[(proc text) Order read for consideration in Committee of Supply [4th Allotted Day]. (proc text)]
[Mdm Speaker in the Chair]
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Committee of Supply − Head K (Ministry of Education)","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OS","content":"[(proc text) Resumption of Debate on Question [6 March 2017], (proc text)]
[(proc text) \"That the total sum to be allocated for Head K of the Estimates to be reduced by $100.\" − [Ms Denise Phua Lay Peng.] (proc text)]
[(proc text) Question again proposed. (proc text)]
The Chairman: Minister Ng.
The Minister for Education (Schools) (Mr Ng Chee Meng): Mdm Chairman, Members have raised pertinent questions about our school system and how we are preparing our students for the future.
Education is a key strength of our society and economy. Our school system produces good educational outcomes and is internationally respected. It is inclusive and ensures that all young Singaporeans, regardless of background, have access to good educational opportunities.
Our students have done very well in international studies, such as Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS) and the Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA), which emphasise application, reasoning and problem-solving skills.
We take a long view of education, constantly reviewing what and how we teach to cater to the aspirations and needs of our students and the needs of our economy. For example, we are focusing more on 21st Century competencies, such as critical and inventive thinking, and soft skills, such as communication skills and cultural awareness.
At the core of our education are values and character. They anchor and guide our students in navigating the uncertainties and challenges of the future.
Last year, we introduced daily cleaning in schools to instil in our children a stronger sense of personal and social responsibility. I am glad this has been well-received by parents and educators alike.
We owe a big part of our success to our professional and dedicated educators. Every time I meet them, I see them always strive to bring out the best in every child and never failing to impress me with their ideas and hard work. I would like to take this opportunity to thank all our principals, teachers, past and present, for putting so much heart into all that they do.
Our mission in the Ministry of Education (MOE) is to mould the future of the nation by moulding the people who will determine the future of the nation. This is not just MOE's work but the collective work of educators, parents and the wider community. Together, we want to build in our children a strong foundation of knowledge, skills and values that will enable them to chase their dreams.
Debates on how we are changing our education system, like this one here today, will become more important, as the world is changing at an unprecedented rate.
Ms Denise Phua asked how we will help schools, educators and students respond to a volatile, uncertain, complex and ambiguous (VUCA) world. In my conversations with employers, parents and educators, many are likewise concerned and want to know how the education system will better prepare our young for the future.
The Committee for the Future Economy (CFE) recently outlined a roadmap on how we need to evolve to meet the economic challenges of the future. What do all these structural shifts mean for our young and for education?
In the area of knowledge and skills, our young need to develop deep skills and to continue to update these skills and acquire new ones to stay relevant. Lifelong learning is key.
In terms of qualities and attitudes, they have to be more adaptable to reskill themselves as needed. They have to be more resilient to navigate changes and uncertainties ahead. They also have to be more enterprising so that they can innovate and create value.
By making a big push towards lifelong learning, we have already started to lay the groundwork for the changes ahead.
Last year, Minister Ong and I talked about making a paradigm shift away from an over-emphasis on academic grades, to focus on holistic education. While academic excellence is a key strength of our system, it should not be over-emphasised at the expense of other meaningful activities.
Let me share the broad directions I have set for our schools to better prepare our children for the future.
First, we must nurture the joy of learning in our children. This intrinsic motivation will drive them forward to explore and discover their interests and passions.
Second, develop in them an entrepreneurial dare so that they will go beyond the classroom, apply their learning to real-world contexts and pursue their passions.
Third, develop deep skills and expertise. Minister Ong will outline our plans in the higher education landscape, to enable learning at every stage of life.
To support these plans, we must lay strong foundations in school and help our students develop their passions into strengths and to their fullest potential.
Fourth, all of these efforts must be founded upon sound values and character. I agree with Dr Intan completely. We want to nurture individuals who are not only successful, but also committed to their family, to serving the community and to Singapore's future.
Lastly, we must continue to ensure equal access to opportunities for all, regardless of their backgrounds.
Let me elaborate on the joy of learning. We believe in nurturing the joy of learning so that every child can discover his interests, grow his passions and love what he is doing. School should not just be about doing well in exams. It should be an exciting place to acquire knowledge and skills, where learning is fun and with the necessary rigour. How are our schools changing our teaching practices and methods to foster joyful learning? We have taken two key approaches.
One, we are encouraging learning through play at the start of every child's education. When I visit schools, I am always delighted to see how engaged and energised our primary school students are, when they learn not only in the classroom, but also through lessons in the school gardens, through field trips and outdoor games, and all the different things that I did not have the opportunity to do.
The Programme for Active Learning in every primary school provides varied and fun learning experiences, combining classroom learning with outdoor activities to stimulate interest and curiosity.
Two, we are encouraging more applied learning among our upper primary and secondary school students so that they do not just learn theories but get to apply learning to real-world contexts. This makes learning come alive and sows the seeds for innovation from primary school onwards.
Beyond the classroom, students can explore further afield through Applied Learning Programmes, such as in robotics, food sciences, media communications, arts and music, and through many, many other avenues. Through these hands-on activities, sometimes even employing modern technologies, students' learning takes on real-world meaning and relevance.
In these ways, students find joy in learning and are intrinsically motivated to learn, not just for examinations.
I share Ms Denise Phua's concern about tuition and thank her for her suggestions. Excessive tuition, especially when the child is already doing well, can erode the joy of learning. Children need to have more unstructured space to play, to grow their imagination, creativity and socio-emotional skills. If a child spends too much time on tuition, his holistic development can be impacted.
Excessive tuition can also develop a crutch mentality in our students. This stands in the way of what we want to do to teach them: self-management, self-responsibility and self-reliance in learning.
I fully understand that parents want to give the best support to help their children do well in their studies. I am a parent, too. But we need to find a balance, at each age. As a parent, it is not easy to learn when to step forward to assist our children or when to step back so that they learn independence and self-reliance. Parents like me need to find the balance, and I hope all parents would.
In schools, we are calibrating this balance carefully. We are developing an online portal for all students to support their self-paced learning and revision. Not yet an e-campus, but we are working towards that.
For those students who require extra help, we provide levelling-up programmes in smaller groups, and remedial and consultation sessions outside of lesson time.
We will also continue to partner self-help groups in the community who have done good work in providing subsidised tutoring to those in need.
But not all students who go for tuition actually need it. Some are already doing well in school. What truly fuels the tuition industry is an unhealthy over-emphasis on academic results that we all need to move away from.
Changes to the Primary School Leaving Examination (PSLE) scoring system, as I have announced last year, are a step in this direction. From 2021 onwards, the PSLE T-score will be replaced with wider Achievement Levels, and pupils will be assessed independently of how their peers fare.
Making this paradigm shift towards a more holistic education for our children is not easy and will not be easy.
I agree with Mr Lim Biow Chuan that we should not set overly high standards for school examinations. We guide schools and provide training and resources to teachers to help them pitch school-based assessments closer to the standards of the national examinations.
I would also like to assure Dr Tan Wu Meng that we have taken active steps to simplify the language used to set mathematics problems in national examinations. Schools also take care to pitch the language used in their assessments appropriately to avoid penalising students who are weaker in English.
While schools will do their part, parents, I suggest, would also need to make judicious choices, taking into consideration the child's total needs. I am glad to see a gradual mindset change among parents. More are starting to see the value of creating informal, unstructured learning spaces for their children.
I look forward very much to deepening this partnership with parents to cultivate and sustain this joy of learning in our children.
Finding passion is good but we need to do more. We need to help our students develop an entrepreneurial dare so that they will apply what they learn, act on their passions and pursue them.
Mr Dennis Tan spoke about promoting entrepreneurship in schools. Our students are exposed to Business and Entrepreneurship through Co-Curricular Activities (CCAs) and Applied Learning.
My vision for entrepreneurial dare, however, is broader and goes beyond encouraging entrepreneurship. It is not simply about promoting businesses or startups. Rather, entrepreneurial dare is an attitude, a mindset of pushing boundaries, of wanting to innovate and finding a breakthrough. It applies across all domains, not just in business and enterprises, but also in scientific research, engineering and the arts. So, it is not about the mechanics of entrepreneurship but a broader foundation to equip our students with that entrepreneurial dare to push boundaries.
Being \"entrepreneurial\" is about having a spirit of enterprise. An enterprising person is able to quickly analyse across complex issues and identify problems and gaps, develop new ideas, seize opportunities and take action.
To \"dare\", resilience is key because it is often the fear of failure that holds us back. If we are confident of being able to bounce back, more of us will have the resilience to \"try, fail, try again\" until we succeed.
To \"dare\", adaptability is also key. Adaptability enables us to quickly innovate to seize the opportunities or respond to the challenges that may crop up.
Some employers I have spoken to tell me they want to see more entrepreneurial dare in our students. They say our students are smart, but some are afraid to embrace risks in trying new things or new ways of doing things.
Because it is easy to become hemmed in by our own successes, we must try to help our children venture out of their comfort zones and fail-safe modes. Having entrepreneurial dare is all the more important as we enter uncharted waters ahead.
To cultivate this entrepreneurial dare, we need to infuse it into our students' education journey and create an environment where trying is encouraged and failing is accepted as a step towards success and as part of our overall learning.
Outdoor education is one key way to nurture this entrepreneurial dare because it promotes many of the traits required. Apart from being fun, outdoor education and adventure build character and qualities, such as resilience, tenacity, leadership, teamwork, grit and adaptability, all of which help to foster entrepreneurial dare.
This year, I am happy to see that Secondary 3 students from 28 schools will take part in the new five-day MOE-Outward Bound School (OBS) programme. In fact, I joined some of them recently. I joined students from Whitley Secondary School and Tanjong Katong Girls' School when they were at OBS. Most of them tell me OBS is fun and they also say that it is challenging. They shared, however, that whether out at sea or in the forest, they are often pushed to the limit, physically and mentally.
In those unfamiliar environments, they had to learn to draw on one another's strengths to overcome challenges. They have to either try and persevere or remain stuck in uncomfortable situations. Through these experiences, they tell me they learned to rough it out and emerge together tougher, more confident and resilient.
I am glad to see the MOE-OBS programme developing well. Having nurtured a strong team of passionate and qualified outdoor adventure educators, we are on track to make this programme a common experience for all Secondary 3 students from 2020.
Parents who got a taste of outdoor activities at MOE's Outdoor Adventure Learning Centres have also given us very positive feedback. They see how outdoor education can develop resilience and a can-do spirit in their children and are glad that we are investing in this area.
Mr Png Eng Huat asked how we will support and promote sports in schools. Across all levels, we have increased physical education (PE) lessons to at least two hours per week. Students learn how to play a wide range of sports in PE and participate in inter-class games. Those who are interested can also get into the more vibrant sports scenes that we have engendered in the schools. Today, we have more than 60 sports CCAs being offered across our schools. Each year, more than 55,000 student athletes participate in the numerous sporting events in the National School Games.
We are also committed to developing sporting strengths. MOE's Junior Sports Academy selects primary school students with a high natural ability in sports and grows their talent from a young age. If I recall correctly, it is in the region of 400 to 500 of these young primary school students that will join this academy.
Applied learning is another way to nurture entrepreneurial dare. We will continue to create more informal, less structured learning spaces, both within and outside of the classroom, for our children to explore and discover the world.
Last year, Teck Whye Secondary celebrated its 50th anniversary. When I visited, Teck Whyeans proudly showed me a golden orchid. Why? Because the golden orchid was actually developed by Teck Whyeans − secondary school kids. They wanted to have this golden orchid to celebrate 50 years of the school's founding. It took them five years and five different graduating cohorts to breed this golden orchid and, in the process, learn the science of plant genetics.
It took leadership and teamwork across cohorts, with seniors passing this project on to their juniors when they graduated. It took many rounds of trying and failing. But when the students eventually succeeded, they were thrilled and immensely proud to present the golden orchid to the school. When I visited last year, I could see their pride and joy. They showed me what our students can achieve when they can combine academic rigour in our system with the joy of learning, and a dose of entrepreneurial dare.
This simple project of experimentation goes to show the important roles our schools can play in nurturing these qualities. MOE is studying how to build on these good practices to further infuse the joy of learning and entrepreneurial dare in our curriculum and teaching practices.
However, there is no silver bullet or any easy one way to foster the joy of learning, entrepreneurial dare and reduce the over-emphasis on academic results. But as we move in this direction, I hope parents, the wider community and this House will continue to support us in helping our young to discover and pursue their passions. It is passion that will sustain our children throughout their education journey. Fueled by passion, our young can better meet their aspirations and contribute to the future economy as holistic individuals and lifelong learners.
Members are interested to know how we will prepare our students for the growth opportunities that CFE has painted in the region and worldwide. To do this, we are committed to developing strengths in every student. If they are good at something, we want to help them hone their strengths into deep knowledge and skills. By tapping on these strengths and the strong foundations laid in schools, they will be empowered across the multiple post-secondary pathways available.
Our strong Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM) and bilingual education provide a good base for students to discover their talents and develop their skills. Our young will need deep skills and expertise to harness technology in the future economy.
I met some Singaporeans in Silicon Valley during a recent study trip. They told me that they had always been interested in technology. But interest alone was not enough. What enabled them to pursue their successful careers in Silicon Valley is the strong core of technical skills and knowledge that they had acquired back home in Singapore. Our bilingual education also builds strong communication skills that our students can use to connect across cultures, while rooting them in their cultural identity. For those who build this into a strength, they will be well-positioned to seize opportunities in the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), China, India and across the world.
Several Members have asked how we will strengthen our mother tongue languages and cultures and whether we should consider introducing regional languages in our curriculum. Parliamentary Secretary Low Yen Ling and Parliamentary Secretary Faishal Ibrahim will address some of these issues later. They will highlight how we are making our mother tongue languages come alive to ignite students' interest.
Because every child is unique and has different aptitudes and learning pace, we need to give our young people different options and diverse paths. Let me share how we will do this better on this front.
Students have different strengths across their subjects. This is why we offer some flexibility for secondary school students in the Normal (Academic) and Normal (Technical) courses to take their stronger subjects at a higher academic level.
Today, it is not uncommon for upper secondary students in Normal (Academic) course to take one or two subjects at Express level. Those in Normal (Technical), likewise, can take subjects at Normal (Academic) level.
In 2014, we extended this flexibility to the lower secondary students in 12 prototype schools. Students who have done well in specific subjects at PSLE or in secondary school examinations have the option to take these subjects at a higher level earlier from Secondary 1 and not only from Secondary 3.
We call this flexibility Subject-Based Banding. Not only does this help them deepen their learning in their areas of strengths, it also helps our students build confidence and opens up new post-secondary possibilities for them. We have since learnt from the prototype experience and are ready to extend this to all secondary schools. By 2018, we will implement Subject-Based Banding for Secondary 1 students in all secondary schools that offer the Normal (Academic) and Normal (Technical) courses.
Dr Intan asked if we should do away with streaming. I know that there are concerns that streaming can inadvertently discourage some students. But we also know, as Dr Intan has acknowledged, too, that it has served our students well.
The three courses − Express, Normal (Academic) and Normal (Technical) − have catered to the different learning needs and pace of our students and have succeeded in keeping students engaged in schools. This allows them to progress as far as possible in their studies and, as a result, our attrition rates today are very, very low, at less than 1%, compared to 30%-40% at the start of our education journey.
Nevertheless, I recognise that we cannot take a one-size-fits-all approach. We have increased porosity across the various courses. For the late bloomers, they can transfer to a more demanding course if they are able to cope with the academic requirements of the course. For students with uneven strengths across the subjects, they can stretch themselves in their areas of strength through subject-based banding. These are all ways to ensure that our students are not held back but are instead better supported in realising their potential.
I recently met some girls from the Convent of the Holy Infant Jesus (CHIJ) St Theresa's Convent, who shared how they have benefited from Subject-Based Banding. They told me that taking one or two subjects at a higher level has boosted their confidence in learning and also helped them realise their potential across subjects.
Catrice Gan, who is in the Normal (Academic) course, took English at the Express level when she was in Secondary 1 and enjoyed herself very much in that class, so much so that the experience made her a more confident learner and she improved in her Mathematics and was later offered to study Mathematics at the Express level as well. She told me she never imagined this could happen because Mathematics was her weakest subject in PSLE. Now in Secondary 3, she is looking forward to taking both English and Mathematics at O-Level.
The girls admitted also that adjusting to this faster pace of learning was not always easy. Their teachers and parents provided a lot of support to help them adjust. Some of them told me they gave it a good shot but, eventually, decided not to continue. Still, they told me that it was a good learning experience for them and they were glad to be given this opportunity to try. Hearing the girls' positive experiences, I am glad that, by 2018, we will be able to expand Subject-Based Banding to all schools, to benefit more students.
Mr Lim Biow Chuan and Mr Edwin Tong asked about appeal transfers after the Secondary 1 Posting Exercise. Our transfer process must be fair and transparent. The Secondary 1 Posting Exercise is conducted based on PSLE performance. Hence, principals will consider appeals only if the student has met the school's cut-off point.
For those who do not meet the cut-off point, flexibility will be exercised if they have medical or special needs, or if there are exceptional circumstances. Over 400 of our students appealed successfully and obtained a school transfer, according to their school preferences.
Our secondary schools do not only admit students based on cut-off points. The Direct School Admission (DSA) scheme was set up to allow schools to recognise and admit students based on a more diverse range of talents and achievements, beyond what the PSLE recognises.
Many students take up the DSA because they want to further nurture their talents and strengths through specific programmes in schools.
At St Theresa's Convent, I saw how hard the Theresian hockey team fought to win a friendly match. A few hockey players I saw told me they joined the school via DSA, because they had fallen in love with hockey at primary school and wanted to further develop their talent through the strong hockey team at St Theresa's Convent.
Like the Theresians who chased their passion, Kirshann Venu Das joined Evergreen Secondary via DSA. He wanted to nurture his passion and talent in English through their Communication Programme. When Kirshann was in Secondary 2, he won the Silver medal at the National Schools Literature Festival Poetry Slam. Now a junior college (JC) 2 student, he continues his passion of studying Literature at A-Level and conducts public poetry recitals at school.
These examples illustrate the intent of our DSA scheme and how students have benefited by taking ownership of their education choices.
