do not cause congestion. So, we will have to talk to the drivers' associations and operators before we can decide.
The Chairman: We have run out of time. Can I invite Mr Saktiandi Supaat, if you would like, to withdraw your amendment?
Mr Saktiandi Supaat: Chairman, I will try to keep it short. But we have covered a whole range of issues over air, land and sea. MOT has quite a lot of work to do in terms of complex issues, not just in terms of making the lifeblood of Singapore run efficiently, but also they need to make Singapore very friendly over the next six years by 2030.
So, I would like to thank all Members who have participated in this debate today. I thank Minister Chee Hong Tat, Senior Minister of State Amy Khor and Senior Parliamentary Secretary Baey Yam Keng for their extensive yet thoughtful replies to all of our questions; and also to thank all the MOT family – LTA, CAAS and MPA – for their good work in making things run over the past year or so.
On that note, Mr Chairman, I beg leave to withdraw my amendment.
[(proc text) Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. (proc text)]
[(proc text) The sum of $2,446,931,800 for Head W ordered to stand part of the Main Estimates. (proc text)]
[(proc text) The sum of $12,296,058,800 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":"Building a caring and inclusive society together","sectionType":"OS","content":"The Chairman: Head O, Ministry of Health. Dr Tan Wu Meng.
Dr Tan Wu Meng (Jurong): Chairman, I beg to move, \"That the total sum to be allocated for Head O of the Estimates be reduced by $100\".
I declare that I am a doctor working at a public hospital. I will speak on our healthcare system and thinking outside the box.
Today, we have already started thinking outside the box in healthcare policy. Subsidising health screening in Healthier SG so that illness can be detected earlier, treated upstream, reducing the burden of human suffering down the line years later, all this while maintaining the approach of co-payment established many years ago as part of keeping Singapore's healthcare system sustainable.
But there are other boxes we need to think outside of, as part of the next bound of healthcare policy. I will share about this today.
Today, we also need to think outside the box of space and place – bringing the care, bringing the subsidy to where the patient is, where the person in need is. Some public hospitals have been testing hospital-at-home services, or what is called mobile inpatient care at home. Can the Ministry of Health (MOH) provide an update on the progress of these efforts? Are they being scaled up? What has been the experience? Can we make it easier as well for MediShield Life and MediSave to be claimable for care that is delivered to patients at home where medically necessary?
I want to speak also about the ecosystem of care because bringing care closer to home goes beyond medical care, nursing care or allied healthcare. It must also look at Government programmes that support the sick and unwell.
I remember my Clementi resident who passed away. We got to know each other over my eight, coming to nine years in Clementi. She was my resident. We became friends over the years. We visited her in hospital, visited her funeral wake. She was getting more ill, getting more frail – more frail, more prone to falls. She was ill with kidney failure for many years, on peritoneal dialysis, finding it heavy going doing her own peritoneal dialysis at home every night.
She applied for a migrant domestic worker levy concession – maid levy concession. But she was not old enough to fit the Ministry of Manpower's (MOM's) aged person scheme. So, she applied to the Agency for Integrated Care (AIC) under MOH. She was told that because she did not always require assistance with at least one of the activities of daily living (ADL), did not always require assistance with one ADL and so, she could not qualify.
But I ask the Ministry, could the ADL have been looked at in context? Could the ADL have been considered in context of someone who was frail, getting more and more frail, many medical conditions and on peritoneal dialysis at home? Could it have been asked by the agencies, would the patient – would the resident – find it difficult to do peritoneal dialysis at home without the extra help?
And if you speak with real-world practitioners on the ground, there are residents – there are patients – who may not fit the technical criteria, always requires assistance with at least one ADL. Many who met my resident in person would have found her frail, even if she did not fit the letter of the policy, many would have felt she fit the spirit of the policy. So, I call upon MOH to consider such situations, see if there is a way to take into account the medical situation of the patient – the spirit of the policy, in addition to the letter.
There is another group of patients – palliative care patients with a limited lifespan, life-limiting disease, not much time left.
And likewise, I call upon MOH, can our agencies, in assessing the concessionary levy for migrant domestic workers in the approval process for frail patients on home peritoneal dialysis, who already find it difficult to cope without a helper, can they be considered more holistically? For patients with a serious life-limiting disease, not much time left, can they be considered holistically as well?
Sir, we must also think outside the box of individual agencies and individual Ministries because home care does not just help the patient, it also helps caregivers who otherwise might have to follow the patient for appointments, accompanying to see the doctor, for treatments, for blood tests and scans, depending on the condition.
Back in January 2022, two years ago, I asked a question in Parliament, how many specialist outpatient clinic visits a patient might have in an individual year at a public hospital? The 2019 figures from before COVID-19 showed that over 7,000 patients had 24 or more outpatient visits a year. In short, on average, two outpatient visits a month. There were over 2,000 patients with 36 or more outpatient visits a year, averaging three or more a month for an entire year.
Imagine being a patient or a caregiver, this many visits, trying to hold down a job, because we know that not every employer allows flexible working arrangements. We know that not every job makes that flexibility possible. We know that while some employers are kind, there are employers who can be one kind. And so, Mr Chairman, this is something our agencies need to look at.
I have Clementi sons and daughters – filial, caring for their parents – but they had to give up their careers to accompany their parents for treatment, the many visits each month.
So, if we can reduce the number of trips to the clinic, have more care delivered closer to home, it will help patients and caregivers, especially workers who find it harder to take leave and take time-off; workers who are lower-wage; with less bargaining power at the workplace; workers with jobs that cannot be done remotely. I called upon MOH to look into this two years ago during the MOH Committee of Supply (COS). Can MOH give an update on how they are looking at this?
Some might ask, why should MOH subsidise home medical care, care closer to home, in order to save jobs for patients and caregivers? But we already accept in principle, in other Ministries, that subsidy and funding can be used to save jobs or create a more level playing field for workers who encounter disadvantages.
For example, MOM has the Enabling Employment Credit to help persons with disabilities find work in an uneven job market. MOM has the Uplifting Employment Credit to help people find a second chance in life. MOM has the Part-Time Re-Employment Grant to help senior workers who need part-time employment opportunities or flexible work arrangements.
And so, given this precedent in other Ministries across the whole of Government, I call upon MOH and the Government as a whole to look at access to home medical care and home medical treatment through the lens of a coordinated approach to economic and social policies.
In short, if better home care helps save the job of a patient, if it helps save the job and career of a caregiver, can the case be made at whole of Government with MOH, MOM and MOF looking together at this?
Let me speak on means testing. In particular, can we further reduce the visits to a public hospital for patients who are undergoing means testing for assistance and MediFund? In 2016, nearly eight years ago, I asked in Parliament: can we make it smoother for patients on MediFund who are seeking treatment across different public hospitals in Singapore?
Last November, Minister for Health Ong Ye Kung, announced the roll-out of mutual recognition agreements for MediFund across hospitals and between acute hospitals and step-down care, intermediate care hospitals.
Can we also empower the Social Service Offices (SSOs) or the local Family Service Centres (FSCs) or the Active Ageing Centres (AACs) to assist the public hospitals, medical social workers, to do some of these means test assessments? This can reduce the need for an additional trip to see the medical social worker at the hospital. Reduce the need for additional appointments, especially for lower-wage, lower-resource families for whom travel may be more challenging.
On patients with mobility needs, can we also make it easier to find access to subsidised transport for patients who are less mobile with medically necessary visits to the clinic or medically necessary trips to receive treatment? Some months back, a fellow Singaporean and her family – this fellow Singaporean was undergoing treatment for a serious illness at a public hospital – shared about how the multiple visits to clinics for treatment to and fro, this, over the span of a month, especially where some trips were made during rush or peak hour. In one month, the family had clocked up more than $400 in private hire vehicle fares just to get their loved one to treatment because their loved one was less mobile.
I will now speak on home personal care because care for a senior goes beyond the clinic and we must look at their daily life at home. Many seniors want to stay in the community where friends, coffee shop \"kawans\", \"kakis\" are. But some need help with daily living, showering, cleaning up the home. Support for home personal care can make the difference in whether someone is in the community or later institutionalised. Can MOH look at how we can support seniors better on home personal care?
On seniors living alone, falls are a worry for our seniors, not just the injury but some seniors having fallen, cannot get up. If the senior is socially isolated, living alone, it may mean not getting help till someone passes by. Or worse still, what happens if the senior has fallen, cannot call for help, does not have anyone coming by and the community only discovers later after that senior has died?
Two years ago, in a Parliamentary Question in 2022, I asked MOH about using technology to help look out for frail seniors who had fallen at home. Can MOH give an update?
Sir, I want to speak about Clementi, the town which I help look after. I want to speak about the upcoming new Clementi Polyclinic. Today's Clementi Polyclinic is in the town centre, near to the Clementi MRT station, near to Clementi Bus Interchange, with sheltered, barrier-free access for many blocks around the Clementi Town Centre.
In June 2022, MOH announced that the Clementi Polyclinic would be redeveloped at a new site, about 650 metres away from the existing site and 250 metres from the Clementi MRT station. There would be addition of new features – bigger polyclinic, more capacity, more services.
But there also would be one important subtraction. Many residents no longer will have sheltered last-mile barrier-free access to the new location. Many residents who previously had sheltered last-mile access will have to cross Clementi Avenue 3.
It is not a small matter. For less mobile seniors with a walking stick or mobility aid, imagine holding an umbrella in the rain. If you are an elderly caregiver pushing your loved one in a wheelchair, imagine doing that in rainy weather and trying to hold an umbrella for the two of you at the same time.
Mr Chairman, this crossing is right next to Clementi MRT station. And my Clementi residents have been keeping up to date on LTA policy. They have read LTA’s explanation of the Walk2Ride programme, and I quote, “Where feasible, walkways have been built to schools, healthcare facilities and other public amenities within a 400-metre radius of MRT stations.”