Mr Ang Wei Neng asked for a breakdown of the DSA admission numbers in 2016. I would like to first clarify that schools received 16,000 applications last year, with some students applying to more than one school. That means many students actually made multiple applications. So, eventually, a total of 2,800 students were admitted to secondary school via DSA, half of which were to the Integrated Programme (IP). This is not surprising, given that IP schools have full discretion in admission, while the majority of our secondary schools can only set aside 5%, 10% or 20% of their Secondary 1 intake for DSA places today, depending on the type of school.
Our schools, I agree with Mr Ang, have robust distinctive programmes. For example, the Applied Learning Programmes and the Learning for Life Programmes are designed in consultation with industry partners to offer more authentic learning experiences so that we can do more to help students take advantage of these programmes via DSA in all schools to pursue their interests.
Starting from 2018, we will expand the number of DSA places so that all secondary schools can admit up to 20% of their Secondary 1, non-IP intake via DSA. With this expansion, students can better access schools with suitable programmes via DSA to nurture their strengths, talents and interests.
As Mr Edwin Tong has pointed out, DSA should not be seen as an entry ticket to popular schools, but it is also a mutual commitment between the school and the student, and the child will have to complete the DSA application process before the release of the PSLE results. We will also make changes to the DSA processes. First, we will refine DSA selection.
Today, all applicants who apply for a particular DSA category in a school go through the same selection that is open and merit-based. The selection matches a student's strengths and interests to a school's talent development programmes and ensures that students are able to cope with the academic rigour of the school's programmes. We will start refining DSA selection from this year to better achieve the objectives of DSA. Schools will focus on identifying students with specific talents and move away from recognising strong general academic abilities.
As Mr Edwin Tong and some parents have rightly pointed out, students with strong general academic abilities would already be able to qualify for the school with their PSLE results. As part of this refinement, schools will discontinue the use of general academic ability tests in DSA selection by 2018. These tests are used by some schools as a standardised assessment of applicants' general reasoning and problem-solving skills. While they allow for a comparison of students' abilities, they also inadvertently put undue focus on general academic abilities, rather than identifying specific strengths. Schools will continue to focus on identifying sporting, artistic or academic talent in specific domains, for instance, the languages, Mathematics or Science.
Schools can conduct their selection via a range of assessment tools, including interviews, trials, auditions and subject tests. They will also consider the applicant's overall portfolio and achievements.
A second change we will make is to simplify the DSA application process. Today, students have to apply to individual schools, each with their own application processes. From the 2019 DSA Exercise onwards, students will be able to submit their applications through a centralised online application portal, using a common application form. Schools will also have to put out clear information about the DSA categories and selection criteria on their websites. This will help students and parents make better informed choices.
I look forward to seeing more primary school students take up these increased opportunities to develop their strengths in a more holistic fashion.
As we improve our education system, we will continue to ensure that it remains open and inclusive, such that every child will have access to a quality education. This inclusiveness and openness should not be taken for granted. In many countries, parents are not optimistic that their children will have a good education if they come from the lower socio-economic quartiles. In Singapore, this is not the case. In the 2015 PISA results, about half of our Singaporean students in the bottom socio-economic quarter were found to be resilient, performing better than what their socio-economic status would otherwise predict. This is almost twice the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) average.
We must continue to ensure open access to opportunities for all students, regardless of their backgrounds. Last year, we announced that we will include children with moderate to severe Special Educational Needs in the Compulsory Education (CE) Act. Minister of State Janil Puthucheary will share more on this later.
In 2015, we enhanced the MOE Financial Assistance Scheme (FAS) to include a transport subsidy, in the form of a $120 public transport credit or a 50% subsidy for their school bus fee. In 2016, we also doubled the overall meal subsidy provision, from $270 to $520 per year for every primary school student on FAS, to support more meals and at a higher value.
Mr Png Eng Huat and Mr Leon Perera asked about MOE's resourcing of schools. Mr Png said that this is the second year he is asking. Our schools are well-resourced, both in terms of funding and manpower. Because schools have different student profiles, they run different programmes, catering to different learning needs and learning pace. In deciding how much to resource, our focus is on the student. Equitable funding is not about giving every school the same resources, but taking a needs-based approach, varying our resourcing to bring out the best in every child.
Take, for instance, the four Specialised Schools, in particular, Crest and Spectra, which we have set up for students in the Normal (Technical) course. They received per capita funding of about $27,000 in financial year (FY) 2016, significantly higher than other schools. This funding goes towards supporting a skills-based curriculum and customised learning environments that can better position the students for subsequent studies.
It is also important for me to clarify that the recent mergers were due to falling cohort sizes and not as what the Members have misunderstood them to be. The mergers were necessary to sustain a critical mass to offer students a good range of educational programmes and quality learning experiences.
We take a needs-based approach in deploying teachers, too. The size of our teaching force has increased by 20% over the last decade, lowering our pupil-teacher ratios (PTRs) to 16 and 12 at the primary and secondary levels respectively. This is comparable to OECD standards. Rather than reducing class sizes across the board, schools deploy their additional teachers flexibly to keep class sizes smaller for students who need that extra support. For instance, in learning support classes for Primary 1 and Primary 2 students who require extra help in English or Mathematics, there are typically only eight to 10 students per class. OECD research has shown that teacher quality is, in fact, more critical than class sizes for student outcomes. Hence, we should not focus solely on class sizes but on the overall situation in how we deploy our teachers optimally for the best outcomes for the kids.
I agree with Dr Intan and Dr Lim Wee Kiak that we want to ensure some level of access for students who are interested in secondary schools with affiliation but did not attend the affiliated primary school.
Today, 27 secondary schools offer their affiliated primary school students priority in the Secondary 1 posting. Affiliates qualify for this priority only if they indicate the affiliated secondary school as their first choice. Affiliation has its educational merits. It helps foster a strong school spirit and preserves the schools' traditions and ethos. But notwithstanding these merits, we have to ensure that our schools are open to all students, regardless of their backgrounds or connections.
Since the 2014 Primary 1 Registration Exercise, we have already set aside at least 40 places in every primary school for children without prior connection to the school. This gives every Singaporean child a better chance to enter the primary school of his choice. Starting from the 2019 Secondary 1 Posting Exercise, 20% of places for each course in every affiliated secondary school will be reserved for students who do not benefit from affiliation priority.
Most affiliated secondary schools today already admit more than 20% of non-affiliates. However, since this proportion varies up and down, year to year, we are setting aside 20% of places every year in every affiliated secondary school, to strike a balance between recognising affiliation and all the benefits and ensuring open access for all students.
Finally, I would like to assure Dr Intan that values and character education remain at the core of education. MOE believes in nurturing socially responsible, value-centred Singaporeans who care for their family, community and our Singapore. Our Character and Citizenship Education effort is integrated in the various experiences of school life. Students are also given opportunities to put their social and emotional competencies into action through their involvement in activities, such as CCAs and Values in Action programmes. As they reflect on these experiences, our students can better internalise our core values through their experiential learning. Mdm Chairman, allow me to say a few words in Mandarin.
(In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] Singapore's education system is starting from a position of strength. It will equip us to respond to the changes and the challenges ahead. To better prepare our students for the future, our schools are taking the following broad directions.
First, we must nurture the joy of learning and an \"entrepreneurial dare\" in our students. The joy of learning means that we cultivate an intrinsic interest and passion in students. This will drive them forward to explore and discover their interests and passions throughout their lifetimes.
Second, with regard to entrepreneurial dare, we will encourage students to try different things and apply their learning to real-world contexts, so that they will learn not to fear failure when facing difficulties and try again and again until final success. Through this way, students will understand that \"failure is the mother of success\".
Third, schools must help students lay a strong foundation and help them develop passions into strengths and to their fullest potential. From 2018, lower secondary students will have the flexibility to take their stronger subjects at a higher level, as long as they meet the criteria.
In 2018, we will also expand opportunities for DSA, students can better access to a secondary school with suitable programmes to nurture their talents and achievements. Values and character continue to remain at the core of all that we do. We want to nurture holistic individuals who are not just passionate about learning and work, but also passionate about and committed to Singapore's future and willing to contribute to the nation.
Last but not least, we will continue to ensure equal access to opportunities for all, regardless of their background. Each Singapore child must be able to achieve their full potential.
(In English): Let me now turn to other issues that Members have raised. Dr Tan Wu Meng and Miss Cheng Li Hui asked about Singapore International Schools for overseas Singaporeans.
The Singapore International School Hong Kong (SISHK) is the only overseas school run by MOE to cater to Singaporean students who are based abroad. We currently do not have plans to set up a similar school elsewhere. Nevertheless, MOE is committed to supporting children of parents who have ventured abroad. MOE helps to get them to stay in touch with the Singapore school system while they are away and also to ease their integration back into the local school system at any time that they return.
For example, schools allow students to take a Leave of Absence and provide them with teaching and learning materials while they are overseas. I know the needs of parents. As more venture overseas, we will see how we can do this better.
In closing, let me share the story of a group of ITE College West students whom I met recently. They won the top prize in the national Green Wave Environmental Care competition, beating several other credible teams in the JC-ITE category.
What impressed me was not just because they had won. What really impressed me was how they had discovered their passion and applied their learning in Environmental Sciences.
Determined to repopulate horseshoe crabs in the wild, the team started a school project to improve the hatch rate of the eggs. Through many months of hard work, they developed expertise in this field and discovered new knowledge in the propagation of horseshoe crabs. It was fascinating to hear from these 18- to 19-year-olds how they harvested the eggs, built their own incubator from recycled materials, complete with an enhanced oxygen hatching tray, to improve the hatch rates.
Along the way, they also learnt that the blue blood of horseshoe crabs has special medicinal value. They are now learning how to harvest the blue blood extract which is valued at over US$15,000 per litre.
When I was talking to them and learning about all these things, I encouraged them to seize this opportunity and make the most out of it. Maybe, with a little bit of entrepreneurial spirit and some assistance from industry, they can do a startup and extract this and make it a business, make it worthwhile medicinally and do good overall.
Most importantly, when I talked to them as I prepared for this speech, I saw the joy in their eyes and their entrepreneurial dare to push boundaries in their learning. When I reflected on this, I found that their success is not a coincidence.
They had discovered and pursued their passion; they worked hard with the academic rigour that we had instilled in them in school and developed these through project work into a strength. They were not deterred by the many failures and challenges and found the tenacity to see through their project.
I share their story because their journey is exactly what we want all our students to experience: learning with joy, having an entrepreneurial dare and having the strength of character to overcome challenges and setbacks.
Therefore, let us work together, this House and beyond, to nurture our students so that they will become holistic individuals and lifelong learners with deep skills and expertise, ready for the future. [Applause.]
The Minister of State for Education (Dr Janil Puthucheary): Mdm Chairman, MOE will work with parents and the community to build up strong academic fundamentals, healthy living habits and a resilient mindset. MOE is also committed to helping those in our schools who may need more attention and support to access these opportunities.
I assure Ms Denise Phua that MOE is committed to supporting the education of all our students with special educational needs (SEN). Three-quarters of these students are supported in our mainstream schools and are able to access the same curriculum and opportunities which equip all our children with skills and knowledge for the future economy. These students are supported by our Allied Educators and a core group of teachers in each school trained to support children with special needs.
Ms Chia Yong Yong asked about how we train our professionals. There are key service providers delivering structured training programmes for our school personnel. MOE works with the National Institute of Education (NIE) to provide both pre- and in-service training in special needs for Allied Educators (AEDs) and teachers. Voluntary welfare organisations (VWOs) are also involved in providing in-service courses and professional advice. Besides training, MOE also facilitates the sharing of evidence-based practice and strategies that work well amongst school personnel.
We have always been working closely with our partners to improve the quality, accessibility and affordability of MOE-funded special education (SPED) schools and to enable our students to realise their potential for independent living. Mr Perera asked about the challenges faced by schools in engaging bus contractors. We will work with other Government agencies to explore how best to encourage more bus operators to serve SPED students.
In the post-secondary space, our Post-Secondary Education Institutions (PSEIs) have SEN Support Offices to support students in securing internships and jobs. Our Institutes of Higher Learning (IHLs) also work with SG Enable to provide internship opportunities for students with SEN to build up their professional network and gain practical job-related skills. MOE has also broadened the use of the Post-Secondary Education Account (PSEA) to include approved training courses under SG Enable. This will support persons with disabilities in continuing training beyond their school years.
The House would be familiar with the School-to-Work transition programme, a collaboration between MOE and SG Enable for work-capable SPED students. The outcomes have been positive and we look forward to more students benefiting from this programme.
I should highlight that such positive outcomes for our students would not have been possible without strong support from our community and industry partners. Their open hearts and minds have made a big difference to the lives of our SPED students. I will encourage more partners and employers to step forward and play a part in enabling opportunities for our students.
In response to Mr Dennis Tan's question, MOE currently employs 80 persons with disabilities. MOE tries to be an inclusive employer and is working with SG Enable to explore opportunities to recruit persons with disabilities into more suitable positions.
Ms Chia Yong Yong asked about disability awareness, which is an important element of our Character and Citizenship Education curriculum. It is useful to set aside time for students to discuss such issues face-to-face with their teachers and peers. But we do hope to go beyond disability awareness to encouraging our students to appreciate different abilities and to show care towards all. Our schools are also involved in \"Values in Action\" projects, or in Satellite Partnerships with SPED schools, which allow our students to directly engage and interact with peers of different abilities.
Madam, MOE believes in the importance of quality education, starting from the preschool years. Mr Gan Thiam Poh and Dr Lim Wee Kiak had asked about our MOE Kindergartens (MKs) which provide quality and affordable preschool education. The fees are comparable to the Anchor Operators, and eligible children receive assistance from the Early Childhood Development Agency (ECDA),
To attract capable educators, MK teachers are remunerated competitively. Children from MKs have been able to transit well into the primary schools. The experience from running the 15 MKs has been valuable in establishing good practices and in developing teaching and learning resources and for sharing these with the rest of the preschool sector.
As Minister Ng announced last month, MOE will open another three new MKs in Punggol to serve the high demand there. We will continue to assess the progress of our pilot MKs and review our plans as part of the Government's overall efforts to strengthen the preschool sector.
Assoc Prof Daniel Goh had asked if MOE would implement early detection of dyslexia at the preschool level. Every year, there are some very young children who need more time to develop fluency in oral language skills, as a result of a number of problems with literacy, including but not limited to, dyslexia. Such children are actively identified and the focus at the preschool years is then on providing high-quality language and early literacy instruction, without rushing to make a diagnosis for a problem that may be temporary. The literacy support and interventions can still be carried out and are effective.
As I had updated the House last year, MOE has expanded the Focused Language Assistance in Reading (FLAiR) programme to support more kindergarten children who have difficulty learning English. Since 2007, FLAiR has benefited more than 21,000 children.
Mr Louis Ng had asked how MOE acts against negligent parents who do not ensure that their child attends school. He mentioned the Compulsory Education Act which holds parents responsible for their children's attendance at school.
Imposing penalties, as provided for under the Act, does not necessarily solve the root problems of non-attendance. MOE takes a holistic approach by working together with parents, schools, the Family Service Centres (FSCs) and relevant agencies to counsel and support the family and help all students attend school. Legal enforcement should be the last resort, considered only if all possible interventions and counselling efforts have been exhausted. To date, we have not found it necessary to resort to prosecution.
Beyond formal curriculum hours, Student Care Centres (SCCs), as Dr Lim pointed out, play an important role in providing a conducive after-school environment for our students, including those from disadvantaged backgrounds. Over the last five years, we have increased the number of school-based SCCs to 147, supporting more than 18,000 students. The provision has largely kept pace with demand and we remain on track to open SCCs in all primary schools by the end of 2020 and will continue to work with the Ministry of Social and Family Development (MSF) to monitor the demand for SCC places in our schools and in the community.
Miss Cheng Li Hui had asked about MOE's involvement in NurtureSG and our ongoing efforts to build healthy bodies and healthy minds. MOE has been working with our schools, community partners and families to build resilience in our students. In school, the students themselves, particularly the older students, also play an important role in fostering a caring and supportive environment. Students in distress may confide first in their friends, who can provide them with a listening ear and critical support in a time of need.
Some of our schools have already taken the lead to strengthen such peer support networks. We hope to build on this good work and establish the practice across our school system. Starting from this year, MOE will train a core group of students in each school to establish a caring environment in every class, to identify signs of distress in their peers and offer basic social and emotional support.
We also hope that for this group of \"peer supporters\", such training and experience will serve as a unique development opportunity to hone their empathetic listening, interpersonal and communication skills. They can also help raise awareness of mental well-being amongst their schoolmates and engender a culture of support and resilience in the school where students are willing to seek help.
There is no single solution to the underlying problems behind mental health issues, which are often complex and, in rare cases, may result in a tragic situation of suicide. One of the NurtureSG Task Force's recommendations, therefore, is to set up an interagency workgroup on youth suicide. Dr Lam Pin Min and I thank Prof Daniel Fung from the Institute of Mental Health (IMH) for agreeing to lead this effort, and I am confident the workgroup's findings will be instructive.
Madam, we also want to encourage our children to develop healthy eating and living habits. By the end of this year, all primary and secondary schools, junior colleges and the Millennia Institute will have implemented the \"Healthy Meals in Schools Programme\" which will allow our students to easily access healthy food options.
Assoc Prof Daniel Goh suggested to start school later. Our schools determine their start time and do so based on various factors, including traffic conditions, parents' need to get to work on time after dropping their children off, and the afternoon heat affecting student attention. For better health and learning, the key is the amount and quality of sleep our students get. Lessons on good sleep habits are currently incorporated into our primary school curriculum. The importance of sleep and sleep hygiene will also be taught in the secondary school curriculum so that students can exercise self-management. We also hope to partner parents in instilling good sleep habits and the practice of good sleep hygiene in their children.
We have also been encouraging our students to be active. Our formal PE curriculum has been increased to at least two hours a week for all schools. To provide students with more opportunities for \"unstructured play\", where they can initiate their own sports and games, our schools will also make available sports equipment and school facilities for our students to use during their break or after school hours.
Mdm Chairman, in conclusion, I want to emphasise that while our schools will do all we can to ensure that our students are in good physical and psychological health and have good eating habits, these efforts must not stop once our students walk out of the school gates each day. Otherwise, these efforts will be unsuccessful and any gains will not be sustained over a child's lifetime. We need to aim for healthy, active and resilient children who become healthy, active and resilient adults who take on a personal responsibility for their own well-being.