The new polyclinic is a healthcare facility. The new polyclinic is within 400-metres from Clementi MRT. So, can I ask the Ministries, MOH and the Government more broadly, surely it would be feasible to build that shelter across Clementi Avenue 3 to help seniors and less mobile residents? Especially since we have many Clementi residents who today attend the existing Clementi Polyclinic with sheltered barrier-free access and will find it harder to get to the new polyclinic location on a rainy day, and it would benefit young families as well, children in prams being brought by their parents or sometimes their grandparents too.
So, I call upon MOH and LTA to work together, see what can be done, whether this sheltered last-mile barrier-free access can be costed and factored in fiscally as part of the project holistically, because access to care goes beyond having a new, larger polyclinic. It is also about whether frail seniors with mobility needs can feasibly get to that polyclinic the same way they did to the existing polyclinic in the Clementi Town Centre.
As I said to Deputy Prime Minister Lawrence Wong, eight years ago in 2016, during an Adjournment Motion debate when Deputy Prime Minister was Minister for National Development, and I quote, “When we add new innovations, we must be mindful not to subtract from what came before, especially when it affects the vulnerable and disadvantaged among us.”
Sir, the current Minister for Transport used to serve at MOH. The current Health Minister used to look after MOT. May I humbly ask MOH and MOT to work together, look at this, do the costing together with the Ministry of Finance and see what can be done to help our seniors in Clementi, especially our frail seniors.
Sir, on healthcare capacity. Because even as we think outside the box, we also have to ask ourselves are the existing boxes big enough, deep enough. In short, do we have enough capacity, enough capability?
Can MOH tell us, is it tracking the doctor-to-population ratio and how Singapore compares with other advanced economies, in particular, the doctor-to-population ratio when we look at public sector doctors serving the Singaporean population?
Is MOH getting ready for what happens when there is more health screening as part of Healthier SG? Residents with pre-existing illness, did not know they were ill, but having gone for screening, having had illness discovered, will need follow-up, will need treatment. Are we looking at the projected increase in demand?
Is MOH taking a good look at how much time is needed to deliver holistic care, 21st century care, in Singapore? Because, whether you persuade someone to stop smoking, help someone with a mental health crisis, or support someone with a life-threatening illness and with limited time, all this needs holistic care.
As I said 11 years ago in The Straits Times and last year in Parliament, if a clinic is too busy and consultation times are too short, it becomes harder to promote health. Because six consultations of five minutes each are not the same as a 30-minute consultation. So, we need to accurately measure how much work is actually being done on the ground, how much work is needed for tomorrow so that we can do right by our patients, caregivers and healthcare workers.
When our decision-makers understand the actual amount of work that is needed, the ground situation, it is like flying an airplane. Even the best pilot needs to know what is the altitude, what is the air speed, how much is in the fuel tank. You need that for good decisions. Otherwise, we know what can happen.
On healthcare financing, when thinking outside the box, we need to keep the toolbox stocked with new tools. Is MOH working to ensure fair, equitable access to new treatments, such as cell, tissue and gene therapy products?
For certain new treatments where the chance of success is very slim, but the cost is very high, are there new billing models such as a “no cure, no pay” funding model? Expensive drug, if it does not work, does not cure the patient, is there a refund from the manufacturer?
So, in summary, Mr Speaker, we will need resources, energy and imagination for tomorrow to keep our healthcare system fit for purpose.
[(proc text) Question proposed. (proc text)]
Mr Pritam Singh (Aljunied): Chairman, having to be hospitalised is physiologically and emotionally stressful in many ways. Fortunately, our health workers work hard to minimise the inconveniences of the experience as much as possible.
Even so, to know that you have to wait long hours for a bed in Singapore does not correspond with what many older Singaporeans in particular expect of our healthcare system. At their moment of need, many of our seniors and even citizens across various age groups did not believe that they would have to wait hours in a chair in an A&E department or be decamped to beds located at a temporary car park where the lights are never turned off at their moment of critical need.
MOH currently publishes the daily median waiting time at emergency departments on a delayed basis of two weeks. In some hospitals, even at the median, the waiting time for a bed can exceed 16 hours. This was the situation at the end of January at Khoo Teck Puat and Changi General Hospital. Imagine being ill and uncomfortable and having to wait 16 hours for a bed. This hospital experience is being narrated anecdotally to me by an increasing number of seniors.
In order to have a more accurate perspective of the problem, would the Ministry be prepared to publish the waiting time for an admission to a ward, not just at the median which it does now, but at the 75th and 90th percentiles as well, for a more holistic overview of the situation on the ground?
Secondly, in view of the situation today and in the short term, can the Ministry generate a publicly accessible or build within mobile health applications such as HealthHub, a resource that provides information on waiting times at A&E departments in our public hospitals, and details on bed occupancy in as close to real-time as possible, perhaps even on a two-hourly basis, so that patients and their caregivers can exercise the option of going to an A&E department that is less crowded? This would also relieve and better spread the patient load at hospitals where doctors and nurses, allied health workers and staff consistently see higher A&E admissions and bed utilisation.
Sir, the reality of our growing senior population has been on the radar for decades. I understand moves are underway to increase the number of hospitals and polyclinics. In fact, piling works have just begun last month for the Eastern Integrated Health Campus in my ward of Eunos in Aljunied Group Representation Constituency, the development of which is expected to take some patient load off Changi General Hospital. These developments should improve the situation, but it has to account for the rising number of seniors and Singaporeans who inevitably will have to tap onto the healthcare system in some shape or form, and also to account for the rising healthcare manpower needs.
Thirdly, there have been reports of patients preferring to stay in a hospital longer than they are supposed to, despite being medically fit for discharge. One report cited an expert as postulating, for example, that three out of 10 patients at the National University Hospital (NUH) or their family members have to contend with discharge issues. While each situation would have to be looked at on a case-by-case basis, such patients can exacerbate the problems faced by the primary healthcare system. How many patients were labelled as overstayers in our public hospitals in 2023, and how serious is this problem?
The Ministry has announced plans to increase beds over the next five years and the number is 1,900. Can the Ministry share its plans on how it intends to expand home care services over the next five years as well, to reduce patient load in hospitals, and so as to ensure that the load on our healthcare workers is not more than it needs to be?
The Chairman: Ms Ng Ling Ling, you can take your four cuts together.
Ms Ng Ling Ling (Ang Mo Kio): Chairman, the Mobile Inpatient Care at Home (MIC@Home) pilot seems to be demonstrating the potential of transforming patient care by providing a sustainable alternative to traditional hospital settings. I was encouraged to read from a Straits Times article in August 2023 that, as of June last year, around 1,000 patients have been admitted to the programme, staying for seven days on average, and resulting in an estimated savings of 7,000 bed days. By end of 2023, more than 2,000 patients would have experienced the virtual wards according to the article.
In such an at-home care setting, family and community involvement seems crucial to maximise the benefits of patients’ recovery. This may involve training family members in basic care protocols and procedures to create a conducive and supportive home environment for the recovery of the patient.
I would like to ask for an update on how MOH is intending to scale up MIC@Home, including extending the care model to more patient types in palliative care or even paediatrics. I believe that such scale-up can provide more options to patients and caregivers, especially for senior patients who may prefer to recover in the comfort of their own home.
I would like to ask MOH what more can the community and individual families learn and do to make such a scale-up possible for more groups of patients, especially our senior patients for the years to come.
MediShield Life has undergone several rounds of enhancement to ensure that Singaporeans can continue to afford paying for large hospital bills in times of catastrophic medical episodes and selected costly outpatient treatments, such as dialysis and chemotherapy for cancer.
I am glad to note from the World Health Organization (WHO) Global Health Expenditure database that the out-of-pocket expenditure in terms of percentage of the current health expenditure in Singapore has decreased between years 2000 and 2020 from 48.1% to 18.9%. It is also note-worthy that eight in 10 Singaporeans pay little or no cash for their subsidised hospital bills.
However, given an ageing population where healthcare needs will increase and prolong, as well as advancements in medical treatment options that can be more costly, there is a concern on rising healthcare costs that may lead to higher out-of-pocket expenditures for Singaporeans in the years ahead. Another concern is the cost drivers in public hospitals that may increase operating expenditures, which can all indirectly increase bill sizes and out-of-pocket expenses for Singaporeans.
I would like to ask MOH the following questions.
One, what are the primary drivers behind the increase in healthcare costs in Singapore and how can they contribute to hospital bill sizes?
Two, what cost control mechanisms are currently in place or will be in place in our public hospitals to mitigate cost increases and ensure healthcare remains affordable?
Three, how does MOH intend to help public hospitals manage their costs and become more cost-efficient?
Four, is the MediShield Life coverage expected to continue to be adequate to help Singaporeans defray a substantial portion of their bill sizes and keep out-of-pocket expenditures low?
Lastly, how can MediShield Life adapt its coverage to reflect these rising costs while ensuring that the premiums remain financially sustainable for Singaporeans?
Chairman, the Healthier SG initiative marks a pivotal shift in our national healthcare strategy towards preventive care with an emphasis on community-based health management. I would like to commend the efforts of MOH and all the partners that has brought about very encouraging enrolment figure – I think I last read, almost 700,000 residents have been enrolled.
The successful implementation of this initiative relies heavily on the active collaboration between MOH, Primary Care Networks (PCN), polyclinics and private general practitioners (GPs). I would like to seek an update on what is the percentage of the enrolled residents that did so with GP clinics and what is the percentage that have enrolled with the polyclinics?
As more Singaporeans enrol on this initiative, besides focusing on reaching a wide base, I believe that there must be also healthcare indicators that can show that our population health is improving. I would like to further understand the development and efficacy of Healthier SG for enrolled residents such as: one, what are specific health outcomes that are being targeted for improvement under the personalised health plans for those who are enrolled? How has the personalised health plans been monitored for the enrolled residents?
Secondly, in cases where enrolled residents are not meeting their health goals, what are the interventions or additional support that are given under Healthier SG to help them overcome their challenges?
Lastly, does MOH expect that the prevalence rates for the most common chronic diseases faced by Singaporeans, including high cholesterol, high blood pressure and diabetes to ease or reverse as Healthier SG initiative rolls out?