Madam, finally our success so far is also the result of the efforts by many community partners and many parents working together in partnership with MOE and the schools. We welcome and thank them for all the efforts and we look forward to a continued and strengthened partnership with many more.
The Chairman: Ms Foo Mee Har.
Ms Foo Mee Har (West Coast): Madam, SkillsFuture was launched in 2014 as Singapore's movement to help our people embrace lifelong learning, a critical skill to master in this era of rapid technological change and shortened innovation cycle. If implemented effectively, it will sustain Singapore's competitive advantage and help our people ride the waves of significant shifts in jobs and skills throughout their careers. It will enable them to be reskilled multiple times in their working life to keep pace with technological advancement.
However, more must be done to shift the focus of SkillsFuture away from the long list of SkillsFuture courses available and how one can spend the $500 SkillsFuture Credit.
I have spoken often about the use of SkillsFuture to help retrenched professionals find their feet, rebuild their confidence, guide them to acquire new skills and, most importantly, to get employers to provide job opportunities. There should be a strong connection between training and employability, a direct line of sight between the efforts that one puts into retraining and the hope of re-employment.
I would like to ask the Minister how successful have programmes, such as the Professional Conversion Programme (PCP) and Place and Train initiative been, in helping workers transition to new jobs. What has the impact been so far and how can they be scaled up to support more workers?
Of course, Madam, it is far better if our workforce uses SkillsFuture in a proactive manner to prepare, retrain and reskill themselves for industries of the future, rather than wait until their jobs are affected. However, I continue to receive feedback that the SkillsFuture system does not lay out a clear path to follow. For a start, people need to know what the future growth clusters are, where future jobs will flourish and what kind of vacancies exist and will emerge. How can we better help our citizens position themselves for careers in growth areas and the transition paths, step by step, on what they should do to get there?
There should be clear linkages from training courses to skills and jobs. The range of training courses available in SkillsFuture is wide and the quality is uneven. Will the Government consider setting up a national registry to grade, rank and publish the effectiveness of different training programmes so that workers can make an informed choice? Programmes with positive employment outcomes may be listed as such and may even offer more generous subsidies. There is also the possibility of allowing those who have been trained to add their own rating, so, feedback rating. SkillsFuture should also provide tools for career guidance that will help direct people's training efforts towards growth clusters.
Lastly, SkillsFuture is most effective when it is closely linked to specific job requirements. Companies and trade associations and chambers (TACs) should be encouraged to play a very active role in customising training especially suited to their respective industries. The Government should support TACs on training infrastructure, training design and learning pedagogy that are relevant to their industry to support learning in a modularised fashion, strengthening learning and on the job utilisation. The SkillsFuture movement should accelerate the building of competency standards within each industry and key families to ensure that curriculum development and training efforts are closely aligned with current and future job requirements.
Ms K Thanaletchimi (Nominated Member): Madam, I welcome the various SkillsFuture initiatives that are implemented, such as the greater support for modular and e-learning and training.
What more can be done to encourage both the young and mature Singaporeans to embrace modular training and e-learning? How can we persuade more Singaporeans to embrace lifelong learning? How long will it take to change our people's mindset and for them to see the importance of equipping themselves with the relevant skills?
How prepared is the Civil Service sector in recognising qualifications attained through modular courses and e-learning curricula? Are employers ready to acknowledge new job entrants with skills qualifications obtained through e-learning? How do we change both employers' and employees' mindset to accept such training as a way of life for Singaporeans to keep pace with the changing skills needs of the economy and achieve skills mastery? To see a significant change in the mindset of employers, I urge the Civil Service and the Government-linked companies to initiate and lead by example.
In the healthcare sector, too, there should be pervasive modular training and e-learning modules for support staff to strive to upgrade themselves for career progressions. However, as more take on skills-based programmes, the professional regulatory bodies must stand prepared to review the current programmes and provide greater accessibility to modular training and e-learning.
To prevent \"a spiraling paper chase\" and producing a workforce which excels in exams but are ill-equipped to take on jobs of the future, there is a need for our society to move away from exam-based assessment and provide greater emphasis on practical training. We should also allow funding and subsidies to be extended to standard programmes of modular and e-learning curricula. Workers in employment who pursue programmes of such nature must be given equal opportunity for recognition, promotion and career progression.
I trust the Government to also change the mindset of human resource professionals to be inclusive in their recruitment of job applicants with skills-based qualifications obtained through e-learning and short courses.
Now, I wish to also speak on women in male-dominated sectors.
Information and communications technology (ICT) is a fast-growing sector for Singapore. In 2015, only 43 women out of every 100 men enrolled in the information technology (IT) field for their first and higher degrees, and only 58 females for every 100 male students enrolled for the diploma courses.
Does the Ministry have data to show a comparison on the usage of SkillsFuture Credits across gender? If so, is there any significant difference between the genders for ICT and STEM programmes? Does the Government also curate the courses to ensure that they are up to date and relevant, given the rapidly changing nature of technology? Have there been efforts to encourage women mid-career switchers who go for conversion programmes to consider STEM-related training? Can the Ministry consider allocating STEM scholarships for female students?
The Chairman:\tMs Thanaletchimi, can you please conclude?
Ms K Thanaletchimi: Madam, thank you.
Mr Pritam Singh (Aljunied): Mdm Chairman, when I spoke about SkillsFuture during the Budget debate in 2015, I noted that as SkillsFuture got off the ground, it would be useful for the Government to track the outcomes of SkillsFuture initiatives, especially for our small and medium enterprises (SMEs), so as to assess how the scheme has been effective in achieving the desired productivity increases and economic outcomes and to better track the real value of SkillsFuture initiatives for various industries.
It will be inevitable that practical outcomes would be expected of SkillsFuture and sought after in view of dire warnings of machines replacing people and the requirement for a high level of skills to succeed in the workplace of tomorrow.
The concern I have then and as I do now is that Singaporeans do not see a qualification strategy as being synonymous with the genuine skills upgrading strategy. To that end, the review mechanism to understand the outcomes of SkillsFuture is a necessity.
As the Government has shared, SkillsFuture is more than just a movement targeted at specific age groups but across age groups and society and, therefore, it is also about the larger cultural shift towards lifelong learning.
To this end and in October last year, I asked a Parliamentary Question about the utilisation of SkillsFuture Credits. It was reported that up to August 2016, over 80,000 Singaporeans had used them. This number was later revised on the back of a similar Parliamentary Question this year which raised the number to 126,000 over the course of the entire year. Can the Ministry provide more details about this number in terms of the types of courses taken up by Singaporeans and the age group breakdown of Singaporeans who have used their SkillsFuture Credits?
While I accept it would be more important for Singaporeans to utilise their credits carefully and thoughtfully, can the Minister comment on his assessment of the utilisation rates so far?
In reply to my Parliamentary Question, the Minister also replied that it dedicates far more funds to subsidising course fees at the supply end to make them affordable, not just SkillsFuture credits, so that there are avenues for workers to reskill or upgrade.
To this end, it was recently reported that the Government funded 920,000 training places in 2015. Can the Minister provide a breakdown of these numbers and which industries received the most and, conversely, the least attention as well, and what are its plans moving forward?
In addition, does the Ministry dovetail newly subsidised courses with the various Industry Transformation Roadmaps (ITMs) under the broad strategic direction offered by CFE? If so, is the Ministry considering stepping up public communication to advise Singaporeans of the options available to take up courses for new careers and for those who change careers midway through their working life?
Finally, can we expect employers to make a renewed commitment to hire Singaporean workers, even more so in the SkillsFuture environment where so much energy and resources are spent on upgrading the skills of Singaporeans?
Miss Cheng Li Hui (Tampines): Forty-two percent of our labour force aged 15 to 64 attended training over the year ending June 2016, a record high, compared to 35% the previous year. It is clear they were aware of the need to retrain and upgrade themselves.
What is worrying is that the increase was driven by professionals, managers, executives and technicians (PMETs). However, it is even more urgent for the lower-skilled workers to upskill and retrain. I am very concerned about those whose jobs will likely be eliminated due to technological advances, such as drivers, receptionists, telemarketers and waiters.
How does the Ministry reach out to these groups of Singaporeans? How do MOE and SkillsFuture Singapore (SSG) ensure the provision of high-quality SkillsFuture courses that are relevant to market needs and help individuals make informed decisions on training and careers?
Assoc Prof Daniel Goh Pei Siong (Non-Constituency Member): Madam, Singapore's total fertility rate has hovered around 1.2 to 1.3 for some time. We are struggling to reach the 1.4 to 1.5 mark that Deputy Prime Minister Teo Chee Hean set as the target back in 2013 when launching the Marriage and Parenthood package.
An oft-cited reason given by young women for putting off having children is that they are concerned that parenthood may permanently derail their careers. This is not an unjustified concern. Women tend to find it more difficult to re-enter the workforce after having children. Now, with the constant stress to upgrade one's skills so as to remain competitive and stay relevant, more pressure is placed upon women who question if they can afford to take time off and still be able to keep up with their peers when they return.
I would like to propose a SkillsFuture Mommy Award to be made available to women while they are on maternity leave. The award would be valid for one year, which should coincide with the no-pay leave period during the baby's first year, an idea mooted by the Government last year and is currently being explored. This award will encourage mothers to take up training that may help them remain relevant to their industries, keep their skills sharp and make re-entry into the workforce a little less challenging.
Mr Low Thia Khiang (Aljunied): Madam, retraining and education are essential in this new economy where the idea of having a job for life is quickly disappearing and workers must be prepared to switch industries and pick up new skills if necessary.
While many local courses are subsidised for Singaporeans and the Government has provided some assistance by way of the SkillsFuture Credit, there are courses that still require hefty fees. I would, therefore, like to propose the Government setting up a SkillsFuture Education Loan to facilitate further and continuing education that will help workers to advance their careers or switch career paths.
While the Government may point to the existence of the Central Provident Fund (CPF) Education Scheme as a similar initiative, there are several limitations of the scheme such that it does not adequately address the needs of working adults who may wish to further their education or to take up training courses.
One such limitation is the type of courses that it applies to. The CPF Education Scheme is meant for full-time subsidised courses offered at Approved Educational Institutions and only applies for first degrees and diplomas.
On top of this, the use of CPF to fund education and training will also have an impact on the retirement adequacy of the individual and their family members, if they are still eligible to borrow from the CPF savings of their parents or spouse.
In the implementation of the SkillsFuture Education Loan, some aspects can be borrowed from the CPF Education Scheme, such as pegging of interest rates to CPF Ordinary Account interest rates, which are less onerous than rates offered by banks, and stipulating that repayment will commence a year after graduation. The loan scheme will give individuals greater peace of mind over repayment which may, in turn, encourage more people to pursue retraining or higher education.
Mr Zainal Sapari (Pasir Ris-Punggol): Madam, there are many uncertainties in the global economic environment. As an open economy, Singapore will inevitably be affected. There are concerns among Singaporeans that these uncertainties will cause disruptions to our livelihoods. Parents will also be concerned about how their children can be prepared for future jobs.
To prepare ourselves for the future, CFE has recommended that we deepen and diversify our international connections and acquire and utilise deep skills.
Our education system must provide the opportunities for our students to be exposed to the region. Learning and development cannot be limited to the classroom. Our students must also get out of the classroom and get real work experience.
Many of us will agree that some life skills, such as working with different people, can only be honed through experience and practice, and not just acquired based on theory. How does the Ministry prepare students for future jobs, particularly with regard to applied learning that allows them to learn on the job?
Additionally, do our students have the opportunity to take part in overseas programmes so that they can learn more about the cultures and business environments in neighbouring countries?
Ms Foo Mee Har:\tMadam, I had the opportunity to learn about systemic skills training in Switzerland, where two-thirds of school leavers enrol in vocational training. I heard inspiring personal stories about the strength of this system from chief executive officers (CEOs) of Swiss multinational companies to SME owners who came up through the ranks of vocational apprenticeship. One striking example was a young 16-year-old engineer employed in robotics design in a leading Swiss company whilst pursuing his engineering studies.
Having seen how Swiss students are trained from an early age to master practical skills in a real-life work environment, I am convinced that this is the key competitive advantage that has helped Switzerland to become one of the most competitive economies in the world. There are many advantages in blending work and study into degree programmes, such as better employment prospects, better job matching and better preparation to embrace lifelong learning.
I am encouraged by the emergence of work-study degree programmes in Singapore, with different models being piloted by our local universities. How can our universities accelerate their efforts and develop the necessary infrastructure, which must include career offices and linkages to industry to expand and support work-study programmes?
Work-study degree programmes can only be successful with the active involvement of employers and their management teams. Apart from the lack of know-how, such willingness to nurture talent is not yet, unfortunately, ingrained in the corporate culture of most local companies. Managers tend not to see it as their responsibility or understand how it benefits everyone in the ecosystem. Perhaps, the inflexion point will come with the first batches of managers who are themselves beneficiaries of the work-study programmes.
Mdm Chairman, to give this relatively new concept a much-needed boost, I urge the Minister to help employers develop the necessary human resource (HR) and training infrastructure and, most importantly, the right mindset to embrace the widespread adoption of work-study programmes. Could the Government, Singapore's largest employer, set a shining example in its own ranks?
Mr Ang Wei Neng (Jurong): Madam, the Government has invested much in education, including the Institutes of Technical Education (ITEs), which have become a popular option. During my Meet-the-People Sessions (MPS), many young residents come to appeal for admission into ITE courses. The Earn and Learn programme is an excellent apprenticeship scheme, where ITE graduates are able to work at participating companies to earn a decent income while learning as an apprentice.
After a few years of working, many ITE graduates typically want to upgrade to a diploma. This is appropriate, given that they have acquired deeper skills in their respective vocations. However, diploma courses in the local polytechnics may not suit them, as they are more adept at hands-on learning and are less academically inclined.
Therefore, I would like to suggest that MOE consider devising diploma courses that are technical and hands-on in nature, which focus on deepening skills rather than pen-and-pencil examinations.
Mr Thomas Chua Kee Seng (Nominated Member) (In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] Mdm Chairman, a good vocational education is an important foundation of Singapore's economic development. Over the past 50 years or so, our educational system has undergone perpetual adjustments in line with changes. Now, the Singapore economy is experiencing a major transformation once again. This leads us to ponder over how the educational organisations could support industry transformation.
Last year, when the Singapore Chinese Chamber of Commerce and Industry (SCCCI) organised the Trade Association Congress, we invited a business leader from a German Chamber of Commerce as one of our guest speakers. This friend briefed us on the operational model and experiences of German trade associations. It was really an eye-opener.
In the area of vocational education, the German industry associations play a powerful role. Firstly, all companies are required by law to join industry associations, hence giving industry associations sufficient critical mass and influence. Industry associations are also invested with much authority. They provide practical vocational training, with a key focus on grooming specialised technical personnel. Certificates issued by industry associations are recognised by society and become important references in the recruitment of workers. Like Singapore, SMEs make up 99% of all business entities in Germany. The government is responsible for basic education and tertiary education, while the industry associations cater to vocational education and worker training. At the same time, the government also provides requisite funding to industry associations.
People always rave about that German workers are well-trained and, in this regard, the industry associations have contributed a great deal. With compulsory membership in industry associations, both large enterprises and SMEs are thrust together in the same boat. They move forward together, united as one. With sound financial foundations and deep insights into the industry, trade associations would be able to tackle the pains of economic restructuring in a timely manner and with greater accuracy. This is also one of the reasons why the German manufacturing industry can remain strong all this time.
Taking a leaf from the German experience, I suggest that ITEs and polytechnics work together on a win-win basis to strengthen collaboration with trade associations. I hope the Government could authorise trade associations to conduct even more vocational skills training courses. This would constitute another milestone, bringing the national education system more in step with a transforming era.
Dr Tan Wu Meng (Jurong): I have met residents whose families spent a small fortune on a degree from a private institution. In some cases, the parents withdrew CPF savings, retirement savings to support their children on the course. It is important to know whether they got value for money.
How detailed is MOE's tracking of educational outcomes for private degrees as well as skills upgrading? Does MOE look at skills upgrading outcomes and whether the skills learnt are actually being used at work later on? We must distinguish between providers who are only selling hope rather than skills and opportunities. This will help us better support students, parents and responsible constructive education providers.
Mr Ang Wei Neng: Madam, we are proud that the National University of Singapore (NUS) and Nanyang Technological University (NTU) have improved their global university rankings by leaps and bounds. According to the Times Higher Education World University Rankings, NUS was ranked 40th in 2011 and now ranked 24th in 2016. NTU's progress is even more remarkable. NTU was ranked 174th in 2011 and is now ranked 54th, that is, NTU jumped 120 places in five years.
However, in the push to improve our ranking results, have we lost sight of more important goals? One of the main reasons why NUS and NTU have improved their rankings was their push for their professors to produce academic papers that can be cited by acclaimed international academic journals. Is this done at the expense of having the professors conduct research on local issues, which are less glamorous and would less likely be published in the international journals? Has the concentration on showy research compromised the quality of teaching?
The local universities are heavily funded by the Government. I hope the Minister can consider refocusing the priorities of the local universities so that they can conduct research which would help us to better understand and perhaps even solve challenges faced by Singapore and Singaporeans, rather than in pure pursuit of global university rankings. We need a more balanced approach.
Mr Pritam Singh: Mdm Chairman, late last year, the Ministry announced a significant grant for research in the Social Sciences and Humanities to the tune of $350 million under the auspices of the Social Sciences Research Council (SSRC). I understand the first round of grant calls has closed to about 70 proposals and an announcement is due soon on the award recipients.
I know that the grant focuses on big themes with a public purpose, such as social integration and resilience, building identities, developing new models of training and education and spurring growth, productivity and innovation. I would like to enquire, in awarding the grants, how does the Ministry consciously spread the awards between the Humanities and the Social Sciences?
While these initiatives are significant, I would also like to know whether some of these grants would be available for initiatives that encourage or promote an interest in the Humanities per se and not necessarily the Social Sciences as such and, therefore, lacking in immediate societal outcomes. This might include historical research on the South China Sea, urban and rural communities in Southeast Asia, Asian literature and languages which encompass a broadening of the knowledge base of Singaporean researchers and institutions, thereby producing independent outcomes. Such work may not have direct relevance now, but they would be of consequence in view of our geopolitical realities.