Chairman, in Singapore, about 80% of our primary care demand are met by our GP clinics. Many of our GP clinics are well located in most neighbourhoods. As such, their involvement in Healthier SG is an important collaboration in the population preventive health approach that we are increasingly taking. As we integrate social prescription and increase access of mental health treatment through our primary care providers in the Healthier SG and other national health strategies, our GPs will increasingly need help in expanding their capacities and capabilities, including receiving comprehensive and continuing training. This is especially so when areas such as social prescriptions and mental health treatment may be relatively newer areas that our GPs need to increase proficiency in.
In this regard, I would like to ask MOH to provide updates on whether it has overall capacity building and professional development plans for our GPs, especially on: one, how are the GPs going to be supported to make time for continuing education training when time away from their clinics can mean opportunity costs from seeing patients in their clinics?
Two, what are the support and resources provided to GPs on the latest research findings and protocols for the most effective treatment options in common chronic diseases, especially those where we are seeing increasing prevalence rates, such as hypertension?
Lastly, for social prescription and mental health treatment, which usually require a multi-disciplinary treatment involvement, how will the GPs be equipped and how will the joint training be done for such multi-disciplinary teams to provide best health intervention to patients who need them?
Dr Syed Harun Alhabsyi (Nominated Member): Chairman, I would like ask the Ministry regarding the progress update for Healthier SG implementation thus far.
First, whether the manpower, infrastructure and systems implementation plans are keeping pace with the timeline and envisioned capacity of the national healthcare system as it pivots to Healthier SG. I note that the Government announced last month regarding changes to and guidance on the salary of our nurses, but are there similar concerns and plans for the retention of other healthcare professionals including doctors and allied health professionals. I also wonder whether the remaining eight polyclinics slated to be open by 2030 are on track, and whether there have been any challenges to the system integration efforts between private GPs, polyclinics and hospital clusters to realise the full potential of Healthier SG over time.
Second, could the Minister also share whether early indicators suggest that Healthier SG plans are achieving its articulated goals and outcomes? Is the approach towards better preventive healthcare being realised? Have both doctors and patients, at the last mile, reported stronger patient-doctor relationships and are patients having better experiences when receiving their care with their primary healthcare provider through Healthier SG?
Third, part of the vision of Healthier SG is that there be more rooted partnerships and the integration of health and social ecosystems of care. Have partnerships been strongly established with agencies like AIC, the Health Promotion Board (HPB), People's Association (PA) as well as Sport Singapore to realise the vision of Healthier SG? Could the Ministry share specific examples of how this has been done and expected to evolve over time? Have there been any barriers in this regard and could the Ministry share the forward steps that can be anticipated in this space?
Finally, much has been said about the promulgation of the National Mental Health and Well-being Strategy and the anticipated greater awareness of mental illness and mental wellbeing over time. Are there any changes to be made to the Healthier SG implementation plans, especially towards incorporating the four tiers of the tiered care model and to realise the four articulated focus areas as outlined by the strategy?
The Chairman: Mr Yip Hon Weng. You can take your two cuts together.
Mr Yip Hon Weng (Yio Chu Kang): The Healthier SG initiative holds immense promise for transforming our healthcare system towards upstream and preventive care.
Firstly, can the Minister share the latest enrolment figures for Healthier SG as of today, as well as the statistics for the number of participants who have attended their first consultation? Understanding the level of public engagement is important to gauge the programme's effectiveness.
Secondly, can the Minister elaborate on the format of personalised health plans or social prescriptions? Will they include a list of recommended activities tailored to individual needs? How will compliance and implementation be ensured? The recent rollout of Healthier SG chronic tier subsidies and the broader direction to encourage GPs to manage more chronic conditions, is welcomed news.
However, I have some concerns regarding its impact on the wider population.
Firstly, not all GPs have equal expertise in managing every chronic condition, especially relating to issues of mental health. Will this expansion lead to patients having to switch GPs to access the full benefits of Healthier SG? Secondly, ensuring participating GPs have the necessary resources and expertise is critical. How will the Ministry equip them with the training, tools, and support they need to effectively manage these additional chronic conditions, particularly those requiring specialised knowledge? We need to avoid overburdening GPs and jeopardising the quality of care for existing patients.
As we witness an increasing number of seniors living alone, the potential for social isolation and unmet care needs becomes a pressing concern. I want to focus on how we can ensure that our seniors stay active, connected and well-cared for within their communities, aligning with the Age Well SG strategy.
Firstly, how will the Ministry evaluate the success of Age Well SG initiatives? This could involve metrics on senior well-being, programme effectiveness and cost-efficiency. How will the Ministry implement the shift from insititutionalised care to community and home-based care, highlighting specific initiatives, take-up rates and timelines?
Secondly, understanding the current state of care is critical. Can the Minister share the current average waiting time for nursing home beds? What novel models of care are available to bridge the gap and prevent institutionalisation?
Thirdly, can the Minister update on the progress of rolling out Active Ageing Centres (AACs) to seniors in non-rental flats, ensuring broader accessibility? When will the expansion cover all seniors? How will AACs implement initiatives that specifically foster inter-generational relationships, tackling social isolation for seniors while providing learning opportunities for younger generations? How do we specifically reach out to those seniors who are reluctant to socialise, as they are most vulnerable to loneliness?
Fourthly, enhancing home-based care for seniors with higher needs is critical. Does the Ministry also have a target of how many patients do we aim to onboard for home-based care? As home care can be resource-intensive, can the Ministry also share about the long-term financial sustainability of such programmes, especially regarding potential future cost increases and affordability for seniors? How can we increase public awareness of home-based care?
Similarly, improving our seniors’ home environment through initiatives like EASE 2.0 is important. I am glad the Housing and Development Board (HDB) is going to roll-out EASE 2.0 from 1 April onwards, which includes the expansion of the wireless Alert Alarm System to benefit more seniors. How will the Ministry raise awareness about this system and other fall detection solutions, especially among seniors who live alone? At the broader level, will the Ministry partner with technology companies to develop similar senior-friendly applications? These solutions can also be used for social interaction, health monitoring or for accessing services.
Chairman, building a society where everyone ages well necessitates a multi-pronged approach. By addressing social isolation, providing accessible care options and investing in community infrastructure and manpower, we can ensure our seniors live fulfilled and dignified lives within their communities.
Assoc Prof Jamus Jerome Lim (Sengkang): In my speech on the Motion on supporting healthcare in May last year, I spoke about how hospital bed and medical personnel capacity in our fair nation falls short of what may be expected, not just compared to almost every other advanced economy, but also to our own internal benchmarks. This has led to us failing to meet health service quality targets set by MOH. Things have improved somewhat since then, but capacity still remains constrained. Medium wait times at the end of January can still exceed half a day in Changi General and Khoo Teck Puat, while the bed occupancy rate for all but one of the public hospitals hovers above the Ministry's own preferred 80% ceiling.
There is a dire need to relieve not only our capacity shortfalls in the short run, but also any projected long-run need. Indeed, the planned expansion of Alexandra Hospital and the Woodlands Health Campus is likely to only fix current shortfalls, but remain insufficient as our population grows and ages.
What this comes down to is a willingness to sacrifice short-run efficiency by accepting a certain amount of redundancy in the interim, at least until the needs inevitably arise. My sense is that this will only occur when our current occupancy rate for hospitals remains substantially below 80%, at least for a certain duration. To achieve this, I believe that the current system can stand to expand its transition care offerings. I will suggest three ideas.
First, we can ramp up our urgent care offerings as an intermediate option, complementing existing GP polyclinics versus A&E solutions. While still uncommon, there are already several urgent care centres (UCCs) in Singapore, including the reclassification of Alexandra Hospital's A&E department into a UCC, along with several private providers. Singaporeans should be educated about using this channel for non-life-threatening medical emergencies, especially with regard to the substantially shorter wait times compared to A&E. It can also relieve the pressure on polyclinics to triage such cases for which they are not designed for.
Second, we can improve the incentives for transition care at home, perhaps with cash incentives paid directly to patients using savings that would otherwise go toward hospitalisation expenses. The Government can directly encourage this by providing rebates to insurance companies for encouraging select cases to pursue this route.
Third, while I support the decision to expand the non-profit model, whether the experiment will ultimately prove viable, will also hinge crucially on whether the associated tax exemptions are accompanied by increased or decreased flexibility of operations. Otherwise, if the approach is simply one of delivering more subsidies that exchange for greater health price regulation, economy plus healthcare, the true advantage of the non-profit model may be lost. At the same time, I encourage MOH to also look at public health bills.
The Chairman: Mr Ang Wei Neng. You can take your three cuts together.
Mr Ang Wei Neng (West Coast): Chairman, I am deeply concerned about the recent report in The Straits Times regarding the predicament of 12 ambulances, out of a fleet of 92 Singapore Civil Defence Force (SCDF) ambulances, being stuck at Changi General Hospital on 29 January 2024. This situation is alarming and warrants immediate attention. Regrettably, the situation in the West does not appear to be any better. Residents in Nanyang have voiced their frustrations over prolonged wait times at hospital A&E departments, with some even having to endure further delays in securing a hospital bed, often relegated to corridors along hospital wards.
Singapore's ratio of hospital beds per 1,000 people stood at approximately 2.55 in 2023, last year. This figure pales in comparison to countries like the United States – 2.8 beds; China – 5.2 beds; and Japan – 12.6 beds. In light of our ageing population, I would like to ask the Minister for Health if he believes that we have insufficient number of hospital beds in Singapore right now. If so, is MOH prepared to expedite the construction of additional hospitals beyond those already slated for development?
Chairman, many residents in the West, particularly those in Nanyang, encounter difficulties securing appointments at Pioneer Polyclinic. Given the demographic shift towards an ageing population, I would like to inquire whether MOH has plans to build additional polyclinics in Jurong West to alleviate these concerns.
I would like to extend my congratulations to MOH for recruiting 5,000 nurses, surpassing the initial target of 4,000 last year. However, this success raises concerns about whether we have enough doctors to meet healthcare demands.