What such funding would also do is to generate significant interest among young Singaporeans who seek to pursue postgraduate qualifications to teach and carry out research in our local universities. A community of Singaporean Social Science and Humanities scholars with specific expertise would, in time, also raise the quality of the standard of our research, staff and faculty in Singapore and promote a drive towards excellence.
There should be no reason why the world's pre-eminent historians, sociologists and other humanities specialists of the region should be teaching in a university or institution which is not based in Singapore. We should aim to count as many Singaporeans as we can among such a group of scholars.
Dr Lim Wee Kiak (Sembawang): Chairman, current admissions to our IHLs are still primarily based on academic results. It is a transparent and objective system but too much stress is placed on our students and parents for these high-stake examinations. Aptitude-based admissions allow for a more holistic assessment of students and reduce the over-emphasis on academic results. It takes into consideration the level of passion and interest the students have for their choice of courses. However, a pure aptitude-based system may be too subjective as it is dependent on the assessors. I suggest MOE adopt a hybrid system, perhaps with 60% weight towards academic and 40% weight to aptitude.
I am pleased to note the gradual expansion of the aptitude-based admissions to PSEIs, as announced by Minister Ong Ye Kung last year.
I would like to ask if the Ministry intends to introduce further enhancements to the aptitude-based admissions and adopt a hybrid system which has both components.
Mr Ang Wei Neng: Madam, one of my residents is a pharmacy assistant who has performed well in his job and has been praised by his supervisors. He has come to see me two years in a row because, each year, NUS had rejected his application to read Pharmacy at NUS. He was told that his grades were not as good as those of the other applicants.
Grades are not everything. Passion is equally important. I understand that MOE has started to have Aptitude-based Admissions in PSEIs. I have heard some happy stories after the new scheme has started. Can we do more and increase the quota allocated for Aptitude-based Admissions? This would be of great help to adult Singaporeans who may not have done well in school but have done very well in their jobs and want a second chance at obtaining an academic qualification.
Mr Gan Thiam Poh (Ang Mo Kio): More and more young people are interested in creative arts tertiary education, which augurs well for our endeavour to transform Singapore into a Distinctive Global City for the Arts. Creative arts education fosters creativity and innovation, both necessary for a future-ready Singapore.
I am heartened to note that the Government is looking at how to further develop creative arts tertiary education, both in terms of expanding the scope and depth. Would the Ministry provide an update on its plans to enhance the quality of creative arts tertiary education? How have the enrolments been for the various disciplines and levels at our institutions?
In addition, what measures does the Ministry have to align our creative arts graduates' skills with industry demands? How does the Ministry help them prepare for their future careers and what kind of projects has the Government initiated or attracted to Singapore to help provide them with good career prospects?
Mr Edwin Tong Chun Fai: Mdm Chairman, there is no doubt that in recent times, the arts and culture scene in Singapore has become a lot more vibrant, immeasurably enriching and a lot more diverse. There is also no denying that the arts stimulate creativity, reimagination and out-of-the box innovation. These traits are crucial to Singapore as we look towards the future economy which will be challenging.
We need to nurture the appreciation of arts and culture from a young age. We see an improvement in literacy when young people take part in drama and library activities and better performance in Mathematics and Languages when they take part in structured music activities. The relationship has been studied and it is undeniable.
Hence, what steps are being considered to foster the appreciation of arts and culture amongst our students at an early age?
Secondly, can the Minister provide an update as to what steps are being taken to meet a constantly growing interest in creative arts tertiary education and what assistance can be given to allow creative arts graduates to deepen and enhance their skills so that they become more relevant to industry needs and also in terms of enhancing these students' own career prospects?
Mr Ang Wei Neng:\tMadam, in Mandarin, please.
(In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] The tuition fees charged by PSEIs, especially university tuition fees, have increased significantly over the last 10 years.
In 2007, the three major Singapore universities − NUS, NTU and the Singapore Management University (SMU) − charged Singaporeans roughly $7,000 to $8,000 in annual tuition for a general arts and science degree. Fees in the last 10 years have gone up about 38% on average and the increase varies across institutions. What is consistent, however, is that the increase in the tuition fee has significantly outpaced consumer price index (CPI) growth over the same period.
While we understand the need to increase tuition fees to better reflect the value of tertiary industry, we have to be mindful that students from the underprivileged families may be unfairly disadvantaged. Income of low-income families usually rises slower than that of upper middle-income families, and a university education is the best way for students from low-income families to go up the ladder. This does not just apply to students from low-income families but those who are in the sandwich group or who marginally miss out on MOE's financial assistance scheme because of the qualifying criteria.
To help such students from the sandwich group, I have to raise funds every year to provide them with bursaries. However, raising funds through private donors may not be sustainable and is especially difficult when the economy is slowing down. Thus, I hope that the Minister can relax the qualifying criteria for MOE's financial support for tertiary students so that more can benefit.
The Chairman:\tMinister Ong Ye Kung.
The Minister for Education (Higher Education and Skills) (Mr Ong Ye Kung): Mdm Chairman, I thank the Members for their questions. I will try to answer as many of them as possible in my speech.
I will start with a story. I think is a story that many Members already know. It is the story of Ms Kirsten Tan, one of Singapore's most renowned film makers. I want to tell it again even though Members might be familiar, because there are so many aspects of her story that are so relevant to our education system.
Kirsten had always wanted to make films, but her parents, in her own words, these are not my words but her parents', \"die die wanted her to go to university\". So, she went to study literature in NUS but never gave up on film. At NUS, she set up her own production house and also set up her own studio. She made two films and, in her words again, the films were so bad even she did not know what they were all about.
After NUS, she went to Ngee Ann Polytechnic to do an Advanced Diploma in Film Production. Finally, she got to do something she was passionate in. This time, she made two more films which won awards at the Singapore International Film Festival. Later, one of her films, as you would know, called \"Pop Aye\", won a Special Jury Prize at the Sundance film festival. It was a moment of great pride and joy for her, her family, as well as for Singapore.
Today, she gets gigs from all over the world, mostly work from New York. I have set up a meeting with her sometime later this year. And her parents have come round to supporting her in her film-making career.
I tell this story because of the contradictions that she has to deal with in this new world. Her story is one of pragmatism versus her passion; of parents' expectations versus what she herself so wanted to do; of lifelong upgrading and yet not conforming to the social notion that after a Degree, there must be a Masters or a PhD. She went to do an Advanced Diploma in an area she wants to be good at, of venturing beyond Singapore and yet remaining Singaporean at heart. It is a story of what education should and can do for all of us, across every field.
We have an effective and internationally well-regarded education system. But sometimes, a great strength can also be a weakness. It gives rise to a temptation that maybe we just tinker around the edges when, actually, more fundamental changes may be needed.
I believe that we are at the threshold of major changes in our society and economy. We need to transform our higher education landscape in response. We need to make five important shifts as part of this transformation.
One, besides being a pathway into good jobs and lifelong employability, education also needs to be a journey to fulfil hopes and aspirations. And the two need not be at odds with one another.
Two, education and learning need to be lifelong. Ms Thanaletchmi made this point very well, although she spoke quite fast. But we must recognise that the learning needs and habits of adult learners are vastly different from those of students. For adult learners, it has to be short, concise, modular, convenient and accessible and to the point.
Third, education must impart skills, not just information and knowledge, for a simple reason. Today, information we can google, skills we cannot. And whether you are performing a surgery, coding a complex computer programme, cooking something for your clients and for your customers, repairing a car, negotiating effectively or working in a team of people of different cultures, all these are skills.
Fourth, \"learning by doing\". We are used to the idea of \"learning for doing\". We study for a few years, then we step out into the workforce and we work as a professional, technician or whatever. But technical and cognitive abilities can also be gained through actual experience. This method has underlined centuries of European apprenticeship, as Ms Foo Mee Har and Mr Thomas Chua have mentioned. And it is more important and more relevant than ever today.
Fifth, help Singaporeans adapt to a data-rich and digital working environment. Not everyone needs to learn how to code or become an IT expert. But we must all be comfortable and competent working in a digitally-enabled working environment. In other words, we must be data-enabled as a workforce.
These shifts are the building blocks of transformation. To implement them, we will do three things − build, configure and scale. These represent the three overlapping phases of our work. The changes will take place over the next five years but will set the stage for our continued progress for the next 20. Let me talk about them in turn.
First, we need to build, meaning to lay the critical foundations of organisations, structure and funding. It is painstaking work. Fortunately, we have been at it for over a decade. In the early 2000s, the Government set up the Lifelong Learning Endowment Fund. We set up a dedicated agency to promote lifelong learning, that is, the Singapore Workforce Development Agency (WDA). WDA, in turn, set up the Workforce Skills Qualification (WSQ) framework and also set up over 40 training centres to deliver adult training.
Last year, WDA was restructured into two Statutory Boards. One of them, SSG, is now part of MOE. With that change, education and learning from young to old, for your whole lifetime, comes under one Ministry.
Under this structure, PSEIs under MOE, namely, ITEs, polytechnics and universities, are all given a mandate to promote and drive lifelong learning. We are not done building. In 2014, the Singapore Institute of Technology (SIT) became our fifth autonomous university (AU) and the first to pioneer an applied degree pathway.
Later this year, I will be tabling a Bill in this House to restructure the Singapore Institute of Management (UniSIM) into our sixth AU, which will focus on applied degree programmes in the social sciences, such as social work, HR, psychology, early childhood education and so on.
We will also further develop tertiary education opportunities in the arts. Mr Edwin Tong and Mr Gan Thiam Poh have asked about this. We can do more to develop the capabilities of our two publicly-funded arts institutions, the Nanyang Academy of Fine Arts (NAFA) and LASALLE College of the Arts (LASALLE). I will ask Parliamentary Secretary Faishal Ibrahim to talk more about this later in his speech.
Another important aspect of build is to fund lifelong learning, to make it affordable and accessible to Singaporeans. I thank Mr Pritam Singh for explaining the supply and demand side of our support. I have been trying to explain that for a long time. But I think it is worthwhile spending a bit of time again explaining the concept and how it all works.
Supply-side funding means we fund the training provider so that the course fee charged is lowered to a small fraction of the original cost. This is not different from the way we fund education or healthcare, which is through schools and hospitals.
The advantage of supply-side funding is that we have better control in funding the courses which are relevant to the industries that represent the growth areas and, very importantly, as pointed out by Mr Singh, aligned to our ITMs. The downside is that it is not very visible to the public.
The other way is demand-side funding, where funding goes directly to the learner and to the individual. Examples are bursaries, SkillsFuture Study Awards and, of course, SkillsFuture Credit.
What is good about demand-side funding is that it is very visible and people do get excited. When SkillsFuture Credit was first implemented, people were talking about what they should learn next. There was a certain excitement. But the first downside is that if it is done across the board, like SkillsFuture Credit, it can be expensive, that is why we limit it to $500 per Singaporean.
The second downside is that we have little control on how people will spend the grant. This, therefore, gives rise to the question that Ms Foo Mee Har asked: with so many courses, where do I go, and what is it that can help me link up my training with my employability? It is just too much. And what people spend on may not be entirely aligned with our industry and growth strategies. That is the downside.
To illustrate how it all works, take a training programme that costs $1,000. Supply-side funding is $900, so the course fee gets lowered to $100. That is what the public sees and they use their SkillsFuture Credit to pay the last $100. So, in fact, it is free.
On balance, our approach is to continue to lean more on supply-side funding, which is more prudent and a stronger lever in public policymaking. So, today, we spend about $400 million a year on supply-side funding, versus $37 million last year on SkillsFuture Credit funding.
This approach has worked well for us. Through our efforts to promote Lifelong Learning and SkillsFuture over the years, our training participation rate has jumped from 32% to 42% over 10 years, and half of the increase was realised in the last three years.
Training headcounts annually have increased by 70% to 380,000 today, over the last five years.
Excluding areas, such as safety, security and food and beverage (F&B), which produce a large number of training places partly because of regulations, the top nine areas today account for over half of the training places supported by SSG.
In descending order, what are these nine? They are ICT, service excellence, education and training, HR management, personal development, leadership and people management, business management, productivity and innovation and healthcare. These are the top nine.
We did not plan for these numbers, but what we have designed is to allow the training industry and market to respond, and we provide support where we think the quality of training is good and it is aligned with our growth strategies.
Over time, many members of the public, and also Members of this House, such as Mr Low Thia Khiang, Assoc Prof Daniel Goh and Miss Cheng Li Hui, have asked for more demand-side support, such as study loans or tops-up of SkillsFuture Credit, for vulnerable workers or for mommies.
I agree that we should extend more help to these groups, especially if they are vulnerable. But we would rather do so mainly from supply-side measures.
And, indeed, we can. There are some 9,000 courses out there which are already heavily subsidised. Part-time diplomas today are 85% subsidised. Short courses often 90% to 95% subsidised, through supply-side funding.
For someone taking a Diploma programme in a polytechnic or a Degree programme in an AU, study loans and tuition fee loans provided by the institutions are available to them. Maybe this is not well-known by them, but even if you are an adult worker taking a part-time Degree or polytechnic courses, the loans are available to them. Hence, the CPF Education scheme is only one option.
But such help can also be generic. For a back-to-work woman, besides course fee funding, she may need career support and job placement support.
That is why we set up intermediaries, such as Community Development Councils (CDCs) and the Employment and Employability Institute (e2i). They will help her access all the supply-side assistance out there, provide additional funding support if need be, and facilitate her job search and placement.
This is how we link training and employability, which Ms Foo Mee Har spoke about. Similarly, training programmes developed under SkillsFuture supply the tools to MOM to implement Place and Train, Adapt and Grow, and Attach and Train, to help more targeted clients. And with the intermediaries, we bridge the gap between demand and supply-side support, such that workers can get individualised help, but not a customised grant.
Mr Ang Wei Neng asked if we can provide more financial support for our students in PSEIs, particularly in the universities. This is one area of demand-side support that can be improved. And Minister Heng spoke about this in the Budget Statement.
There are currently three bursary tiers for undergraduate and Diploma students from families with monthly household per capita incomes of $950 and below, $951 to $1,400, and $1,401 to $1,900. For ITE students, we provide additional assistance to students from families with a per capita income of $570 and below. So, three tiers for most but, for ITE students, four tiers.
MOE has reviewed the Government bursaries and will enhance it in the following ways from academic year 2017. First, we will introduce four bursary tiers across all PSEIs. This will allow us to be even more targeted in helping students from lower- to middle-income households. Second, besides per capita income, we will also look at gross monthly household income. To be eligible for the bursary, a student only needs to meet either of the two income criteria. More will qualify. Third, we will update the income eligibility caps based on the latest household income data. Essentially, they will all be revised upwards and more students will qualify. Finally, we will raise the bursary amounts. The increase will range between $50 and $400 across various levels, with larger increases going to the lower-income students. This will bring the maximum annual bursary quantum to $4,000 for undergraduates, $2,350 for diploma students, and $1,400 for ITE students.
MOE will provide the details in a press release later today. With the revisions, the projected number of students expected to tap on the bursaries will increase by 12,000 per year to 71,000 per year. The total annual budget is estimated to increase by $50 million a year to $150 million a year.
Having built the infrastructure to support Lifelong Learning, we need to configure it, make sure we have the right approaches, policies, programmes and processes. We are doing this actively, through the SkillsFuture Movement launched two years ago. ITEs, polytechnics and universities have, therefore, been revamping and improving their programmes. Let me cite a few examples.
There is now great emphasis on industry attachment and internship. They are championing overseas internships so that students get early exposure to an international working environment, which Mr Zainal Sapari spoke about.
NUS and NTU both run overseas entrepreneurship programmes where students are attached to startups and tech companies in Silicon Valley, China and Europe. I was recently in Beijing, China, for the Joint Council for Bilateral Cooperation (JCBC). During a dialogue with Singaporeans based there, I was pleasantly surprised to meet a big group of students from our universities, all on tech company attachments. SMU has introduced SMU-X, an initiative where students get to work on real-life industry problems, side by side with businesses. UniSIM and NTU are converting all their teaching materials for online delivery, to refresh their teaching methods and also to inoculate themselves against possible disruption in future.
All over the system now, there is much greater emphasis on interdisciplinary teaching and studies. But one critical configuration that we need to do is to ensure that our system takes into account the interests and aptitudes of our students. This is because we are simply better at doing what we like. Notwithstanding this, many of our youths go with the flow. They go into courses where their grades can take them or where their friends are going. Our young need guidance and help to discover themselves, to discover their strengths and interests. We need to strengthen our Education and Career Guidance in our education system considerably, starting from secondary schools. Parliamentary Secretary Ms Low Yen Ling will speak more about this later.
But for those who are clear about what they want to pursue, we should support them as much as possible, to facilitate their admission into our PSEIs based on interests and aptitudes and not just based on academic results. Dr Lim Wee Kiak and Mr Ang Wei Neng have asked how we can strengthen this.
The universities will be expanding aptitude-based admissions in their admission exercises later this year for up to 15% of their intake. This was what I announced last year but they are implementing it for the academic year this year. Some, however, like SIT and SMU, have been practising aptitude-based admissions on a fairly large scale and over many years.
As for the polytechnics, since my announcement last year, they have implemented aptitude-based admissions through the Polytechnic Early Admissions Exercise (EAE) last year and the outcomes are encouraging. They received applications from about 8,000 O-level students, of which 2,500 successful applicants eventually had their EAE offers confirmed. The eventual EAE intake is close to 12% of the total polytechnic intake, with two polytechnics bursting their 12.5% quota very slightly. And these are healthy utilisation rates for a first exercise. And, as expected, I got a lot more appeals this year.
Polytechnics have given feedback that EAE is particularly useful in sectors, such as social work, nursing, early childhood education or those that involve the creative arts, because your commitment and interest in the subject are very important for these courses. Given the success in the first year of implementation, MOE will increase the polytechnics EAE quota from 12.5% to 15% for the 2018 Admission Year. This will mean about 500 more places included under EAE.
There is also scope to apply aptitude-based admissions at the ITEs. Currently, at the Higher Nitec level, only 10 out of nearly 50 courses are open for enrolment based on aptitude and interest. There should really be more, given that ITE courses are vocational and very specialised in nature.