Many young Singaporeans, including residents from Nanyang, possess a strong desire to pursue careers in medicine. Unfortunately, the doors to the local medical schools remain largely closed to the majority, despite their excellent results. It is disheartening to note that Singaporean students with perfect GCE \"A\" level scores of 90 points have been turned away from our medical schools. As a result, some have to go overseas to study medicine, imposing a significant financial burden on their parents and contributing to a brain drain from Singapore.
We understand that about 2,400 Singaporeans applied to medical schools at the National University of Singapore (NUS) and Nanyang Technological University (NTU) every year but were rejected due to an intake of only about 510 students per cohort.
Singapore's doctor-to-population ratio stands at 2.8 doctors per 1,000 people, which is quite low compared to countries like the United Kingdom, 3.2; United States, 3.6; Australia, 4.1; and the EU average of 4.3 doctors per 1,000 people. Given our ageing population, there is room for an increase in the number of doctors in Singapore.
Thus, I would like to inquire if MOH is prepared to collaborate with the Ministry of Education (MOE) to expand the number of vacancies in the medical schools at NUS, NTU and Duke-NUS. Meanwhile, I also receive feedback that junior doctors in local public hospitals have overwhelming workloads, particularly during their housemanship. I would like to ask if MOH is prepared to take measures to ease their burden, which is vital for both their well-being and the patient care quality.
Chairman, during a recent cycling trip to Serangoon East Dam, I was dismayed to witness a group of teenagers openly vaping. Regrettably, similar incidents seem commonplace, as echoed by my residents from their experiences. One friend, in particular, recounted reporting a vaping incident to the Police. Then the Police redirected her to the Health Sciences Authority (HSA). Despite her complaint, there was no follow-up from HSA. Probably, HSA does not have sufficient resources to follow-through.
Vaping poses a significant problem in schools, with many students obtaining vaping accessories from family members, including their parents. To combat this issue, we must intensify the efforts to raise awareness about the harms of vaping and promote responsible behaviour. Initiatives, such as the \"Truth Initiative\" campaign by the United States' Centres for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) have proven to be effective in reducing vaping prevalence through public education.
While education is crucial, strict enforcement is equally necessary. We are pleased with the recent Government measures to curb vaping imports and restrict its use in schools and public spaces. However, questions linger regarding the adequacy and effectiveness of the enforcement actions.
I have just visited HSA's website. It is concerning that the Chairman and CEO of HSA did not even mention anything about enforcement action against vaping in their messages on the website. On the website, the messages are on the front of the website; no mention about anti-vaping measures. This raises doubts about the priority placed on anti-vaping efforts within HSA.
Hence, I urge the Minister to provide insights into the size and effectiveness of the HSA's enforcement team and whether the Minister is satisfied with the current state of the vaping scene in Singapore.
If the Minister is not satisfied, I would question whether relying solely on HSA as the enforcement authority against vaping is sufficient. Considering the Government's concern that vaping is harmful, I would like to ask the Minister whether the Minister thinks that vaping is more harmful than smoking or it is about the same as smoking. But if vaping is harmful and we think that we need to enforce with greater strength, I would like to suggest that agencies like the Central Narcotics Bureau and the Police, with their larger enforcement personnel, could assist in the anti-vaping efforts.
Dr Lim Wee Kiak (Sembawang): Mr Chairman, I want to declare my interest as an ophthalmologist in a private group practice.
The issue of healthcare costs and productivity is one that weighs heavily on the minds of many Singaporeans. While we strive for accessibility, quality of care for all, rising costs and long waiting times paint a concerning picture for all of us. Over the past decade, healthcare expenditure has skyrocketed, raising questions about sustainability as well. Long wait times for appointments and procedures frustrate patients and strain the healthcare system.
The Government has taken steps to address these concerns and increased hospital bed capacity and medical personnel recruitment are commendable efforts. The recently unveiled nurse retention scheme as well as initiatives to improve healthcare workers' welfare are all welcomed. But all these belated responses are after years of groundswell feedback and growing pressure. The prompt question now is: why now, when the bed capacity issue has been a concern for years, even before COVID-19? This reactive approach highlights a need for a more proactive as well as an anticipatory strategy. What is being done now to move towards a more forward-looking approach in healthcare administration? Therefore, I raise the following questions.
What are the key drivers to cost escalation in healthcare delivery? Are these primarily driven by medical technology advancements, rising drug prices, inflation or other factors or all of the above? Are there specific areas, such as medications, technology as well as administrative costs, that drive cost increases?
Beyond medical procedures, cost concerns are driving some Singaporeans to buy prescription medication from online marketplaces and over the counter across the border without prior medical consultation, potentially jeopardising their healthcare. This raises serious concerns about accessibility and affordability of essential medication within our healthcare system. We need to understand the root cause of this behaviour and explore solutions that prioritise both public health as well as affordability.
What specific measures are being taken to slow down cost increases? We need concrete actions, be it exploring alternative treatment options, revisiting procurement strategies or leveraging on technology for cost optimisation. Are there plans to leverage on more bulk purchasing, negotiate for better pricing with pharmaceutical companies or explore alternative treatment options completely? Costs of a surgical procedure done in a day surgery setting is significantly much lower than that of a same procedure done as inpatient of the hospital. Can MOH explore how we can further expand the capacity of day surgeries to moderate our medical cost increases and reduce inpatient hospitalisation?
Can the Ministry also elaborate on the utilisation of smart solutions and artificial intelligence (AI) in healthcare delivery? Can these technologies be used to optimise resource allocation, streamline administrative processes or personalise healthcare for individual patients, leading to cost savings as well as improved outcomes? Smart medical monitoring devices or wearables can be used to substitute and reduce the reliance on our nurses for patient monitoring in the hospitals and, in same cases, outpatient settings as well.
Because of the small size of our island, proximity to hospitals is a blessing. But it is also contributing to the overuse of A&E services for non-emergencies, resulting in a gridlock at the A&E and also a knock-on effect on bed shortage. This is often driven by a lack of knowledge about recognising and managing their health conditions. While long-term education efforts are crucial, we also need immediate solutions to address the current strain. Leveraging smart solutions and AI-powered triage systems can be a game-changer. Patients can rely on virtual consultations to connect with healthcare professionals remotely for initial assessments, potentially avoiding unnecessary A&E visits. AI-powered tools with symptom checkers and decision-support tools can also guide patients towards appropriate care options based on their symptoms, directing them to clinics, pharmacies or telemedicine consultations instead of the A&E.
While I acknowledge the Government's efforts to address healthcare challenges, there remains a need for a more proactive, data-driven and cost-conscious approach. By embracing innovation, empowering patients and leveraging technologies, we can navigate the crossroads of healthcare costs as well as productivity, ensuring accessible, affordable and quality healthcare for all Singaporeans.
Mr Ong Hua Han (Nominated Member): Chairman, today, I raise a matter of urgent concern: the need for financial assistance for those living with spinal muscular atrophy (SMA). SMA is a rare and debilitating genetic disease. Last year, I got to know Ms Sherry Toh, a 25-year-old socio-political and gaming journalist who lives with SMA type 2.
SMA is a progressive disease that affects the nervous system and muscles, resulting in severe physical disabilities. Despite the challenges posed by SMA, Sherry is an incredibly resilient person, determined to live her life to the fullest. Members can read about her story online.
Without treatment, SMA patients like Sherry face the grim prospect of progressive deterioration, respiratory failure and a bedridden future. However, there is hope. There is an HSA-approved oral medication called Risdiplam, which improves motor function and stabilises SMA's progression. Roche, which markets the drug, donated a three-month supply to Sherry last year.
This intervention led to noticeable improvements in her energy levels, swallowing abilities and overall well-being. It gave Sherry a newfound taste of freedom and independence, enabling her to live her life more fully. Yet, this was a temporary lifeline. Risdiplam needs to be consumed daily and consistently for its effects to last. An annual supply of Risdiplam costs $375,000 per year. This is far beyond the reach of an average Singaporean. As soon as the third day without medication, Sherry felt a notable deterioration. It took her longer to swallow water compared to when she had been on Risdiplam for two months.
While there is hope that SMA treatments may be included in the Rare Disease Fund in the future, I raised this topic in my Parliamentary Question last year, patients like Sherry cannot afford to wait any longer. Every day without treatment access is a missed opportunity to improve their quality of life and prolong lifespan. Therefore, I urge MOH to expedite its review of SMA treatments for subsidies and mainstream financing.
Crowdfunding is not a suitable nor sustainable alternative. Sherry has extended her crowdfunding campaign many times now. Yet, she has only managed to reach 12% of her $375,000 target, just to secure one year's supply of medication. Mr Chairman, Sherry is only trying to buy time, time to witness policy change, time to hope for a brighter tomorrow.
Ms Sylvia Lim (Aljunied): Sir, cancer remains the leading cause of death in Singapore, claiming nearly 24% of all recorded deaths in 2022. One in four Singaporeans is expected to develop cancer in their lifetimes. According to the Singapore Cancer Society, over the five-year period from 2017 to 2021, an average of 46 people per day were diagnosed with cancer in Singapore, while 16 people per day died of it.
A study last September commissioned by DBS Bank and conducted by Black Box Research surveyed approximately 1,200 participants on their financial readiness to tackle cancer costs. Three key findings emerged: first, that responders perceived difficulty coping with the cost of cancer care; second, that cost concerns may significantly impact decisions about treatment; and third, part of the solution lay in improving financial literacy.
The survey is ongoing. Among those surveyed on why they did not purchase additional coverage, some cited unaffordable premiums and a lack of understanding about policy benefits. One in three participants expressed concerns about the exorbitant cost of cancer care. An earlier study by National University Cancer Institute and Research for Impact showed that patients of lower socioeconomic status were at higher risk of financial toxicity.
Financial toxicity means that patients are likely to experience significant financial distress due to the cost of care, which usually coincides with a period of lost income. This not only affects their quality of life and mental well-being, but also that of their family members.
Empowering people early with financial knowledge on private insurance options would instill confidence to prepare for the unexpected catastrophic medical expenditure and allow patients to focus on treatment. It is also important to ensure that the national coverage for cancer under MediShield Life remains meaningful. How is the Ministry working with the relevant stakeholders to raise awareness of cancer treatment costs and to mitigate financial toxicity?
Ms Hazel Poa (Non-Constituency Member): Mr Chairman, last July, the Government amended the law to allow women between 21 and 37 years old to undergo elective egg freezing. The Progress Singapore Party (PSP) supports this as it provides women with the option to preserve fertility and their chances of having children later in life. This is necessary as young Singaporeans are getting married later and our TFR has fallen to 0.97 in 2023.
However, we can do more to support women who are thinking of or currently undergoing egg freezing.
Firstly, the procedure is still very costly in Singapore. Elective egg freezing can cost between $7,000 and $9,000 per cycle in a public hospital, or $10,000 to $15,000 per cycle in a private fertility clinic. Currently, there are no subsidies, co-funding, or Medisave available for elective egg freezing. There are only certain subsidies that couples can avail of when undergoing in vitro fertilisation (IVF) treatment, if and when they choose to use the frozen eggs in the future. But if young women cannot afford to freeze their eggs at the optimal age, there will be no frozen eggs for couples to use later.
PSP therefore calls on the Government to consider some level of subsidies in public hospitals and allow the use of MediSave for this procedure. Conditions on subsidies can be imposed to prevent abuse and ensure that unutilised frozen eggs can be donated to other couples or used for other purposes like research or education.
Countries like South Korea, Japan, Australia and France already subsidise elective egg freezing. The Government can also encourage businesses to subsidise or cover the costs of such procedures and other fertility treatments as part of a package of fertility benefits for their employees. This is already common in the US, where many large employers routinely provide generous coverage for fertility treatments such as egg freezing and IVF as part of their employee benefits. We should encourage this to become the norm in a Singapore made for families.
Secondly, we can also do more to increase the resources available to young women who wish to go through egg freezing, which can be physically, psychologically, and financially taxing. Young women should be given fertility information through healthcare providers and institutes of higher learning. This would include information about contraception, pregnancy and fertility treatments. Space must be created for young women to have informed conversations about fertility and maternal health issues, so that they can be empowered to make decisions that are best for themselves.
The Chairman: Mr Louis Ng. Your three cuts together.
Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang (Nee Soon): Many couples tell me of the long waits at public hospitals for IVF procedures. We can help reduce this. Co-funding support from the Government is important to allow couples to access IVF which is extremely expensive. However, there is no support when couples go to private clinics for IVF. Channeling some couples to private clinics will help ease the load on our public hospitals. Can MOH consider allowing couples who have failed two IVF cycles in a public hospital to receive co-funding for treatment at a private clinic?
There is no fiscal loss to the Government. For couples who have failed twice at public hospitals, this allows them to try a different approach to increase the chances of success. We are doing so much to get Singaporeans to have children. Couples undergoing IVF are a group that is trying so hard to have children and we are not doing enough to help them.
Prime Minister Lee talked about how couples who want kids put off starting families, not realising how quickly it gets harder with each passing year. Couples are starting their families late and a study showed that Singaporean couples try for 3.4 years to conceive before seeking help if they are unable to conceive.
Early fertility screening helps people catch problems early and avoid even more costly fertility treatments later when they are older and when it is harder to conceive. Not only does it save costs, but it also saves couples from the heartache and stress of multiple rounds of unsuccessful IVF if needed.
The Government can view this also as cost savings. Again, spending more on fertility testing at an early stage might reduce future spending on subsidies for repeated IVF cycles as the success rates of IVF decreases with age. I have raised this previously and I am asking again that the Government provide more subsidies for fertility screening and create a separate MediSave category for fertility screening.
All of us are grateful for the life-saving work of our nurses and healthcare workers during COVID-19. They put themselves on the frontline to save lives. They were stretched during COVID-19, and we all hoped that things will get better for them post-COVID-19. Unfortunately, things have not gotten better yet. Our hospitals remain stretched. In December 2023, the median waiting time to be warded was around 17 to 20 hours, and even exceeded 20 hours in certain hospitals.
In my Budget speech last year, I spoke up for more rest time for nurses. The ANGEL scheme announced by MOH is a positive move. But in addition to financial incentives, nurses hope we can do more to ensure they have sufficient rest. For already exhausted nurses, they dread the PM-AM-PM-AM shift, or PAPA shift. This means that nurses work two consecutive sets of afternoon shifts followed by morning shifts. I understand that Khoo Teck Puat Hospital has looked into PAPA shifts and has made positive changes. Can MOH ensure that all hospitals do away with this PAPA shift and that we look into ensuring nurses have a minimum amount of rest between shifts, similar to what we do for flight attendants?
The Chairman: Mr Gerald Giam. Take your two cuts together.
Mr Gerald Giam Yean Song (Aljunied): Sir, currently Pioneer Generation, Merdeka Generation and Public Assistance cardholders receive special subsidies under the Community Health Assist Scheme (CHAS). I would like to propose adding persons with disabilities or special needs as another group of Singaporeans to receive special subsidies under CHAS. They should also receive additional MediSave top-ups and more subsidies for intermediate and long-term care. All this will help persons with disabilities or special needs and their families to defray their medical expenses, which are likely to be larger over their lifetimes.
I would also like to suggest that MOH track the number of individuals under CHAS who are persons with disabilities or special needs, so as to better understand the healthcare expenses and needs of this group of Singaporeans.
The healthcare costs and lost productivity caused by smoking in Singapore has been estimated to be at least $600 million a year. Singapore has one of the world's toughest anti-smoking laws. Yet, continuing to raise tobacco taxes and extending public smoking bans may start seeing diminishing returns. Stricter rules in public places have ironically driven smokers to light up at home or create informal smoking corners, harming their children's health and sparking neighbour complaints about second-hand smoke.
In January 2023, MOH stated that it is reviewing international practices on cohort smoking bans. The United Kingdom (UK) plans to increase the minimum smoking age every year until eventually no person can illegally buy cigarettes. New Zealand initially implemented a cohort smoking ban, but the new Conservative Government revoked it to fund tax cuts. Deputy Prime Minister Lawrence Wong stated in January 2024 that public health and not potential tobacco tax revenue loss were factors in banning e-cigarettes. I trust this principle will also apply to any Government decision on cohort smoking ban.
A generational smoking ban is specifically designed to safeguard the future without imposing restrictions on current smokers. This forward-looking approach ensures that today's adults can make their own choices while laying the groundwork for a healthier legacy for their children and grandchildren. I urge the Government to implement a cohort smoking ban for all individuals in Singapore born on or after 2010. This will give us four years to prepare new smoking regulations before we see our first smoke-free generation for all children aged 14 and under today.
The Chairman: Ms Mariam Jaafar. Take your five cuts together.
Ms Mariam Jaafar (Sembawang): Healthcare costs have grown rapidly and the MOH budget is now second only to that of the Ministry of Defence. Hospital bills and insurance premiums continue to rise.
The shift to preventive care under Healthier SG will be a critical lever to bending the cost curve in the long term. But we must also drive cost reduction in the here and now. We have residents who come to us complaining that the cost of medical treatment is higher in Singapore than in the region, but even other wealth developed nations like Japan, that the cost of unsubsidised consultations are sometimes more expensive in our polyclinics that at private GPs.
Yes, we have an ageing population. Yes, there is a rise in chronic diseases. Yes, there are global shortages. Yes, we are disadvantaged as a small and rich nation when it comes to drug pricing, but what are the other material drivers of rising health costs that could be controlled?
Healthcare economics is a complex field, rife with principal-agent problems, moral hazards, human emotions and behaviours, and the Government has worked hard to address these challenges over time. But there are proven levers to reduce costs – value-based heathcare, digital technology, strategic procurement – but for their impact to be sustained, changes to ways of working, processes, people and incentives all have to be aligned; otherwise, the costs come back or just move somewhere else.
With the move to capitation funding, what benchmarking studies have been done and what targets have been set to get healthcare systems and insurers to go after cost savings. How can we get individuals to make decisions for the good of their loved ones and society as a whole? What more is being done to keep healthcare costs under control?
During the Healthier SG White Paper debate, I spoke about value-based healthcare, which is a transformative model of healthcare that focused on delivering better health outcomes with the same or lower costs by optimising available resources, citing several international best practices. Minister Ong Ye Kung had assured the House then that our hospitals have always been implementing value-based healthcare, have also been through many such initiatives, such as community measures to help resuscitate out of hospital cardiac arrests.
I am heartened that we have seen many successful value based healthcare pilots in our healthcare system that demonstrate the potential. However, to fully realise this potential, we must scale up these pilots and integrate them across our healthcare system. This requires a concerted effort involving multiple stakeholders across the health care continuum. We must invest in technology, infrastructure, data, workforce training and culture to support this transition and ensure incentives are tied to outcomes, as well as address disparities in access to care and social determinants of health.
By embracing value-based care models and scaling up successful pilots, we can improve patient outcomes, enhance health care quality and bend the cost curve. Can the Minister provide an update on the status of these pilots, what results have come out of them, whether some have been scaled up across the healthcare system and why or why not? What is the expected contribution of value-based healthcare to bending the cost curve.
Digital technology and AI are rapidly transforming the healthcare landscape around the world. Digitisation and automation of healthcare systems, has the potential to both improve health outcomes and reduce costs in every area of the industry. The rapid development in GenAI has exciting promises in healthcare, with many emerging AI use cases from aspects as diverse as healthcare R&D, consumer billing and other efficiency, productivity and cost improvements. The roll-out of the National Electronic Health Record (NEHR) and the Next Gen Electronic Medical Record (EMR) alongside Healthier SG, adds vast array of new sources of data, AI and GenAI, offering exciting opportunities to improve preventive care and empower patients to manage their own healthcare.
Alternative health care models are also gaining momentum. Telehealth is advancing further, moving from consultations to remote diagnostics, including using AI to analyse symptoms and enable at home lab tests. Wearables and at home smart medical devices are also being rolled out. Virtual hospital wards will facilitate the remote continuous monitoring of patients, helping to reduce demands on hospital beds and manpower as well as reduce the need for hospital trips.