ITE also has a Special College Admissions Scheme, but applicants are considered based on general talents like leadership and sports, and not so much on aptitude and interest. Hence, today, only a very small percentage of ITE students are admitted to ITE based on course-specific aptitude and interest. MOE will, therefore, introduce an ITE EAE, where the ITEs can systematically admit up to 15% of its intake via aptitude-based admissions. Like the polytechnic EAE, ITE EAE will be conducted before the release of N- and O-Level results.
There is another important thing we can do for ITE students. I mentioned \"learning by doing\" as a key shift in the way we deliver higher education. Ms Foo Mee Har, Mr Thomas Chua and Mr Ang Wei Neng have urged industries and PSEIs to collaborate more closely to deliver education.
The ethos of \"learning by doing\" actually has been the strongest at ITE, because of its tradition of vocational education and a very highly practical curriculum.
Today, many ITE students aspire to progress to the polytechnics. Indeed, every year, about a quarter of them manage to do so. However, while a polytechnic education is applied in nature, it is not quite \"learning by doing\" in the sense of an apprenticeship, like a European apprenticeship. An ITE student still needs to score quite a good grade point average (GPA) and demonstrates quite good academic abilities before a polytechnic will take him or her in.
But many ITE students are talented at using their hands and probably learn best by practising, by doing. This is a more natural path for them to achieve mastery, across a range of areas. And over time, with skills mastery, they should also have a chance to move up to management positions if they so desire.
Take the hotel industry, for example. If you meet the general managers (GMs), which I do from time to time, you will find that there are two kinds of GMs. One type of GM is those that take a degree in hotel management and they get parachuted into the hotel. After some management associate programmes, they rise up. They become GM. Another type of GM starts off as an apprentice in the kitchen, sometimes in the restaurant. And they move around different departments of the hotel, different operations and, over many years, they know the operations so well and they are so competent at it, they rise up and become GM.
These are distinctly different paths to the top, via development of cognitive abilities through formal education, or via \"learning by doing\" in a structured and facilitated way. Hence, we will develop a new pathway for ITE students leading to a Technical Diploma that will be conferred by ITE.
Compared to a polytechnic Diploma, the big difference is in the mode of learning, it will be apprenticeship-based. Every course will be delivered in partnership with an employer. ITE students will be able to apply for them after they graduate with a Nitec or Higher Nitec or after a few years of working.
For a start, we will introduce this pathway in sectors, such as Mechanical and Electrical Services Design and Supervision, Security Systems Engineering, Rehabilitation Therapy and Offshore and Marine. More details will be provided shortly.
With this new pathway, ITE students need not see polytechnics as their only path for progression. They can advance through skills mastery and practice, by staying with ITE.
\"Learning by doing\" will also apply to universities. Ms Foo Mee Har asked about this. I recently visited the Singapore office of an American technology company. It is a big office in the Mapletree Business Park along Alexandra Road. The company believes in training Singaporeans to be competent working in digital and data-intense workplaces. And the training is not just for their own employees. They said it is for anyone who is interested because they say that it builds up the entire ecosystem that way.
They run an intense eight-month, hands-on programme for fresh graduates to learn about data management and data analytics. And I was told everyone who graduated from that programme was immediately snapped up by the industry because that skillset is in such short supply in the industry.
I was impressed by this very enlightened approach. They think big and they think long term. They even have a global function in Singapore where they are looking for their next one billion customers. Members of this House will know this company. It is Google.
The immediate question that sprung to my mind was: if the data analytics programme is so effective, why can it not be part of our university education curriculum? Therefore, our AUs must also co-recreate programmes with industries and promote \"learning by doing\". When I attended SIT's very first graduation ceremony recently, I announced that SIT and UniSIM will introduce seven new SkillsFuture Work-study Degree Programmes. They are jointly developed and delivered in partnership with companies, such as Singtel and Standard Chartered.
I am glad that Government agencies are coming on board quite actively. They are also partnering the Cyber Security Agency of Singapore (CSA) and also the Defence Science and Technology Agency (DSTA) of the Ministry of Defence (MINDEF). We hope, over time, more will do so. In fact, one of the Government Ministries that is a pioneer in providing \"learning by doing\" training programmes is MOE. At NIE, you do not just study in the classroom, but you would also practise teaching through a practicum.
I am happy to add that NUS will also start offering a slate of such work-study programmes this year, with courses in Information Security, Business Analytics and Data Science and Analytics. I hope that such programmes for \"learning by doing\" will proliferate across our university landscape.
The third phase of the transformation plan for higher education is scale. Where we have reasonably built and configured the system, we are ready to scale so that we can create a widespread impact and benefit Singaporeans. Scaling will help guide more Singaporeans in their training journey and career paths. It will help us reach out to more workers, which Miss Cheng Li Hui spoke about.
I announced the effort called SkillsFuture Engage last year, where we will proactively step up efforts to connect with Singaporeans and help them benefit from SkillsFuture. SSG will partner the People's Association (PA), CDCs, Workforce Singapore and e2i, to conduct workshops at the community level to explain SkillsFuture to Singaporeans, guide them in finding the right training programmes to attend, identify the right skills for them to learn and advise them how to best use their SkillsFuture Credit.
We expect to reach out to tens of thousands of Singaporeans each year through this initiative and roll out the programme in the middle of this year.
We will also make more online tools and resources available for Singaporeans to do the same and to search and apply for jobs as well. This will be done through a portal called MySkillsFuture. We will also use the MySkillsFuture portal to publish training outcomes for selected courses. Individuals and trainees will get to rate the training programmes and help others make better training decisions.
One of our key strengths as a society is that we have always been able to mobilise Singaporeans whenever it is necessary to reskill our workforce or adapt to a sea-change.
For example, in the 1980s, we launched two programmes − Basic Education for Skills Training (BEST) and Worker Improvement through Secondary Education (WISE). Those were efforts to build up literacy and numeracy skills amongst our workforce. Those were the essential skills at that time.
Around the same period, as part of the national computerisation efforts, the Labour Movement set up the National Trades Union Congress (NTUC) Computer Training Centre to raise basic IT literacy for workers.
About 10 years ago, running up to the setup and development of the Integrated Resorts, we launched the WSQ Certified Service Professional programme, an intense five-day programme, to train people to raise their service awareness and service delivery, and we trained tens of thousands of workers at that time.
The time has come again for us to undertake such an exercise. The workplace of the future will be different, with lots of use of IT, robotics and data. Not all our workforce, not every worker, needs to be an IT expert or needs to have programming skills but everyone will need some basic working knowledge, such as an understanding of emerging technologies, their impact on your work, and an ability to interpret and use data. We also need to be equipped with a mindset for change, innovation and resilience.
If you are a sales manager, you must be comfortable with diving into your data to understand what is generating your sales − what segments of clients, which geography, what products. If you are a taxi driver, instead of driving around to try to pick up customers, you learn to use all the different apps to match supply and demand, and you go to where the customers are. If you are a char kway teow man, you would not have to fry electronic kway teow, but you should be able to take electronic payments and electronic orders. This is the digital environment that we must all get used to working in.
The course will not be a long one. I expect it to be one or two days. SSG is developing it and will roll this out as a new national training programme and they called it Future@Work. It will be implemented across the island and positioned as an entry programme for all Singaporean workers to understand the future work environment. We plan to launch the programme by the end of this year. More details will be announced later.
We can also scale our efforts and make an impact through our PSEIs. Our AUs, in particular, have done very well in international rankings, which we can all be proud of. However, these are rankings by private organisations, based on their own criteria. And I agree with Mr Ang Wei Neng that such rankings may not fully reflect the social and public missions of an AU. I do worry that, over time, our universities may get into the game of chasing rankings at the expense of their public missions.
MOE will work with our AUs to further sharpen and articulate the public objectives of our AUs and tie part of our resource allocation to the fulfilment of these objectives. There are three objectives which we would like AUs to focus on.
First, constantly refresh and improve teaching. This includes \"learning by doing\", overseas exposure for students, and new methods to deliver lessons, including leveraging technology and e-learning.
Second, champion lifelong learning. All the AUs have already set up their lifelong learning units. They now need to ramp up the programmes, especially the bite-sized modular ones. This is not a matter of just modularising existing programmes. The lifelong learning units ought to be like Skunkworks or innovation units, constantly coming up with new programmes in response to industrial needs and the latest developments and technology.
Third, realise the impact of research. As NTU's President Bertil Andersson always tells me, there are only two kinds of research in this world − applied research and not-yet applied research. He said all research must ultimately change lives for the better, whether it is creating new enterprises, new jobs, giving us new insights into policies or implementing new projects that strengthen competitiveness or improve lives.
Mr Pritam Singh asked how SSRC will spread its grant awards between the Humanities and Social Sciences. Notwithstanding its name, the SSRC is meant to support the Humanities, too, and will fund good research projects in these disciplines.
In fact, let me give an example. One of the priority themes of SSRC is \"identities, social integration and resilience\" and it is really a broad theme. And this study is not complete without a study of Southeast Asia − its history, languages, communities, literatures − for a Singapore identity is unintelligible without the cultural backdrop of Southeast Asia and the broader region. So, please be reassured that the Humanities will be part of SSRC. Ultimately, the Council will allocate grants based on the quality of the projects and their potential impact.
Teaching, lifelong learning, impactful research − these are all areas that our AUs are already working hard on. With a stronger alignment of missions, objectives and resource allocation, I believe this will better position our AUs to fulfil the important roles that they have in shaping the future of Singapore.
Madam, I have spoken about our plan to Build, Configure and Scale over the next five years. In carrying out this plan, what is the toughest challenge of all? It is changing mindsets − the \"die die must do this way\" kind of thinking.
First of all, all of us − parents, students, educators − will need to move our focus away from a relentless pursuit of academic grades to the larger view of human development. As Minister Ng Chee Meng had said, it is about the joy of learning, entrepreneurial dare, moral grounding and holistic development. It is not easy. We cannot tear the system down. It will not change overnight but we are making important adjustments, even at the school level, to catalyse this change.
Second, employers must likewise do the same. Hire based on interest, skills and cultural fit, not just based on qualifications and grades. Because MOE can say all we want about dialing back from an over-emphasis on academic grades, but our message will ring hollow unless employers demonstrate that good jobs need not necessarily come only from good grades.
Third, society needs to recognise and celebrate a wide range of successes, not just managers and leaders but also entrepreneurs, craftsmen, technicians, sportsmen, artists. Step by step, we are getting there.
Let me put into context these mindsets that we inherited that are so hard to change.
Forty years ago, for every Primary 1 cohort, about 5% of students went to university, about 60%-65% of them passed the PSLE. The university's mission at that time, if I may put it starkly, and at the risk of some caricature, was to make sure that we produced as many university graduates as possible to support our economic growth.
That was a pragmatic generation, which had to fight for collective survival. They realised the importance and critical need for education and hoped that their children would achieve good grades and obtain good qualifications. And to a large extent, for this current generation of parents, many of them still think that way.
Today, times have changed. For a Primary 1 cohort, over 98% pass their PSLE, 33% go to AUs and graduate. Make no mistake, our goal must be still to fit graduates to an economic purpose. No one wants graduates who come out of the university and cannot find jobs. But in this new era, our children have new ideas, too.
They do not want to be on a treadmill, constantly chasing after good grades. Many people are like Kirsten, who wants to express herself through film-making and can make a good living doing that because she is very good at it. So, our PSEIs today have an additional mission which is to uncover and develop diverse talents and help our young realise their dreams.
But I am sure that when our children grow up and they become parents, they will believe in multiple paths towards success. They will want their children to go through an education system that recognises their individual strengths. But by then, times will have changed further and their children will have different ideas and they will be saying that their parents have very fixed mindsets.
Every generation that comes of age will transform and remake the society it lives in. That is how we progress, and education is there to help us along. That is why MOE's mission is to mould the future of Singapore.
Today, perhaps, we are at the starting line of a time of change and transformation. It is up to us today to create these multiple paths and new opportunities which will take us to many different places but arrive at a common future − a Singapore of many talents, on a united yet multifaceted journey of one people and one country. [Applause.]
The Chairman:\tParliamentary Secretary Faishal Ibrahim.
The Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministers for Education (Assoc Prof Dr Muhammad Faishal Ibrahim): Mdm Chairman, our education system will continue to strengthen the paths to recognise and build up the different aptitudes and interests of our children. We want to do this with strong partnerships with our parents, industry and the community.
Mr Gan Thiam Poh and Mr Edwin Tong asked about arts education and how we are supporting our creative arts graduates in preparing for and developing their careers. The interest in arts education and the range of opportunities and support available have increased over time. Just in 2016, around 6,000 students enrolled into creative arts courses at our polytechnics, AUs and Arts institutions (AIs).
Last year, I shared that MOE was looking into the creative arts tertiary education sector to improve the current landscape so that our creative arts graduates are better prepared for their future careers. We have been speaking to various stakeholders to understand the sector and look at the graduate employment outcomes of creative arts graduates, especially those from the Arts institutions (AIs), which include NAFA and LASALLE. Our engagements highlighted that creative arts play a role in our economy within and beyond the creative industries. We saw that AI graduates moved into arts-related careers and some also joined larger organisations as managers and executives, where their artistic abilities are put to good use. We also observed the prevalence of freelance work as 17% of our 2016 AI graduates in the labour force are working as freelancers. Against this backdrop, the AIs have started several initiatives to support their students better.
First, Education and Career Guidance efforts are being strengthened. At LASALLE, all students are required to take a curriculum vitae (CV) and Cover Letter Writing course, as well as courses on personal branding and managing freelance work or a small business. Such programmes prepare students better for stepping into the working world.
Second, there are continued efforts to build stronger industry links to enrich the curriculum and to expand internship opportunities. NAFA has revamped its curriculum to include industry-based learning to provide authentic learning opportunities as well as links with relevant industries.
Third, there will be greater provision of modular and short courses to support lifelong learning. This will make it more flexible and practical for industry professionals to return to the classroom for further learning to deepen their skills.
NAFA, for example, has developed several short, specialised courses, such as the Certificates in Visual Merchandising and Fashion Business, based on industry feedback. These courses are aimed at broadening the design and business skills of creative professionals.
We recognise the special role played by the AIs in offering pathways for those with the interest and talent in the field. Since 2011, MOE has provided NAFA and LASALLE with funding to offer high-quality creative arts degree programmes validated and awarded by reputable overseas partners.
Going forward, there is value in developing NAFA and LASALLE further into centres of excellence in creative arts education. MOE will be working with them on a roadmap to raise the standards of their programmes and to better prepare their students for the workplace. It will include efforts to further enhance teaching quality, strengthen employment outcomes and ensure financial sustainability. Each institution will move at its own pace to implement the roadmap.
Beyond the AIs, we do see many who pursue private degree programmes to fulfil their aspirations. As Dr Tan Wu Meng pointed out, there is concern about the employability of graduates from these programmes.
When deciding to attend such programmes, we want students to be more informed and make wise choices. To help them, the Committee for Private Education is enhancing its regulation of the Private Education Institutions, mandating annual graduate employment surveys and publishing the results.
Parents play an important role in partnering schools to support their children in developing their passions into strengths and reaching their fullest potential.
We agree with Mr Zainal Sapari and Mr Gan Thiam Poh that strong school-home-community partnerships lead to better student outcomes. We are committed to fostering such strong partnerships, and our Parent Support Groups (PSGs) play a very crucial role in this. To support PSGs, we recently launched the \"Parent Support Groups − A how-to-guide by parents for parents\". It was developed by our parent representatives from the COMmunity and Parents in Support of Schools (COMPASS) who wanted to help others in setting up and running PSGs effectively.
Besides parents, the community also has a role in enriching our children's educational experiences. This can be seen in the efforts by the community to make our mother tongue languages come alive. Madam, I will continue my speech in Malay.
(In Malay): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] The Malay Language Learning and Promotion Committee (MLLPC) has organised programmes and developed resources to nurture students' love for the Malay language and appreciate the usefulness and relevance of the language in their everyday settings.
One such resource for parents is the Nabil and Nabilah Reader Series for Primary 1 and Primary 2. The Series has been well-received by parents like Ms Siti Shyamira, who uses the story books as part of her family bonding sessions for reading and inculcation of values, such as respect for others. MLLPC will continue to build upon such efforts and is developing two language apps to support parents in their children's learning of the Malay language at home. These apps are targeted at the primary and secondary school level.
MLLPC also works closely with various agencies and the wider community to generate interest in the language and its cultural heritage. Partners, such as the Malay Language Council, Malay Heritage Centre, Malay language organisations and grassroots organisations have come on board to launch a range of initiatives and programmes. An example of such a collaboration is the Malay Language Month, which celebrates the language and its cultural heritage through a range of community events. Without the active involvement and collaboration of various community partners, the impact and reach of these events would be limited.
Mdm Chairman, such partnerships complement MOE's ongoing efforts to make the teaching and learning of mother tongue languages more engaging and enriching. Looking ahead, MLLPC has planned for many programmes and activities to continue supporting our students, teachers and parents in the learning of the Malay language and culture. This will go a long way in nurturing our next generation on Arif Budiman, anchored on sound values and wisdom drawn from our cultural heritage. As the Malay proverb goes, \"Shoulder the heavy, carry the light\". Let us bring Singapore and our community to greater heights.
The Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministers for Education (Ms Low Yen Ling): Mdm Chairman, MOE wants to sustain and strengthen an environment where students discover their interests and are guided in their choice of studies and career for a fulfilling learning journey.
This journey of discovery starts in their schooling years, because when our students understand their abilities, strengths and their interests as well as the options available and what it takes, then our students can make better decisions about their education pathways, vocations and career choices.
Let me briefly share about Gracella's experience. From young, she has been interested in plants but did not view it as a career option. However, at secondary school, she discovered opportunities in the landscaping industry during an education and career guidance (ECG) talk with an ECG counsellor. Armed with new passion and direction, she is now enrolled in the Nitec course for Landscaping Services, happily learning what she loves.
To better support students like Gracella, our ECG arm will help them G-R-O-W towards their career path. Let me explain: \"G\" stands for \"Grasp where their interests lie\"; \"R\" refers to \"Recognise their abilities\"; \"O\" is to \"Observe how their interests link to future education and career pathways\"; and \"W\" is \"Weigh the options for informed decisions\".
MOE facilitates this growth by weaving ECG into the curriculum and equipping ECG counsellors with updated information on education and industry opportunities. Mdm Chairman, can I have your permission to display one slide, please?