What is MOH doing to further harness the potential of digital technology and AI? What has been the impact thus far, and how do we ensure that these efforts drive sustainable value creation and outcomes?
While the focus on healthcare costs discussions often centres around the costs of medical treatments and procedures, the ancillary costs associated with healthcare are often overlooked. These include medication, transportation and caregiving expenses, and they can add up very quickly to become a significant financial burden. For example, transportation costs can be particularly significant for patients with mobility needs, patients who need access to health services frequently, patients with elderly caregivers, and caregivers who do not stay in the same household. For many families, the Home Caregiver Grant barely begins to cover their caregiving costs. And while the chronic tier of Healthier SG is welcome, patients still face high costs of medications and consumables.
It is imperative that we recognise and address these ancillary costs to ensure equitable access to healthcare for all. This requires a comprehensive approach that encompasses various facets of healthcare costs. For example, addressing transportation barriers could involve subsidies for transportation costs for low income families and scaling up medical transport services, but they can also involve promoting telehealth services, as well as ensuring that HDB and public transportation designs are supportive of people with mobility needs.
Has the Minister studied the ancillary cost burden for patients under different scenarios? What support can the Government provide to alleviate this burden for more families?
On a recent house visit, I met Mdm G who is her 90s. She has multiple medical conditions and is bedridden. She lives with three daughters. They are all in their 70s. They sought my help to apply for medical escort services as they struggle to lift her into a wheelchair for her frequent trips to the hospital.
On the same visit, I met Mdm M who takes care of her special-needs grandson. His parents are not in the picture. In her 70s, Mdm M has her own health problems and she was very worried about who would take care of her grandson when she is gone.
As our population ages, many caregivers are ageing or already elderly themselves, grappling with their own age-related health issues, financial constraints and social isolation. The toll of caregiving can be immense physically, emotionally and financially.
The Government has announced many measures to better support caregivers, from higher caregiving grants to enhanced caregiving services and training, to pushing for flexible work arrangements to facilitating special needs trust services. But the challenges are particularly significant when the caregivers themselves are ageing.
Plans under Age Well SG, such as shared stay-in senior care services sandbox, are welcomed, but we must ensure that the solutions are scalable. What can we learn from other aged societies? For example, Japan has been at the forefront of leveraging technology, with robotic assistants, robotic exoskeletons, telepresence robots and smart home systems. What is Singapore doing in this regard?
How can the Government better support ageing caregivers? What other scalable solutions are there to address this issue?
Mr Kwek Hian Chuan Henry (Kebun Baru): Chairman, as a member of the People's Action Party's (PAP's) Senior Group, I am delighted to hear about the added emphasis by MOH to strengthen home-care services and options for our seniors.
This is timely and much needed. Most seniors, even when they get frail, prefer to age-in-place in the comfort of their homes. Some seniors are fortunate to have their loved ones who can serve as caregivers or can afford to hire full-time caregivers. But not every senior is so fortunate.
As such, I am delighted to hear that MOH, AIC and MOM have recently rolled out the Stay-in Shared Caregiving Sandbox, where five companies will come on board to serve an estimated 800 senior clients. This could mean a different option for our seniors, especially if the companies bring on board well-trained caregivers who can serve multiple seniors, say, living in the same HDB precinct.
Can MOH share more about the details of this sandbox, such as the expected range and pricing of the services, whether the Government will be putting aside spaces within HDB estates to efficiently house these professional caregivers?
Can MOH also share about the proposed single-point of contact plan which is part of Age Well SG and whether this single-point of contact plan will lead to better flow of information which can then be incorporated into this sandbox? It will also be helpful if MOH can provide an update on when they intend to scale up the sandbox to the rest of Singapore and whether constituencies like Kebun Baru with a congregation of seniors in both public and private estates can be considered for early inclusion into this subsequent roll-out or pilot.
The next question is whether MOH can share more details broadly about the single-point of contact and how this effort is complementary to the personal health plan which is part of Healthier SG.
Ms Carrie Tan (Nee Soon): Mr Chairman, I would like to bring up an area of work called Caregiver Equipping and seek a review on whether MOH or the Ministry of Social Family Development (MSF) should be the lead agency in charge of this.
While MOH rightly takes care of healthcare, the support and enabling of caregivers should be a community effort with the national strategy of ageing-in-place and, hence, should fall within MSF's purview.
Given the rapidly ageing population, more Singaporeans are finding themselves juggling careers and caregiving. Support for them should be made widely available in their neighbourhoods and not be relegated to healthcare settings or experts, which is costly and unsustainable.
In Khatib, we launched the Caregiver Resource Centre last year to bring capacity-building and a network of peer support to caregivers. Such services should be ramped up quickly so that every caregiver or prospective caregiver can be prepared and equipped to go on this journey whenever it happens.
Many residents shared with me that they were suddenly thrown into a caregiving situation when their aged parents fall ill or have a fall. This was also my experience when my mom was diagnosed with cancer. Luckily, because I have been looking into caregiver provisions and interacting with residents who are caregivers, I found myself much more equipped to know what to do.
I recommend that MOH work closely with MSF to set up community-based caregiver resource centres in every neighbourhood and start training the community with caregiving knowledge and navigation of resources before the care avalanche overwhelms a generation of Singaporeans.
Just like how the Community Emergency and Engagement Committees (C2Es) is a joint effort between the People's Association and the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA), now ubiquitous in many neighbourhoods, preparing citizens with first-aid and first-responder skills, a similar platform can be set up between MSF and AIC to prepare Singaporeans for caregiving.
The natural place to locate such premises is next to polyclinics and hospitals, and I urge MOH to work closely and in consultation with MSF, which oversees social service agencies to work closely together in such programmes.
The Chairman: Dr Wan Rizal, take your three cuts together.
Dr Wan Rizal (Jalan Besar): Chairman, in our commitment to foster a healthier Singapore, we confront a persistent challenge that has evolved over the years, combating smoking and its modern counterpart, vaping.
MOH has been at the forefront of this battle, implementing comprehensive strategies to reduce smoking rates and preventing the adoption of alternative smoking habits, such as e-vaporisers.
In recent years, the landscape of smoking has shifted dramatically with the emergence of vaping which is often mistakenly perceived as a less harmful alternative to traditional cigarettes. This misconception poses a challenge in our fight against smoking. We need innovative approaches and robust measures to combat the rise of vaping among Singaporeans.
This evolving challenge leads us to a series of pertinent questions.
What are the Ministry's ongoing plans and future strategies to minimise smoking rates, particularly concerning anti-vaping measures? Will there be a review of the legislative penalties related to e-vaporisers? Additionally, would MOH consider intensifying public education campaigns to dispel myths around vaping? Finally, would MOH consider enhancing surveillance and enforcement measures to prevent the import, distribution and use of e-vaporisers in Singapore?
Sir, one of the challenges that all ethnic communities in Singapore face is the promotion of healthier lifestyles, which includes the reduction of smoking prevalence. MOH recognises the complexity of this challenge, understanding that it requires a multifaceted approach that addresses the issues at large and pays close attention to the cultural nuances and specific needs of a diverse population.
Smoking, as we are all aware, is a leading cause of preventable diseases and premature deaths worldwide. In Singapore, our commitment to creating a healthier nation means taking decisive action to curb this habit and mitigate its impact on society. This endeavour, however, cannot be successful without considering the cultural and socio-economic factors that influence lifestyle choices.
Therefore, what initiatives has MOH undertaken to decrease the smoking prevalence and to support the different ethnic groups in leading healthier lifestyles, including details on culturally sensitive interventions to address both physical health disparities and also acknowledge the potential role of mental well-being?
Additionally, would MOH consider forging strong partnerships with community leaders and organisations within these communities? I believe that through this collaboration, we can create culturally resonant messaging that addresses mental health stigmas and increases community buy-in to promote healthier lifestyles with sensitivity and effectiveness.
Chairman, in the recent Mental Health Motion, the Health Government Parliamentary Committee (GPC) brought forth the need for a comprehensive, accessible and compassionate mental health ecosystem, a cornerstone of a resilient and healthier Singapore.
Our journey towards improving mental healthcare is not just about enhancing services. It is about changing perceptions, breaking down stigma and fostering a support system that supports mental well-being at every level.
MOH has undertaken various initiatives to expand the availability and quality of mental health services. Furthermore, the Government recognises that mental health is a priority and integral to overall health and well-being. To that end, I would like to ask: what progress has MOH made in advancing mental healthcare and what are the forthcoming strategies and structures being implemented to enhance the accessibility and integration of mental health services within the community?
Additionally, would MOH consider working closely with religious organisations by providing them with the training and support for their staff as we expand into a more community-based approach? Training staff as Tier 1 care providers to recognise common mental health issues not only aids in intervention but also supports our idea of long-term care and rehabilitation within the community.
Sir, with the rapid advancement of AI technology, is the Ministry considering using AI in telehealth and digital mental health interventions? This could alleviate the manpower shortage and make mental healthcare a more flexible and accessible approach. However, it is vital to ensure quality control and efficacy of such platforms, backed by robust research.
Sir, the Government's commitment to advancing mental healthcare is evident and we are grateful for that. We know that the journey is long and we must take it as a marathon, not just a sprint.
So, let us move towards a future where mental health is prioritised, supported and integrated into every aspect of our community. We must ensure that everyone has the access to the support they need to lead a mentally healthy lifestyle.
Mr Keith Chua (Nominated Member): Mr Chairman, providing necessary mental health and wellness services and support cuts across many Ministries. The several Ministries include MOH, MSF, MOE, the Ministry of Culture, Community and Youth (MCCY), MOM and MHA. Current service providers, whether under MOH, MSF or MOE, therefore, welcome the establishment of the National Mental Health Office.
Seamless continuum of care is essential to delivering the best care to persons with mental health issues. Also key will be the continual efforts to reduce stigma and early diagnosis and intervention.
We also need to keep strengthening support networks for recovery in the community. This Parliament recently called for a whole-of-nation approach to addressing the current and future mental health challenges in our nation.
May I seek updates, therefore, on the key areas the National Mental Health Office will initially focus on and whether there has been agreement on initial key indicators to determine outcomes that we can all work towards?
The Chairman: Senior Parliamentary Secretary Rahayu Mahzam.
","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 Senior Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Health (Ms Rahayu Mahzam): Chairman, may I seek your consent to move \"That progress be reported now and leave be asked to sit again tomorrow\"?
The Chairman: I give my consent.
[(proc text) Resolved, \"That progress be reported and leave be asked to sit again tomorrow.\" – [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: Senior Parliamentary Secretary Rahayu Mahzam.
Ms Rahayu Mahzam: Mr Speaker, I beg to report that the Committee of Supply has made progress on the Estimates of Expenditure for the Financial Year 2024/2025 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 7.44 pm.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Engaging Businesses and Individuals to Promote More Sustainable Practices and Reduce Carbon Footprint","subTitle":"Including cutting packaging plastic waste","sectionType":"WANA","content":"9 Mr Yip Hon Weng asked the Minister for Sustainability and the Environment (a) whether an update can be provided on the Ministry's community engagements with businesses and individuals to encourage more sustainable practices and reduce carbon footprint; (b) how does the Ministry address the issue of significant packaging waste arising from more purchases done online in international marketplaces; and (c) what is the progress towards the key milestones for a more sustainable economy under the Singapore Green Plan 2030.
Ms Grace Fu Hai Yien: Since the launch of the Singapore Green Plan 2030 in 2021, the Ministry for Sustainability and the Environment (MSE) and its Statutory Boards have been engaging stakeholders across different segments of the society, including individuals, businesses, schools, Non-Government Organisations (NGOs) and community groups to promote environmentally sustainable practices.
The National Environment Agency (NEA) has embarked on various public education initiatives to encourage households to reduce waste, including through its Say YES to Waste Less and Recycle Right campaigns. Some assuring trends have been observed: according to NEA's 2023 survey on household recycling, 72 per cent of households reported that they recycled their waste materials in 2023, compared to 64 per cent in 2021. A higher proportion of respondents were also aware of common items that can be deposited in the blue recycling bins and recycling chutes.
The Public Utilities Board (PUB), Singapore's National Water Agency, engages diverse partners, including schools, grassroots organisations, public agencies, NGOs, businesses and building owners, to promote water conservation. In 2023, PUB engaged more than 400 partners and 2,000 participants for its anchor event of Singapore World Water Day.
My Ministry has also co-delivered and co-created several initiatives with our stakeholders and the larger community. These include Go Green SG, a nation-wide sustainability movement to rally citizens, organisations and the community to take collective action towards a more environmentally sustainable Singapore. The inaugural Go Green SG in 2023 saw over 70,000 participants across more than 300 activities organised by 160 partners. More than 90% of participants said that they were encouraged to lead a more sustainable lifestyle after participating in the activities.
To support individuals and businesses who want to start ground-up projects that advance environmental sustainability and engage the community, the SG Eco Fund has awarded $9.3 million to support more than 200 initiatives, including education and outreach on sustainable practices. More than 300,000 people were engaged through these initiatives.
Singapore has made good progress in developing a sustainable economy since our Green Plan was launched in 2021. The Member may refer to the Ministry of Trade and Industry and MSE's Committee of Supply speeches delivered on 1 and 4 March 2024 for the latest updates and initiatives to build a more sustainable economy. [Please refer to: \"Committee of Supply – Head V (Ministry of Trade and Industry)\", Official Report, 1 March 2024, Vol 95, Issue 128, Budget section; and \"Committee of Supply – Head L (Ministry of Sustainability and the Environment)\", Official Report, 4 March 2024, Vol 95, Issue 129, Budget section.]
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Police Processes to Detect Indicators of Potential Abuse and Trafficking when Arresting Vice Workers","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"1 Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang asked the Minister for Home Affairs when vice workers are arrested (a) what processes do the Police have in place to systematically detect indicators of potential (i) physical, sexual and financial abuse and (ii) trafficking; and (b) if there are no such processes in place, whether the Police will consider implementing such processes.\n\n\n\n\n
Mr K Shanmugam: As part of its enforcement operations against vice activities, the Police conduct interviews with every commercial sex worker to establish the circumstances of each case. Officers who conduct such interviews are trained to recognise indicators of abuse, exploitation and trafficking. If there are prima facie criminal offences made out, investigations will be conducted.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Potential Collaborations with International Energy Agency from Setting up of New Regional Office","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"2 Mr Shawn Huang Wei Zhong asked the Minister for Trade and Industry with the new International Energy Agency (IEA) regional office in Singapore (a) how will the Ministry facilitate engagements between the IEA, local businesses and research institutions to foster public-private partnerships in the energy sector; (b) whether there are plans to attract or foster innovation in clean and renewable energy technologies; and (c) what impact does the Ministry foresee the regional office have on the local and regional energy markets, particularly in terms of sustainability and energy transition.
3 Mr Shawn Huang Wei Zhong asked the Minister for Trade and Industry (a) whether there are potential collaborations between Singapore and the International Energy Agency (IEA) facilitated by its new regional office in Singapore, particularly in areas of renewable energy, energy efficiency and technology innovation; and (b) what capacity-building or knowledge-sharing programmes are planned in collaboration with the IEA to enhance Singapore’s expertise in energy management and sustainability practices.
Mr Gan Kim Yong: Singapore is honoured to host the first International Energy Agency (IEA) Regional Cooperation Centre outside its headquarters in Paris, France. The Centre will serve as a hub for the IEA's activities and engagements in Asia. This development builds on Singapore's longstanding collaborations with the IEA to share knowledge and build capabilities in our region.
The Regional Cooperation Centre will provide technical advice and policy support to Governments and regional bodies to accelerate the energy transition; for example, through scaling up the deployment of renewable energy and other clean energy technologies.
In Singapore, the Ministry of Trade and Industry and Energy Market Authority will facilitate the Centre's engagements with companies and organisations in the finance and sustainability ecosystems. There will be opportunities for Singapore-based companies and organisations to collaborate with the IEA to address the region’s needs for green financing and climate sustainability solutions.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Annual Number of Students Placed in Time Out Programme and Its Effectiveness","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"4 Ms See Jinli Jean asked the Minister for Education (a) over the last five years, what is the annual number of students placed in the Time Out Programme; (b) what is the main reason for their disengagement from schools; (c) whether the programme is effective in addressing students' disengagement; and (d) what are the adjustments to the programme to provide customised support to the students and their families.
Mr Chan Chun Sing: Secondary schools organised the Time Out Programmes to strengthen sense of belonging to school, improve student attendance, and raise at-risk students' confidence in learning.
Disengaged students face various challenges, including challenging family circumstances, negative peer influence and lack of direction.
MOE ceased the Time Out Programme in 2019 to rechannel the resources for schools to provide support for a broader spectrum of at-risk students, including those who are disengaged. For example, schools have after-school programmes, which focus on befriending and mentoring, strengthening peer relationships and self-management skills and interest-based activities, to strengthen students' connection to their schools. MOE has also deployed Student Welfare Officers (SWOs) in schools to engage students with irregular school attendance and to work with parents and school staff to reintegrate these students back to school.
Beyond school-based support, schools also work with community partners, such as the Social Service Offices or Family Service Centres to address issues that the student may be facing at home.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Full-time Undergraduates on Study Loans under MOE Tuition Grant Scheme and Interest Charged","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"5 Ms He Ting Ru asked the Minister for Education in each year of the last 10 years (a) how many full-time students in diploma or undergraduate courses in the Institutes of Higher Learning have taken up study loans under the MOE Tuition Grant Scheme; (b) what is the average interest rate these students are being charged to service their loans; (c) how many students are in arrears; and (d) what assistance has been rendered to those in arrears.
Mr Chan Chun Sing: Over the last 10 years, about 18,800 or 30% of undergraduates and 2,300 or 3% of diploma students from our publicly-funded institutions tapped on Government loans to finance their tertiary studies each year.
These Government loans are interest-free during the course of study, with interest commencing upon the borrower's graduation or leaving the institution. The interest rate for existing loans is pegged to the average prime lending rate of DBS, OCBC and UOB and is currently 4.75% per annum.
As at September 2023, about 500 loans – or 2.6% of total number of outstanding loans due for repayment – have arrears of three months or more. Borrowers who face difficulty in servicing their loan repayments can make an appeal to defer their loan repayment. MOE will review the appeals on a case-by-case basis.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Study on Extending Development and Learning Support Programme to Differently-abled Children at Nursery Levels","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"6 Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang asked the Minister for Social and Family Development whether an update can be provided on the Early Childhood Development Agency's study on extending the Development Support and Learning Support Programme to children who are differently abled at the nursery levels.
Mr Masagos Zulkifli B M M: The Development Support-Learning Support (DS-LS) Programme supports preschool children aged five and six with mild developmental delays or learning needs. In 2021, the Early Childhood Development Agency (ECDA) piloted the extension of the DS-LS programme to children aged three and four in 20 preschool centres. The pilot is still in progress.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Data on Single Unwed Parents' Age at Birth of Child","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"7 Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang asked the Minister for Social and Family Development for each year from 2022, how many single unwed parents were at the time of the birth of their child (i) below 35 years old (ii) between 35 and 36 years old and (iii) 36 years old and above, respectively.
Mr Masagos Zulkifli B M M: The number of citizen mothers with non-marital births1 in 2022 was 540 for mothers below 35 years old, 22 for those 35 years old and 141 for those aged 36 and older. The 2023 data is not yet available.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":["1 : Based on unique individuals in each age band."],"footNoteQuestions":["7"],"questionNo":"7"},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Cases of Preschools and Kindergartens Breaching Staff-Child Ratios and Measures to Ensure Compliance","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"8 Ms He Ting Ru asked the Minister for Social and Family Development (a) in 2023, what is the proportion of preschools and kindergartens that breached the minimum qualified staff-child ratios during programme hours for (i) three months (ii) six months and (iii) more than six months; (b) what measures are taken to ensure the ratio is adhered to even when staff are on leave; and (c) what efforts are being taken to increase the ratio of staff to students.