The Chairman:\tYes, please. [A slide was shown to hon Members.]
Ms Low Yen Ling: Industry partners like companies, trade and business associations are crucial links between students' interests and careers. Last September, I visited the ECG Fair that you see on the slide here, held at Nanyang Polytechnic and attended by more than 3,600 Secondary 3 students. It was at this fair where industry representatives showcased their work. Their sharing enabled the Secondary 3 students to better understand and appreciate the industries and what it takes to be part of it.
Like what Minister Ng Chee Meng and Minister Ong Ye Kung mentioned earlier in their speeches, parents play a vital role in their children's aspirations and career planning. We hope they can become actively involved as coaches and guides along their children's journey. This booklet is designed for parents and it is called, \"Journeying with Our Children, Achieving Their Aspirations\". It is quite a thin book. I encourage parents and students to read it not just once but many times, and they will have very different takeaways because it allows students to reflect on what are their strengths, interests and talents and use these to make an informed decision about their education pathways and also career choices.
The booklet itself, as well as the Parent Engagement Sessions, are some of the ways that MOE partners parents to help them better understand their children's interests, talents, strengths and passions. These parenting skills can also improve their parent-child relationship and mutual understanding and, through it, set a solid foundation for life.
Mdm Chairman, language skills are another key asset that will put our students in good stead for life. To address Mr Chen Show Mao and Mr Henry Kwek's questions, a significant number, close to 1,000 Secondary 1 students, take up regional languages as a third language yearly. So, 1,000 students for every cohort. There are more opportunities at the tertiary level. We will certainly promote more interest in this area, especially in Malay, Tamil and Chinese.
I thank Ms Tin Pei Ling for understanding and also underlining the importance of our Mother Tongue Languages (MTLs). We will certainly continue to work with our community partners to make MTLs come alive for students.
To this end, last Monday, the new bilingual children's TV programme, \"Junction Tree\" debuted on OKTO TV. Produced in partnership with the Lee Kuan Yew Fund for Bilingualism, the show fosters deeper appreciation of the three MTLs by showcasing their use and relevance in daily life. Our children can catch the show on air every afternoon, and parents, if you can catch the re-telecast with your kids, please watch it with your young children as well.
The Tamil Language Learning and Promotion Committee is also spearheading a new programme, \"Tamilodu Inaivom!\" What does this mean? It means \"Let's Connect with Tamil!\" Through drama and cultural activities, it will show families how Tamil is fun and easy to use at home.
Our new primary school curriculum makes the MTLs come alive by reflecting the rich cultures and languages in everyday settings which our children can relate to. Lessons often reflect the cultural festivals and national events that they experience in the real world. So, they are motivated to relate about what they have learnt. Mdm Chairman, allow me to conclude in Mandarin.
(In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] Bilingualism is a foundational aspect of our education system. I agree with what Ms Tin Pei Ling has said. Our MTLs are not only rich in literary and cultural value but are also useful and constantly evolving living languages. Today's students are \"digital natives\" and we need to engage them in ways that are familiar and interesting to them. Only then can they discover the beauty of the language and an innate desire to learn more about it.
We are working closely with the Committee to Promote Chinese Language Learning, the Lee Kuan Yew Fund for Bilingualism, other community partners and our media friends, to create this vibrant language ecosystem for students to love the language.
Learning our MTLs must start from young, so that the child is used to expressing their thoughts and experiences in their MTLs. To facilitate this, we have introduced new programmes, such as our experiential learning activity, the \"Wow Wild Learn\" Programme for preschoolers, so that they may find joy in learning their MTLs.
Secondly, we will build on students' areas of interests to further expose them to learning Chinese, such as the Xinyao competition Xing Kong Xia. There will be new elements to the competition this year, which includes Xinyao workshops, using Xinyao songs, such as the Singapore Pie, to expound on our Singapore story and our local cultural heritage. We will also be working closely with the Singapore Chinese Cultural Centre to help our students better appreciate our local Chinese culture.
Thirdly, we will better leverage digital technology as a key resource and avenue for outreach. Our iMTL interactive platform and Xuele online portal are tools that parents can use to engage their children in learning Chinese in a fun way.
Speaking of parents, many of our parents have themselves gone through a bilingual education and are well-equipped to help their children to learn Chinese. Parents should take advantage of this strength by speaking to their children in Chinese, listening to Chinese songs, reading Chinese literature or watching Chinese programmes on television together with their children. With perseverance, results will definitely be seen.
Our MTLs are cultural assets that Singaporeans should treasure. They are the foundation supporting our creative innovations and helping us connect to the rest of the world. We will need to master more languages to achieve the CFE's recommendations to internationalise our economy. Through our bilingual education policies, we are strongly placed to strengthen our grasp of regional languages and to use these as the driver for innovation and internationalisation. I believe that through the combined efforts and partnership of MOE, schools, parents, community partners and the media, we will be able to nurture a well-rounded generation steeped in culture and anchored on sound values and wisdom, as well as having the creativity and global mindset to handle the challenges of the future.
The Chairman:\tWe have a bit of time for clarifications. Please keep your clarifications short. Ms Denise Phua.
Ms Denise Phua Lay Peng (Jalan Besar): Thank you, Chairman. I have three questions. Grateful for all the plans the Ministry has shared. It looks like we are in good hands. A lot of the changes that are mentioned depend on mindset changes on the part of employers, families, parents and educators. I would like to hear from the Ministers how they intend to address these restraining forces, especially for the kind of educators that we would need for schools of the future. Is there an ITM for them as well?
The second question has to do with DSA. I would like to ask how the Minister can assure the public and hon Members that DSA is not, indeed, a ticket to popular schools, that, as a result of DSA, certain schools do not become places where they assemble all the top brains and brawns because everybody just wants to go to these schools. Is there merit also in the long term to spread the talents across schools, which is a better reflection of the microcosm of society?
My last question is for Minister of State Dr Janil. I know he has a big heart for special needs students. But my concerns about the gaps were not addressed and I would like to know what he feels about them and what can be done. Also, would MOE consider favourably my proposal for a SPED Academy to look at the lifelong learning needs, lifelong solutions and the potential of this becoming a centre of excellence worldwide for this community?
The Chairman: Minister Ong.
Mr Ong Ye Kung: I thank the Members for the three questions. I will talk about mindset change. \"Mindset change\" is a description, not a prescription. We cannot say that we are going to solve today's problems or improve today's system through a mindset change. I do not think it works that way. What we can do is to give enough speeches, change enough policies, re-allocate resources, structures, come up with new programmes, build, configure and scale and, over time, bring about that mindset change. We have seen how mindsets have changed over 20 years, over one generation. This is something we have to continuously work towards.
Likewise, for schools of the future. It is also not just a school, but a mindset leap into a different kind of school. I do not think we can change it overnight. Neither do we say, \"Oh, the system is doing well, so, tweak around the edges\". Then, you will never reach the school of the future. So, it is to have a balance between the two; not to tweak too little, not to burn things down, but make enough policy steps that, over time, we will have a school of the future.
The Chairman: Minister Ng.
Mr Ng Chee Meng: Mdm Chairman, with reference to educators for schools of the future, some things are evergreen. As I have assured Dr Intan Azura Mokhtar just now, the very core must be founded on good character and values. So, our educators must continue to inculcate such values in our children. As we move forward, given the new opportunities and challenges, we should not focus on the mechanics of learning but, as I have said, inculcate in our kids the joy of learning, an internal engine with which they will keep learning, whether they are seven years old or 70 years old, so that they have this internal engine to guide them to learn new skills throughout their lives.
In summary, I will tell Ms Denise Phua, I do envisage that our future educators will be able to nurture the drive of our children, assist in building their competencies and skills, but, most importantly, their strength of character to guide them to succeed in the future.
With reference to DSA, with the different changes, as we have said, the intent is to recognise diverse talents, enabling our children to excel in their talents in specific domains. We are not looking for general abilities. When we put the different processes that I have articulated in place, I do expect that talents, like what I have seen in St Theresa's Convent where they are passionate in hockey. This is like the example of a young man I also quoted last year, that with his passion in basketball, he decided not to go to a popular school but went instead to another school. These are the things where we want to expand the possibilities for our children, move away from narrow-scoping on what defines a good school and a popular school, but find the best fit for the child to succeed in his talent and strengths, and partner with the community also where we want to introduce more parental co-ownership for events in schools so that the schools, parents and the community can come together to ensure that DSA works.
But first of all, as we have emphasised in our speeches, move away from the over-emphasis on academic results.
The Chairman: Minister of State Janil.
Dr Janil Puthucheary: Mdm Chairman, I want to thank Ms Denise Phua for her very bold and ambitious suggestion, one that will certainly require quite a lot of consideration from a variety of Government agencies and stakeholders.
If I could start with the premise that she has put forward that we have to find ways to improve the effectiveness of the educators and the people who are working with children with special needs. We agree on that. I would also suggest that everybody involved agrees on that − MOE, MSF, our VWOs, community partners and also the groups of therapists and other professionals working within the SPED space. The issue then is how to achieve that. A specific academy is very bold and ambitious and, perhaps, there are several steps we need to consider first before we are in a position to be able to do something as bold and ambitious as that. I think it is worth studying and looking at.
There are several lines that need to be blurred and it is reflective of the difficulty of making progress in terms of excellence within SPED. It is very hard to do research. Any jurisdiction around the world would have different models of education, policy and SPED delivery. So, to be absolutely sure that you are doing the right thing on the basis of somebody else's model, we have to do it on the basis of our own model. It is very difficult to delineate lines between professions. Many of the professional responsibilities are shared across the therapists with the educators. There are lines that need to be blurred between mainstream education and SPED education, between employers and educators, between administrators and the professionals.
Some of these things require a sort of complex approach involving multiple agencies and stakeholders before we can even think about arriving at something singular, like a SPED Academy.
But I want to reassure Ms Phua that all the stakeholders involved have the same intent, which is, how can we improve the professionalism and expertise, either from an educator or other professionals' point of view, that we bring to bear to deliver the best possible education for all children, including those with special needs? And that is so, and everybody involved would like for us to be as excellent as possible in delivering these services.
So, we have the same intent, and we can explore the various modalities. The Member's suggestion of some form of a centre of excellence around special education is a very good one. We will look at how we can make that possible.
The Chairman: Mr Gan Thiam Poh.
Mr Gan Thiam Poh: Madam, I have a question for the Parliamentary Secretary. I thank him for updating us on the development of NAFA and LASALLE.
Presently, I understand that those colleges have collaborated with foreign universities to offer design-related degree courses. My question is: will the Ministry consider allowing them to upgrade to become arts universities and offer degrees to their students?
The Chairman: Parliamentary Secretary Faishal Ibrahim.
Assoc Prof Dr Muhammad Faishal Ibrahim: I thank the Member for the question. I share the hope and aspiration highlighted by Mr Gan Thiam Poh. As the two institutions, NAFA and LASALLE, improve their capabilities, build up in terms of offering degree programmes with what they are doing now, and also improve their quality and programmes, I do not preclude the possibility of allowing them to award degrees in their own name in the future.
However, I feel that they are not ready yet. That is why in my speech, I shared that we are working with both of them on a road map to enhance the standards of their programmes and to better prepare their students for the workforce. I feel that if we succeed in this, we will be able to enrich the landscape for young Singaporeans who wish to pursue their interests in the creative arts at the degree level. This, in itself, in my view, will raise the overall image of the creative arts as a career.
The Chairman: Dr Intan Mokhtar.
Dr Intan Azura Mokhtar: Madam, just two questions. The first is, I am very heartened that MOE and the schools have a lot of initiatives to develop character and values amongst students. But we must recognise that it is not the sole responsibility of schools. Parents have an equally important, if not more important, role in this. Are there plans to increase parental involvement, for example, in outdoor learning, or even in community work, so that they are involved together with their children?
The second question is on the technical diploma. Would the technical diploma programme consider taking in working adults who do not have formal certification and who may have probably not completed their secondary school education so they do not have GCE \"O\" or \"N\" Levels, but now they want to upgrade themselves so that they have better job prospects?
The Chairman:\tWe are running out of time. There are so many hands up. So, please keep your clarifications and responses short. Thank you. Minister Ng.
Mr Ng Chee Meng: Mdm Chairman, we will do that. In terms of getting parents involved, yes, through a few things. One, last year, the Values in Action (VIA) programme where we get kids to learn cleaning. In the middle of last year, we actually got them to bring little booklets home to do chores together with their parents so that the learning is not just in school, but also at home. They do many good things together.
Outdoor learning and community work, yes, we are exploring how we can do that better.
The Chairman:\tMr Leon Perera.
Mr Ong Ye Kung:\tThere is a second question, Madam, by Dr Intan.
The Chairman:\tPlease proceed.
Mr Ong Ye Kung:\tThe new ITE Technical Diploma is for ITE students graduating with a Nitec or Higher Nitec. It is specifically for this group to upgrade to a Technical Diploma. As for the GCE \"O\" and \"N\" Level groups that the Member has mentioned earlier, if they work for a few years, I think the upgrading pathways for them is perhaps an ITE Nitec or Higher Nitec. It can be done part-time or full-time. We should be open for such workers to come into the system to learn again.
The Chairman:\tMr Leon Perera.
Mr Leon Perera:\tMadam, just one brief clarification point to the Minister for Education (Schools). I thank him for his comments on the issue of class size, which is different from student-teacher ratio. I would like to ask the Minister: would he consider the class sizes that we have right now as optimal and, if not, what would be the optimal class size that MOE would want to move towards in the future years?
Mr Ng Chee Meng:\tMdm Chairman, I thank the Member for the question. I cannot give him a specific class size today in our schools, because it ranges from 20 sometimes in the primary schools; to 40 in the secondary schools; and from eight to 10 in classes for students who need extra help. There is a range of class sizes. It is a little bit different from when we were growing up, where a form class and a teaching class is 40. Today, even though administratively, we organise a class according to 40 students, we do many different forms of educating our kids. In subject-based banding, we also have pupils who will go into separate classes to learn. It is a little bit more dynamic and we do create many more pathways, even in the schools itself, for the kids to move around.
The Chairman: Dr Lim Wee Kiak.
Dr Lim Wee Kiak:\t Chairman, I would like to seek a clarification from the Minister of State regarding the after-school care service that is school-based. He mentioned that the current supply itself actually meets demand. But why are we still seeing so many parents coming to us? What is the current vacancy or waiting time for the current school-based after-school services?
Dr Janil Puthucheary:\tI thank the Member for the question. Mdm Chairman, the supply largely does meet the demand. There are some localised areas where there are some waiting lists, and the SCCs will try to prioritise families in need. But I think the key issue is that we are ramping up the supply so that future demand can be well met. I take the Member's point that there are localised areas where there is a waiting time and we are trying our best to solve this.
The Chairman:\tMr Pritam Singh.
Mr Pritam Singh:\tJust a quick question for Minister Ong. With regard to public communication on both the demand and supply side of skills upgrading courses that are available, does the Ministry have any plans to raise public awareness of some of these courses? The signature of SkillsFuture is so large that people do focus quite a lot on the courses that they can choose with their SkillsFuture credits, but on the supply side, are there any plans to raise awareness as well?
Mr Ong Ye Kung: I am really happy the Member realised the challenge because SkillsFuture Credit has generated so much excitement.
On the supply side, one of the problems − and it is for a valid reason − is that we tend to work with partners, be it industry associations, e2i and NTUC and so we also let them brand it. Take, for example, PCP. It rides on the tools of SkillsFuture. The programme is actually a SkillsFuture programme, but MOM takes it, brands it as PCP and delivers it to workers to help them convert their careers.
Individual implementation agencies have their own branding, but SkillsFuture is behind it. So, maybe we are a little bit like Intel. In many computers, there is \"Intel inside\". So, there is SkillsFuture inside every programme.
The Chairman:\tMr Edwin Tong.
Mr Edwin Tong Chun Fai:\tA clarification to the Minister. On the question of applying discretion to a child who has not met the cut-off points, I think the answer was that there is DSA available to the child. But would the Minister agree that this issue of DSA, applying that context is actually quite different? Because a child may have missed the cut-off point for a number of reasons and the school may wish to take the child for any number of reasons, such as the child has got good service and leadership records in the school, such as the child may be a head prefect or vice head prefect, something which is not easily captured or there is no equivalent in the DSA system.
Mr Ng Chee Meng: Mdm Chairman, I understand the Member's question. But we must look at the Primary 6 Posting Exercise in totality, from DSA all the way to PSLE. For those leadership skills that we value, they could have the full discretion at the DSA stage for admissions. At the PSLE results stage, we need to ensure that our posting system is fair and transparent.
If there is a consideration for such traits and skills that could have been demonstrated in DSA before, then it will lead to many, many permutations. As I have said before, DSA first. We do all the different assessments of talents, skills, all the different areas that we want to nurture. Once we have the PSLE results, we want a fair and transparent system to ensure all students are fairly posted.
The Chairman:\tMr Low Thia Khiang.
Mr Low Thia Khiang:\tI refer to my cut on the education loan. I understand that there is the Tuition Fee Loan scheme by the public-funded institutions. Would the Minister not agree that there are courses that are offered not by public-funded institutions, for instance, a diploma in teaching of Chinese and translation offered by the Singapore Chinese Chamber of Commerce and Industry Institute of Business which costs about $5,000 to $6,000 and the Government loan will probably come in handy to encourage people to take up such courses that are relevant to their career?
Mr Ong Ye Kung: I thank the Member for clarifying his question. If it costs $5,000 to $6,000, my sense is that it is probably not even subsidised in the first place. I think we support a programme, on the supply side, if it really does help the worker raise their skills, find better jobs or become more employable. If it does not, then we should avoid funding them. We do get a fair amount of pressure, different people wanting different kinds of courses, even though we know that those courses are not so useful. The pressure is always there, so we are quite selective.
But in this case, if it is really a useful course, we should look at whether we should subsidise it. And if we subsidise it, it becomes more affordable and then maybe we do not even need a loan. Because if you look at a Diploma now, it costs about $2,000 to get a part-time Diploma. People do part-time Diplomas because they are also working at the same time and, therefore, they can afford the subsidised fee. I would say, for this particular instance, we should look at whether we should subsidise it. I would be happy to look at it.
The Chairman:\tMs Thanaletchimi.
Ms K Thanaletchimi: Madam, I have three clarifications. One is on mindset change. How prepared are our Statutory Boards, Government-linked companies and Civil Service in embracing or recognising modular training or e-learning by new job entrants?
The second question is with regards SkillsFuture Credit. Have we done a gender-based analysis or properly analysed which are the courses that are predominantly taken by the female cohorts, compared to the male cohorts?
The third question is: has the Ministry considered, in order to encourage more people to take up STEM courses, can we have a scholarship allocated for female students in the IHLs?
Mr Ong Ye Kung: On Statutory Boards, many of them have come forward, as I have mentioned earlier, in providing \"learning by doing\" programmes. As to whether they will recognise modular training, I think we have to strike a balance.
On one hand, we do not want Statutory Boards and employers to only look at formal qualifications. We also want to look at the interests and skills of the person. On the other hand, we also cannot swing all the way to say that we accept every modular training and e-learning because there are so many. We can learn a lot of things now just by watching YouTube videos, going on Coursera and Udemy. So, I think we need a balance point. We want to move away from just purely looking at qualifications but not swing all the way. That is a continuous process.
On SkillsFuture Credit, if I remember correctly, as of the last update, 55% of the claims were by women, so I think women do use the credits very actively.
Lastly, whether we should have scholarships for females for STEM, by and large, I am not in favour of putting gender-based quotas of any sorts, including for scholarships. Our women are capable of doing very well in a range of fields even though they have to manage family responsibilities and parental responsibilities. My view is that we should support women in their multiple responsibilities, and I am sure that they can do very well in many, many fields.
The Chairman:\tMr Png Eng Huat.
Mr Png Eng Huat (Hougang):\t Madam, just a quick clarification for Minister Ng. Does MOE take the higher school fees and contributions from wealthy alumni into account when providing funding to the schools?
Mr Ng Chee Meng:\tMdm Chairman, I thank the Member for the question. No, we do not take that into account. It is an extra source of income and, in a way, it is getting community involvement in supporting our schools.
The Chairman:\tMs Denise Phua, do you wish to withdraw your amendment?
Ms Denise Phua Lay Peng: Madam, I would like to thank the Government Parliamentary Committee (GPC) for Education and all the Members who have put in all the questions and, of course, the Ministers, Minister of State, Parliamentary Secretaries and the rest of the MOE team for the good and diligent work that they are doing in helping us to secure the future for Singapore. And with that, I beg leave to withdraw my amendment.
[(proc text) Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. (proc text)]
[(proc text) The sum of $12,115,000,000 for Head K ordered to stand part of the Main Estimates. (proc text)]
[(proc text) The sum of $785,000,000 for Head K ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates. (proc text)]
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Committee of Supply − Head M (Ministry of Finance)","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OS","content":"Mr Liang Eng Hwa (Holland-Bukit Timah): Mdm Chairman, I beg to move, \"That the total sum to be allocated for Head M of the Estimates be reduced by $100\".
During the Budget Statement speech, the Minister for Finance announced that a permanent 2% downward adjustment to the budget caps of all Ministries and Organs of State will apply from financial year (FY) 2017 onwards.
Mdm Chairman, I support this measure and the emphasis to spend judiciously and to do more and better with less. A 2% cost adjustment is a reasonable decremental target to work on and the public sector agencies should use the exercise as impetus to review its organisation and its policy implementation, modus operandi to improve its efficiency and, importantly, as a result, to cut red tape. Rather than go on penny-wise mode, the Ministries and agencies should look to trim down costs by way of re-engineering existing processes and streamlining workflows. Thoughtful harnessing of technologies should be considered in every aspect to improve productivity and service delivery. This will benefit both the public and the public sector employees as well.
There are excellent examples by the Public Service agencies which have done more and which have done well with less. One example that comes to mind is the Inland Revenue Authority of Singapore (IRAS) with regard to their efforts to simplify the tax system and their effective use of technology. Its 24/7, one-stop self-service MyTax portal and the no-filing service offer taxpayers a hassle-free way to manage their tax returns.
The outcomes are most impressive. The cost of tax collection by IRAS is among the lowest in the world, and among the lowest rates of arrears as well. And the taxpayers' satisfaction surveys ranked high consistently.
The concept of \"no need for service is the best service\" is clearly demonstrated here. If such service philosophy and strategy can be replicated extensively within the public sector, we would have made a quantum leap in not just the efficient delivery of public service but also deliver positive experience to the public. We have to ask, why not?
I note that digital transformation of Government services is already on the Ministry of Finance's (MOF's) and many Ministries' to-do list. The Committee on the Future Economy (CFE) has also recommended to intensify digitisation and to leverage data as a key enabling asset to transform the economy. The sooner we become a digital nation where interacting digitally is citizens' everyday way of life, the sooner we can reap the benefits and advantages of a smart economy. That, in itself, opens up new possibilities.
The public sector must be early adopters in this digitisation drive and be prepared to try out newer and innovative digital solutions to improve bureaucracy and, hence, benefit society at large.
Of course, as we digitise, along the way, we may inevitably encounter some bugs or blind spots in the initial implementation. It is not uncommon to have minor glitches in new information technology (IT) rollouts for large organisations as well. There may be criticism from the public and complaints for the inconvenience caused. We should take all these in our stride, learn from the mistakes, quickly rectify the gaps and continue to press on with bold and necessary digitisation efforts. I would appreciate if the Minister can provide an update on the Government's digitisation efforts and the results so far.
Moving on to another area, Government procurement. At last year's MOF's Committee of Supply (COS) debate, Members had raised about using Government procurement to support innovation and capability-building by small and medium enterprises (SMEs). Many jurisdictions have already practised this approach and we should move on this as well.
I was, hence, delighted to hear at this year's Ministry of Trade and Industry's (MTI's) COS that the Government will launch a new scheme known as the Government's enhanced Partnerships for Capability Transformation (Gov-PACT) where SMEs can leverage Government-led demand to participate and offer innovative solutions, in the process, strengthening their new capabilities and track record.
This is a good start and I would like to ask the Minister how we could push the frontier further to help more new startups in this area. How would the Government agencies resource themselves to carry out such procurement in an extensive way?
[(proc text) Question proposed. (proc text)]
The Chairman: Ms Foo Mee Har.
Ms Foo Mee Har (West Coast): Madam, CFE has recommended the pervasive adoption of digital technologies across all sectors of the Singapore economy to transform our economy and create new growth and job opportunities.
For a start, the Government should lead the way to transform the delivery of Government services with digitalisation. I would like to ask the Minister for an update on efforts invested by the Government, as part of the Smart Nation initiative, to transform the public sector and make it more innovative and effective. How pervasive is the use of technology in making it easier and more efficient for businesses and citizens to interact with the Government? Is there a master plan for the deployment of digitalisation and innovative technology across Government agencies, with clear targets and key performance indicators (KPIs)?
My residents often share the frustrations of having to provide and submit the same data and documents for different Ministries to verify. The Government should really adopt a whole-of-Government approach in data collection and leverage technology to improve efficiency and service delivery by eliminating the need for citizens to provide the same data repeatedly. So, I would like to ask the Minister what constraints the Government agencies face in sharing information among themselves and how digitalisation can contribute to the solution.
Finally, the Government is in a good position to develop frameworks and infrastructure to lay the foundations for smart digital platforms that businesses can leverage and build upon. For example, data has been recognised as the most important asset for business success. So, how can businesses leverage data captured by the Government to build deep insights, new capabilities and solutions?
Mr Saktiandi Supaat (Bishan-Toa Payoh): Mdm Chairman, with more people turning to technology for their daily needs, from shopping to checking their bank statements, it is important to improve service delivery through digitalisation. What is the Government doing to make digital services for citizens easier to access and more convenient to use? Common grouses I hear from the residents include difficulties to use the two-factor authentication and one-time passwords to access Government services for e-transactions, especially among the older generation. Some older residents find themselves having to waste a lot of time getting hold of a customer service officer via phone to get a walk-through. I believe it is a waste of productivity as well for the customer service officers who could be doing something else. I understand the need for additional security measures. Is there anything that can be done to make this more hassle-free for everyone involved? For example, maybe we can have embracing digital for senior volunteers, whether they are humans or maybe bots speaking in Hokkien or Teochew in community clubs (CCs), for example, as we step up our widespread digitalisation for e-services.
With regard to businesses, what is the Government doing to make it more efficient for them to transact with the Government? There are so many grants and rebates out there, so it can get overwhelming. What can be done to simplify application processes as well as time and effort taken to process the applications?
The Chairman: Mr Low Thia Khiang. Please take your two cuts together.
Mr Low Thia Khiang (Aljunied): Madam, I would like to call on the Government to consider setting up an independent office for budgetary responsibility that provides expert, non-partisan, open-source analysis of the Government's budgetary plans and is accountable to Parliament.
I believe an independent fiscal watchdog is necessary since the Government has been concerned with the rising expenditures in recent years, and the Minister for Finance raises the prospect of tax increases. The public will be interested to know the effect of public expenditure and its actual impact on our fiscal position by an organisation independent of the Government by providing expert analysis.
I believe that no individual outside the Government has the expertise to analyse each year's Budget in much depth, and I believe that Parliament and Singaporeans would benefit from the in-depth analysis provided by an independent fiscal watchdog. Such an office also helps to improve fiscal governance by holding the Government more accountable through better transparency.
There are countries that have an independent budgetary office. The United Kingdom (UK) Office for Budgetary Responsibility was established in 2010, and its missions are: one, to produce detailed five-year forecasts for the economy and public finances; two, judge the Government's performance against its fiscal targets; three, assess long-term fiscal sustainability; four, evaluate fiscal risks; and five, scrutinise the Government's costing measures.
The independent analysis of such an office can also provide input to the Elected President on whether or not to veto Supply Bills, should the Government wish to draw on Reserves not accumulated by the current Government. Given that this is one of the most important decisions the President might have to make, there should be a non-partisan, professional and specialised outfit putting out independent assessments to assist the Elected President.
Madam, the Minister for Finance appears to be laying the ground to prepare Singaporeans for a rise in taxes. He said, and I quote, \"We will have to raise revenues through new taxes or raise tax rates\" to keep our finances sustainable. I would, therefore, like to ask the Minister: what are the new forms of taxes that he is considering? What are the Ministry's considerations in introducing new taxes? And what are the principles guiding these considerations?
There has been widespread speculation that the Government is looking to raise the Goods and Services Tax (GST), with experts and journalists suggesting that it is no longer a matter of whether the Government will do it; it is simply a matter of when.
I would like to ask the Minister: is he planning a GST increase as a revenue measure before the end of the decade? If so, when is he looking to implement this increase in GST, and by how much?
It is widely recognised that GST is a regressive tax that hurts the poor much more than it hurts the rich, which is why the Government has been providing GST Vouchers in an effort to correct the impact on lower-income households. However, GST Vouchers do not fully offset the amount of GST paid by lower-income households. I would like to know whether the Government has exhausted all other cost-cutting and revenue measures and, hence, have to raise taxes.
If the Minister is, indeed, considering an increase in GST before the end of the decade, I hope he can be upfront with Singaporeans now so that they are not blindsided by the Government, as they were with the sudden 30% increase in water price.
Assoc Prof Daniel Goh Pei Siong (Non-Constituency Member): Madam, I would like to ask the Minister to consider temporarily deferring the collection of personal income tax from workers who have been retrenched or made redundant.
Typically, more workers are retrenched in the first and fourth quarters of each year than in the second and third quarters. This means that these workers would have earned enough income to be taxed, and their tax liability becomes an additional drain on savings that they have to factor in. Workers who have signed on to the General Interbank Recurring Order (GIRO) payments will experience ongoing tax deductions even during the period of unemployment, either monthly, or in a lump sum, and if they are unable to pay up, they are slapped with a late payment penalty.
I would like to propose that workers who have been retrenched or made redundant be allowed to defer payment of all personal income tax for a period of six months, or until the worker receives fresh Central Provident Fund (CPF) contributions for the new job, whichever is sooner. The six-month deferment would be in line with the duration used in labour policy for retrenchments.
Giving laid-off workers the option of deferring payment of their personal income tax would help to alleviate some financial stress, especially for middle-class workers. It will give them room to plan their finances so that their families can be better prepared to tide over the period of unemployment. It will also give them some psychological security during the transitional period to focus their energies on training and seeking re-employment.
Assoc Prof Randolph Tan (Nominated Member): Mdm Chairman, the United States (US) administration has been reported as considering radical tax changes which could see a drastic lowering of corporate income tax rates.
As Minister Chan Chun Sing mentioned in his speech on Wednesday during the Budget debate last week, tax competition is a major concern for Singapore, and it determines to a large extent our policy on corporate and personal income tax rates.
At the moment, Singapore has one of the most competitive tax regimes in the world. Together with our infrastructural quality and skilled workforce, this has enabled us to attract significant amounts of foreign direct investments (FDIs). Usually, we would consider economies, such as Hong Kong and Luxembourg, as being more comparable as competitors. The tax rates in major economies, such as the US, UK and Japan, have always been much higher.
By virtue of its size, the relative strength of the US economy and its value as a consumer market, any move by the new US administration to improve its tax competitiveness will refresh its attractiveness to investors and have major repercussions on its competitors. It could spark similar moves by other economies.
Intensified tax competition from large economies will increase the number of economies which investors consider in deciding where to put their money. This will affect our ability to attract FDIs in future. These challenges are of particular concern in the current context, in light of the setback from the abandonment of the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) and other global challenges.
What is the Ministry's strategy should such a scenario unfold? How severely would a US tax cut affect our ability to maintain a sustainable tax regime?
Mr Leon Perera (Non-Constituency Member): Mdm Chairperson, there are many prominent examples of former civil servants and military officers who have taken up senior appointments in GLCs. Often, such transitions happen when the individual is in his 40s. There are many examples of such appointments in the past, and some are also still currently serving.
Madam, I have no doubt that the possibility of senior civil servants and military officers moving to GLCs when they reach a certain age helps us attract good talent to the Civil Service and Armed Forces, and that is not a negligible benefit. Young people contemplating a career in the Civil Service and Armed Forces would know that there is a pathway to enable them to move into the private sector should they choose to do so.
However, has MOF considered if this benefit outweighs the potential downside, which is that our GLCs' senior posts may be filled by individuals who lack experience in their respective industries? Has MOF analysed the performance of GLCs during periods when they are headed by a former civil servant or army officer versus periods when they are headed by an industry veteran or a private sector veteran to see if there are any differences in business performance and organisational effectiveness? If so, what have been the findings? If not, would the Ministry consider doing such an analysis?
Dr Tan Wu Meng (Jurong):\tMadam, corporate regulations are necessary, but too much can hurt innovation and be regressive because it is the big players who can hire an entire team of compliance officers. Does MOF track the amount of corporate regulation, for example, how long it takes to fill up a form, how many forms or steps are needed to attain a specific administrative objective? And is there an active effort to minimise and streamline red tape?
Mr Kwek Hian Chuan Henry (Nee Soon): Madam, Government demand is a very important part of total business demand. As such, Government procurement policies impact our businesses, especially the SMEs. Is there more that the Government can do to ensure that Government procurement contracts, especially those related to construction, maintenance and transportation that usually go beyond hundreds and millions, are not unnecessarily big, which could have the unintended effect of crowding out SMEs from competing effectively in terms of Government procurement?
Mr Chen Show Mao (Aljunied): Madam, the importance of Government-led demand to our small and medium enterprises has been very much rehearsed in these COS proceedings for other Ministries.
Through the Government procurement experience, SMEs get to build not only their track record, but also the capabilities they need to be competitive at home and outside Singapore in the internationalisation drive. Could we complement these efforts and facilitate these outcomes by refinements or enhancements to our Government procurement practice, subject, of course, to alignment with international standards and obligations and the underlying principles of fairness, transparency and value for money.
Could the scope of work be more finely delineated, for example, by specific types of requirements so that different SMEs may take on different parts of the work? This could help them enter into collaborations and form consortiums to bid for higher value contracts in the future. Could SMEs which have niche technologies relevant to the work be engaged through research partnerships with the Government Technology Agency (GovTech) or other agencies?
Madam, our SMEs contribute half of our gross domestic product (GDP) and employ 70% of our workforce and have won the substantial majority of Government tenders under our open procurement system in recent years, both by number and the value of contracts. However, due to their large numbers and variety, it is estimated that less than 5% of our SMEs secure Government projects. Last year, the first Government procurement fair was held, in part, to encourage SMEs to participate in the Government procurement process. Could we look into possible enhancements and refinements to the process that could help even more of them to do so?
Miss Cheryl Chan Wei Ling (Fengshan): Madam, with several upcoming infrastructural projects in Singapore, there will be opportunities for companies to participate in the supply of goods and services to these projects. Understandably, local SMEs and some startups are curious how they can contribute and be a part of the growth.
Will the Government be using more innovative methods to assess the solution providers? For these companies, can the Government provide some insights to a few aspects?
One, subcontracting of projects. For companies which wish to subcontract specific modules or areas of supply within a mega project, will the Government provide this option instead of having the smaller companies to bid from the main contractor? This will provide better accountability and enable a fairer share of profit margins.
Do the Government agencies provide opportunities to SMEs or startups during the regular business period to demonstrate their products' and services' capability? Through this regular assessment, the SMEs which are successful in meeting base criteria could be placed on a list of preferred suppliers for potential invitation to future bids by the agencies.
Two, digitalisation. For projects under the Government agencies, sometimes it is difficult for new digital solutions to be directly adaptable to an existing system, even if it proves to be a better option. Part of this could be due to sensitivity of information or compatibility of different systems, particularly those that straddle across functions. Would this result in the status quo of suppliers and lack of diversity to maximise an optimal outcome in our roadmap?
Three, impact of regulatory sandboxes and intellectual property (IP) access. This initiative is intended to allow some relaxation of rules to promote innovation. It is a welcome move for novel and unproven concepts. But, if faced with a situation where there is a handful of new startups with similar end markets, what are the guiding principles in the Ministries' consideration for relaxing the framework to ensure a level playing field from the onset? Would this actually be the same basis that complicates the work for the IP intermediary under the Standards, Productivity and Innovation Board (SPRING) Singapore to decide who can best access the associated IPs?