Mr Masagos Zulkifli B M M: The Early Childhood Development Agency (ECDA) has a comprehensive set of regulations including staff-child ratio requirements to ensure the safety and well-being of children. Licensees must ensure that staff-child ratios are abided by at all times during a centre’s operating hours. The operator must take all possible measures to ensure the safety of children, which may include redeploying staff or engaging relief staff to temporarily cover duties.
Currently, 23 (about 1%) of preschools did not meet the qualified staff-child ratios at the point of license renewal and are on a six or 12-month licence.
In practice, preschool operators can and do operate with more staff than required, depending on activities being conducted and manpower available. To ensure adequate manpower supply in the sector, ECDA has taken steps to improve the career proposition and working conditions of educators, so that more are encouraged to join and remain in the preschool sector. ECDA is also reviewing ways to grow a pool of relief staff to support the sector’s ad hoc needs. ECDA is mindful that further raising the minimum staff-child ratios across the sector will have an impact on overall manpower demand and availability of services.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Data on Doctors Aged 29 to 40 Resigning from Public Hospitals","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"9 Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang asked the Minister for Health for FY 2022 and FY 2023, what is the annual number and percentage of doctors who resigned from public hospitals who are (i) 29 years old (ii) 30 years old (iii) 31 years old (iv) from 31 to 35 years old and (v) from 35 to 40 years old.
Mr Ong Ye Kung: Across the requested age bands, the attrition rates of doctors from the public hospitals who have left the public healthcare sector are provided in Table 1 below.
10 Mr Yip Hon Weng asked the Minister for Health whether nurses who have resigned and rejoined the public nursing profession will have their previous years of service taken into consideration for the benefits under the new long-term retention scheme for nurses, regardless of their reason for leaving.
Mr Ong Ye Kung: The design of the long-term retention scheme for nurses seeks to encourage them to build a lifelong career in nursing in the publicly-funded healthcare system. When the scheme starts in September 2024, we will start accumulating the year count of nurses on the scheme. If a nurse resigns, this will be considered an exit. If the nurse rejoins the public system in future, the nurse's previous years on the scheme can be reinstated regardless of the reasons for leaving.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Update on Measures to Mitigate Potential Environmental Impact at Revised A1W1 Worksite of Cross Island MRT Line","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"11 Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang asked the Minister for Transport (a) whether he can provide an update on the measures that LTA has taken in consultation with nature groups to mitigate any potential environmental impact at the revised A1W1 worksite for the Cross Island MRT Line; (b) whether LTA is continuing to monitor any impact on the environment and wildlife at the revised A1W1 worksite; and (c) if so, whether the worksite has caused any impact on the environment and wildlife.
Mr Chee Hong Tat: In consultation with nature groups and National Parks Board, the Land Transport Authority has developed an Environmental Monitoring and Management Plan for the A1W1 worksite. The plan prescribes a comprehensive set of measures to mitigate the potential environmental impact at the worksite. Construction has not begun at this worksite.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Sustainable Aviation Fuel Levy on Private Jets Departing from Singapore","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"12 Mr Leong Mun Wai asked the Minister for Transport whether the sustainable aviation fuel levy will be charged for private jet flights departing from Singapore.
Mr Chee Hong Tat: Yes.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Impact of Sustainable Aviation Fuel Levy on Singapore's Aviation Sector and Tourism Industry","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"13 Mr Yip Hon Weng asked the Minister for Transport with flights departing from Singapore requiring to use sustainable aviation fuel from 2026 (a) what is the potential impact on Singapore's competitiveness as an aviation and travel hub; (b) what is the likely percentage increase in the prices of air tickets from the levy and how will this affect travel demand; (c) whether this policy will drive airlines to use alternative airports in the region; and (d) whether other airports charge a similar levy.
Mr Chee Hong Tat: Our approach to build the Sustainable Aviation Fuel (SAF) ecosystem strikes a balance between economic competitiveness and environmental sustainability, to support the long-term growth of our air hub and encourage investments in new SAF production facilities. While other regions have introduced SAF volumetric mandates, Singapore is the first country to adopt a SAF levy, which will allow us to adopt a fixed cost envelope to provide cost certainty to airlines and travellers for the uplift of SAF from Changi. As an indication, we estimate that the levy to support a 1% SAF uplift in 2026 could increase ticket price for an economy class passenger on a direct flight from Singapore to Bangkok, Tokyo and London by around $3, $6 and $16 respectively. Passengers in premium classes will pay higher levies.
The Member may wish to refer to the Sustainable Air Hub Blueprint published by the Civil Aviation Authority of Singapore (CAAS) on 19 February 2024 for more details. The Blueprint is available on the CAAS' website.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Clarification by Senior Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Transport","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WS","content":"[(proc text) The following statement was made in the reply given by the Senior Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Transport (Mr Baey Yam Keng) during Question Time at the Sitting of 5 March 2024: (proc text)]
The Senior Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Transport (Mr Baey Yam Keng): It is an offence to illegally modify, sell or use such devices on public paths. The Land Transport Authority (LTA) conducts enforcement on paths and operations against retailers. From January 2020 to December 2023, LTA detected about 5,100 offences involving non-compliant devices on paths. [Please refer to \"Enforcement against Retailers and Distributors of Batteries for Non-original Active Mobility Devices\", Official Report, 5 March 2024, Vol 95, Issue 130, Oral Answers to Questions section.]
[(proc text) Written statement by Mr Baey Yam Keng circulated with leave of the Speaker in accordance with Standing Order No 29(5): (proc text)]
I wish to make the following factual correction to my reply given during the Sitting of 5 March 2024. My statement should read as follows:
The Senior Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Transport (Mr Baey Yam Keng): It is an offence to illegally modify, sell or use such devices on public paths and roads. The Land Transport Authority (LTA) conducts enforcement on paths and roads, and operations against retailers. From January 2020 to December 2023, LTA detected about 5,100 offences involving non-compliant devices on paths and roads.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Clarification by Second Minister for National Development","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WS","content":"[(proc text) The following statement was made by the Second Minister for National Development (Ms Indranee Rajah) during clarification at the Committee of Supply debate for the Ministry of National Development at the Sitting of 5 March 2024: (proc text)]
The Second Minister for National Development (Ms Indranee Rajah): I will try to keep it as brief as possible. I thank Mr Chong for his clarification. It follows on actually to what Minister Desmond Lee said because the previous clarifications were all asking Minister Desmond Lee how can we have more and more buildings on this 734 hectares. [Please refer to \"Committee of Supply – Head T (Ministry of National Development)\", Official Report, 05 March 2024, Vol 95, Issue 130, Budget section.]
[(proc text) Written statement by Ms Indranee Rajah circulated with leave of the Speaker in accordance with Standing Order No 29(5): (proc text)]
I wish to make the following factual correction to my reply given during the Sitting of 5 March 2024. My statement should read as follows:
The Second Minister for National Development (Ms Indranee Rajah): I will try to keep it as brief as possible. I thank Mr Chong for his clarification. It follows on actually to what Minister Desmond Lee said because the previous clarifications were all asking Minister Desmond Lee how can we have more and more buildings on this 734 square kilometres.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null}],"writtenAnswersVOList":[],"writtenAnsNAVOList":[],"annexureList":[],"vernacularList":[{"vernacularID":6047,"sittingDate":null,"vernacularTitle":"Vernacular Speech by Dr Amy Khor Lean Suan","filePath":"d:/apps/reports/solr_files/20240305/vernacular-Amy Khor MOT 5Mar2024-Chinese (mot).pdf","fileName":"Amy Khor MOT 5Mar2024-Chinese (mot).pdf"},{"vernacularID":6048,"sittingDate":null,"vernacularTitle":"Vernacular Speech by Mr Baey Yam Keng","filePath":"d:/apps/reports/solr_files/20240305/vernacular-Baey Yam Keng MOT 5Mar 2024 -Chinese.pdf","fileName":"Baey Yam Keng MOT 5Mar 2024 -Chinese.pdf"},{"vernacularID":6049,"sittingDate":null,"vernacularTitle":"Vernacular Speech by Mr Don Wee","filePath":"d:/apps/reports/solr_files/20240305/vernacular-Don Wee MND 5Mar2024_Chinese.pdf","fileName":"Don Wee MND 5Mar2024_Chinese.pdf"},{"vernacularID":6050,"sittingDate":null,"vernacularTitle":"Vernacular Speech by Mr Desmond Lee","filePath":"d:/apps/reports/solr_files/20240305/vernacular-Desmond Lee MND 5Mar2024-Chinese(mnd).pdf","fileName":"Desmond Lee MND 5Mar2024-Chinese(mnd).pdf"},{"vernacularID":6051,"sittingDate":null,"vernacularTitle":"Vernacular Speech by Ms Sim Ann","filePath":"d:/apps/reports/solr_files/20240305/vernacular-Sim Ann MND 5Mar2024-Chinese.pdf","fileName":"Sim Ann MND 5Mar2024-Chinese.pdf"},{"vernacularID":6052,"sittingDate":null,"vernacularTitle":"Vernacular Speech by Mr Tan Kiat How","filePath":"d:/apps/reports/solr_files/20240305/vernacular-Tan Kiat How_MND COS 2024 _Chinese(mnd).pdf","fileName":"Tan Kiat How_MND COS 2024 _Chinese(mnd).pdf"},{"vernacularID":6053,"sittingDate":null,"vernacularTitle":"Vernacular Speech by Assoc Prof Dr Muhammad Faishal Ibrahim","filePath":"d:/apps/reports/solr_files/20240305/vernacular-5 Mar 2024 - MOS Faishal Ibrahim - Reply to MND Cuts_MOS Faishal.pdf","fileName":"5 Mar 2024 - MOS Faishal Ibrahim - Reply to MND Cuts_MOS Faishal.pdf"}],"onlinePDFFileName":""}