Mr Saktiandi Supaat: Madam, the Budget has introduced many measures for the business community this year. I am glad to note the strong focus on preparing SMEs for the future economy. However, while clearly a lot of thought has been put into medium- to long-term measures to help SMEs in the long run, I am concerned about the smaller players who may already be struggling. I hope the Government can give SMEs more procurement opportunities to help them cope in the short term.
Last year, it was reported that SMEs were winning more than 60% of total Government contract value and about 85% of all Government tenders over the last three years. This is good news and I urge that this momentum be maintained or even improved upon.
With bigger players and more foreign companies entering Singapore and the economy being lacklustre, I am concerned that the SMEs will falter against the stronger competition. I would like to ask what procurement efforts are in place to support the CFE recommendations and ensure that local companies are getting a significant share of the pie. How will they be rolled out and how will they benefit SMEs? As SMEs have clearly proven capable of handling Government tenders and projects, I urge the Government to set aside at least 60% of total Government contract values for them. In addition, award one-third of all Government tenders —
The Chairman:\tMr Saktiandi, you have to stop.
Mr Saktiandi Supaat: — to smaller SMEs with a turnover of less than $10 million.
Mr Yee Chia Hsing (Chua Chu Kang): Madam, Government procurement needs vary and range from simple low-value purchases to complex multimillion-dollar construction contracts.
Whilst we recognise the principles of value for money, transparency and open and fair competition in our procurement process, have we seen an increase in the award of Government contracts to our SMEs? Are there any specific procurement approaches that various agencies are embarking on to support innovation and growth in our industries and help the SMEs access these procurement opportunities?
I hope we can help our local SMEs build their track record and credibility to participate not just in our local market, but potential overseas markets as well. This increase in opportunities will also enable the growth of job opportunities for Singaporeans.
Ms Sun Xueling (Pasir Ris-Punggol): Madam, Government-led demand can be a powerful means to support innovation and growth in new industries. But it must be structured correctly to maximise participation from the private sectors, attracting interest from both large and small companies while remaining accountable to taxpayers' monies.
Can the Ministry share on the range of procurement approaches that the agencies are using to maximise the positive externalities from Government-led demand as well as the measures in place to prevent abuses?
Further, how does the Ministry ensure that contracts awarded do not subsequently create an incumbency advantage for the awardee arising from the project solution implemented? This is possible, for instance, in information and communications technology (ICT) projects, where subsequent add-on solutions by other players are not possible because of the initial project design.
The Chairman: Dr Tan Wu Meng, please take your two cuts together.
Dr Tan Wu Meng: Madam, value for money matters. But there are positive externalities to building a resilient local SME ecosystem like jobs, opportunities and skills for Singaporeans at home.
What measures is MOF taking in procurement so that smaller players like SMEs have a chance to participate? Can larger projects be split into smaller tenders – right size, bite size?
Next, contractors in major Government tenders can have a certain signature. They receive substantial public funds. They shape labour market norms.
When evaluating tenders, does MOF consider the human resource (HR) and tripartism record of tendering companies, especially if the company may have a history of significant HR bad practices? After all, Madam, awarding a contract is a form of endorsement to the market and society.
Mr Zainal Sapari (Pasir Ris-Punggol): Madam, Government procurement policies can set the benchmark for the private sector to follow. I would like to encourage that Government procurement practices be improved further because it can shape procurement behaviour and set the stage for better service provider and service buyer relationships that will ultimately benefit our workers.
I have three suggestions towards fairer procurement practices.
First, a fair clause for a contract validity period to allow for prices to be agreed upon and also allow for price variations, including that for option years should there be any unforeseen changes in Government policy, for example, mandatory adoption of the Progressive Wage Model (PWM) and announcement of National Wages Council (NWC) guidelines during this period. This will allow service providers to factor in any cost increases.
Second, a termination clause that allows for reasonable engagement by both parties to address any issues, as well as enable both sides to give notice for early termination based on the agreed terms and conditions should issues remain unresolved. This will ensure that the workers' sense of job security is not compromised.
Third, liquidated damages should not be punitive but used as a professional tool to reasonably compensate service buyers for non-compliance of service standards. In current practice, service buyers often dictate liquidated damages for service lapses and this is often blown out of proportion or used as a \"cost-saving\" measure.
With greater transparency in contractual obligations, it can create a level playing field for all businesses and encourage better gain-sharing practices that will benefit workers when the worries of unnecessary costs are alleviated with fair contracts and best practices.
Mr Edwin Tong Chun Fai (Marine Parade): Madam, I tried this last year. I will try again this year with a few extra minutes added to my clock.
Madam, not everyone who lives in private estates is financially independent or self-sufficient. Many of them, especially retirees and elderly singles, need a measure of financial assistance, even though they may, at the same time, live in or own a private property.
If we accept the above proposition as being true, then something has to be done about the way in which we means-test and administer assistance and social transfers. One of the key assessment criteria in our means-testing programmes − and I accept and acknowledge that there is a whole range of these programmes − is the annual value of a home in which they live in, not own, but live in.
For instance, the Silver Support scheme. This is only for Housing and Development Board (HDB) dwellers, with the amount of payout dependent on the HDB flat type. Likewise, the U-Save vouchers and the service and conservancy charges (S&CC) rebates are only applicable to HDB dwellers. Or the Workfare Income Supplement (WIS). To even qualify, applicants must be staying, not owning, in a property not exceeding an annual value of $13,000. Likewise, grants and subsidies, such as the special outpatient clinic, foreign domestic worker grants, all of them include the annual value of the home as one of the eligible cumulative criteria.
WIS has been part of our social safety net since 2007. It is meant to incentivise less educated Singaporeans in the older age group to enter and stay in the workforce. Why then should this turn on what type of housing the applicant stays in as long as the other income criteria are also met?
It suggests to me that the annual value has become too much as a simple surrogate for accessing eligibility criteria for financial assistance. The annual value is frequently used as a measure of wealth, but it is really not. In a publication by the Department of Statistics titled \"Key Household Income Trends 2016\", HDB dwellers, on average, received about four times the amount of Government transfers when compared to private estate dwellers in the same year in 2016.
I am not against using accessible income or annual value as one of the indicators. We have to start somewhere. But it cannot be the start point and end point for such a measure. Nor can it be the only measure. I believe we can and should do more to refine our means-testing criteria so that it is no longer a blunt and ineffective tool. It may be simple to administer, but it is not the most equitable.
First, whilst the ability to afford private housing may generally be indicative of wealth, there are clear exceptions. And these undoubtedly include a number of residents, especially elderly ones, who have no income and little savings. The same report by the Department of Statistics in 2016 found that 6.5% of households in the lowest 10% of monthly household income live in private properties. The landed properties in which some of them live, tend to be old and ill-maintained. And their elderly inhabitants usually struggle with their day-to-day expenses.
For this group, their private or even landed houses are not indicators of wealth, but simply a home where they have lived their entire lives. They probably acquired it many years ago on very modest incomes but could never dream of being able to acquire it today. They are the classic asset-rich but cash-poor residents. Whatever \"wealth\" they possess is almost entirely locked up in their property and cannot be utilised. I would say it would be unrealistic to ask these persons to cash out, to unlock the value of their property by selling, uproot themselves in their golden years, depart from their daily routine, live away from the community they have grown accustomed to and their way of life just to cash out on their asset.
Second, in the means-test which includes the criterion for annual value, it applies, as I said earlier, irrespective of whether the resident actually owns the property or not. So, a person may be renting a home or even just a room in a home in a private house or apartment, or he may just be squatting at a friend's or relative's apartment on goodwill terms. In all of these cases, that person would not qualify for those programmes which consider as one of their means criteria the type of dwelling home in which they live. But surely, we agree that renting a small private apartment or a room in that apartment does not automatically mean that that person is financially better off than an HDB dweller. In fact, I would argue probably worse off.
Third, the annual value of $13,000 has been fixed as a threshold for the last five years at least, as far as I could tell. Leaving aside the fact that the $13,000 annual value is really a hypothetical value for persons who cannot or should not be made to unlock the value of their homes, it cannot be realised. The bar has actually been set pretty low. Thirteen thousand dollars in annual value means that any property which can fetch a market rent of about $1,100 per month would not qualify based on the latest 2016 fourth quarter median rental statistics, only 1- or 2-room HDB flats would then qualify. In other words, if a person lives in a property where the annual value is higher than a 1- or 2-room HDB flat, he or she would probably not qualify for the social assistance programme. And this comes on top of the fact that the annual values for properties are adjusted from time to time, based on market movements and with no correlation to that person's income status or income level.
Fourth, there is little, if any, consideration for the particular financial demands of the household in question, the individual's specific needs of the household in question. Each household is different. What could be a decent household income for a family of three or four could be very different for a multigenerational household with elderly parents and in-laws in need of medical care and, at the same time, young children in school.
We really have to look beyond just one measure of assessable income and annual value and consider other factors as well and also consider dependants who rely on that household income. Some of these cases could well be long-term chronic ones, but there are others which could be short term caused by sudden catastrophic events like the loss of a key family breadwinner or the loss of a job, or a sudden acute need for medical care. All of these are likely scenarios, but our means-testing criteria just do not respond well to any of these happening.
Consequently, there are families which, because of no or insufficient assistance rendered at the right time, fall into cracks and into acute difficulty. To take a leaf out of Minister Chan's ethos when he was at the Ministry of Social and Family Development (MSF), the critical challenge is how to ensure that today's middle income does not end up as tomorrow's bottom. To do that, our financial assistance and social transfers must be far more nimble and adept at identifying those who really need our help. Again, in Minister Chan's words, \"we have also to help the temporary poor, those who, for financial reasons, fall into hardship.\"
Madam, in closing, I would just leave the House with the quote that I found in the Guardian which, I think, aptly summaries the point I am trying to make, and it goes like this. This is a Guardian article in January 2013, \"Means testing hurts people who are neither very rich or very poor because there is always a cut-off point. Some who are far from well-off and who would generally benefit from them are excluded. There are also many people who seem comfortable to the outside world, but who do not necessarily feel so themselves. So, they are frugal for fear of rainy days, not realising that the rain has already come.\"
Mr Murali Pillai (Bukit Batok): Madam, many of our social assistance schemes or initiatives look at the gross total monthly household income or monthly household income per capita as a means-test or criterion for eligibility. Some examples are eligibility for the Community Health Assist Scheme (CHAS) or the Silver Support Scheme.
While household income may generally be a good indicator of need, I am concerned that there are situations where this criterion may paradoxically penalise those who have no choice but to live together with their families because of, amongst others, their financial situation.
For example, to be eligible for CHAS, an applicant's household monthly income per person must be $1,800 or below. Elderly persons without incomes who live apart from their working children would likely be able to meet this criterion and be eligible for CHAS. However, if they were to live together with their working children, the total household income per person may be beyond the $1,800 threshold. In such an event, they would not be eligible for CHAS.
I recognise that family care and support should be the first and most important port of call. However, household income as a criterion may have an asymmetrical effect on particularly our sandwich middle-income families who live with and support their elderly parents and parents-in-law. In such cases, where married couples have to support two sets of elderly parents as well as their children who all live in the same household, this may create a significant financial pressure on the couple even when the combined household income or household income per capita does not fall within the threshold amount for obtaining assistance.
On the other hand, richer families whose parents live apart from them will continue to benefit from the schemes since their elderly parents stand to receive subsidies. Support for such families, I respectfully submit, subverts the policy intent behind the schemes.
Minister Lim Swee Say, referring to the Silver Support Scheme, candidly recognises this anomaly in Parliament on 13 September 2016. He further postulated the possibility of migrating to a per capita family income basis at some point in the future.
I respectfully suggest that the faster the Government migrate to a per capita family income basis as a criterion, the better. With the migration, we will get a more accurate picture of the number of families at the relevant percentile level where the schemes are supposed to kick in and provide help. Once we get a more accurate picture, we can even provide a higher level of subsidy for low-income families from the subsidies redirected from richer families whose parents live separately without increasing the budget.
In this regard, I urge the Government to leverage data analytics to build our family trees. I also further suggest that we look at the Japanese family registration system known as the \"koseki\".
Assoc Prof Randolph Tan: Mdm Chairman, in 2007, expenditure on social transfers was 3.3 times that in 1997. In Budget 2017, expenditure on social transfers is more than six times that in 2007. On average, over the last 20 years, social transfer expenditures have been growing about three times the rate of growth in total expenditures. And this growth has accelerated, with the last 10 years seeing much faster growth than a decade before. Between 1997 and 2007, expenditure on social transfers rose as a proportion of total expenditures from 1.4% to 2.6%. By 2016, this had risen to 8%.
Madam, in 2017, we are seeing a slight pull-back. But the abovementioned total expenditures do not include special transfers. According to the detailed proposal for Budget 2017, on top of the $4 billion worth of social transfers, Special Transfers to Singaporean households will cost half a billion dollars, while Special Transfers to businesses, which include Workfare, will cost $2.1 billion. The current Budget continues with a regular practice of giving payouts which benefit very large numbers of recipients. For example, the one-off Special Payment will reach more than 1.3 million Singaporeans. Both the U-Save rebates and the S&CC rebates reach about 880,000 HDB households.
Unlike targeted schemes, because of the broad coverage, such payouts are spread very thin. Regular payouts of this sort are diffused in their impact and are not directly linked to structural outcomes.
There is no doubt that they play an important role in easing the transition to policy changes. But if they become more or less permanent, their value for this purpose becomes diminished. I am not asking for all forms of short-term reliefs to be curtailed. But we have to decide if it is a good idea for short-term relief to become more or less permanent entitlements. We should move away from a situation where households compete for more Government handouts towards the creation of a support structure that has forward-looking objectives.
The Second Minister for Finance (Mr Lawrence Wong): Mdm Chairman, I thank the Members for their comments and questions for MOF.
Three broad topics have been raised by Members. First, how the Government can help to build a stronger economy through digitalisation of Government services, procurement, corporate regulations and taxes. Second, there were queries on accountability, especially in relation to the Government's Budget and Government-linked companies. Third, areas to finetune our social schemes and programmes.
I will address the cuts on the first topic and Senior Minister of State Indranee will take the other cuts.
Madam, the key driver of the economy is our people and enterprises. But the Government can and will play an important enabling and facilitative role. Our efforts so far have yielded results. At the Budget Debate earlier, the Finance Minister mentioned the improvements in productivity growth over the recent years. Here, I would like to just clarify that he was, in fact, referring to the period from 2009, which was the year the Economic Strategies Committee (ESC) based its recommendations, to 2016, and productivity growth in that period, as measured by value-added per worker, was 2.1% per annum.
If we look at real value-added (VA) per actual hour worked, in other words, VA per hour, not VA per worker, so VA per hour, which is internationally viewed as a better measure of labour productivity growth, was 2.6% per annum over the same period.
These are positive results and we must build on this momentum.
Digitalisation efforts in the Public Service can play a role in our transformation efforts, and here I thank Mr Liang Eng Hwa, Ms Foo Mee Har and Mr Saktiandi Supaat for their suggestions.
Our efforts to build a Digital Government are not new. In fact, they started in the 1980s when we first pushed for computerisation in a big way in the Public Service. And we are continuing with this effort to more proactively use technology and data to improve our service delivery. In fact, now, we are giving this a much bigger push with our Smart Nation efforts which Minister Vivian Balakrishnan highlighted and shared last Thursday.
Our Digital Government efforts form an important part of the overall Smart Nation strategy. Here, MOF works closely with the Ministry of Communications and Information (MCI), the Public Service Division (PSD), the Smart Nation Programme Office and GovTech to drive the Digital Government agenda by setting clear goals and maintaining central oversight. These goals include enhancing the efficiency of our services and ensuring that citizens and businesses are satisfied with them.
As of 2015, nearly 90% of the most frequently used Government transactions can be conducted online. This is a significant increase from 76% in 2013. Based on a survey conducted last year, 77% of citizens said that they were very satisfied with Government digital services.
Our efforts have also received international recognition. In 2016, we maintained the top position on two rankings − the World Economic Forum's Global Information Technology Report Index as well as the Waseda-International Academy of Chief Information Officer (CIO) International e-Government ranking. These are international surveys which rank countries according to their efforts, results and potential in the area of Digital Government.
While we have done well, we should not be complacent. Advances in digital technologies are evolving rapidly and we have to keep up. As Minister of State Janil Puthucheary shared yesterday at MCI's COS, we also need to ensure that our digital services do not leave the elderly and the less tech-savvy behind, and extra support must always be there to help them when they need it. One example is the Silver Infocomm Initiative which helps our elderly stay connected.
Our aim is to make Government digital services more pervasive, more user-friendly for both businesses and citizens, young and old. We want users to be able to transact smoothly with minimal assistance. Let me outline three broad approaches to achieve this.
First, we will do more to customise digital services to the needs of different stakeholders. Several Government agencies have already been doing this. I am glad that Mr Liang mentioned just now the efforts of IRAS. Indeed, in January this year, IRAS released the first phase of its redesigned MyTax Portal, which is more intuitive and mobile-optimised so that you can file taxes on your smartphone. Of the users surveyed, 90% expressed no difficulty in accessing the services after the revamp, as compared to 40% before. So, it is a significant improvement.
Second, we will leverage technology to simplify and streamline online services. As Ms Foo Mee Har mentioned just now, one inconvenience and constant bugbear that Members hear from people is that they have to submit the same data repeatedly to different Government agencies.
To address this, we launched MyInfo last year which allows citizens to automatically fill up digital forms with just one click. So, this will reduce the time spent filling up forms or having to submit supporting documents like the CPF statement repeatedly to different agencies.
Later this year, all SingPass users will be able to make use of this MyInfo service to automatically prefill their basic details like the name, National Registration Identity Card (NRIC), address and contact number, as soon as an online form loads. So, it will be an automatic click and the information will be provided. By 2018, citizens can look forward to this convenience for more than 150 Government digital services.
To extend these benefits to the commercial sector, we will embark on a pilot for citizens to use MyInfo when opening bank accounts. This will begin in the second quarter of 2017 with the Overseas-Chinese Banking Corporation (OCBC), United Overseas Bank (UOB), Development Bank of Singapore (DBS) and Standard Chartered Bank.
We will also continue to make e-payment more convenient, seamless and user-friendly for citizens. Minister Vivian had already spoken about this earlier and our plans to enable the transferring of funds on a mobile phone. We are also exploring a one-stop platform for citizens to make payments to the Government through their mobile phones. This can potentially consolidate bills from different agencies, saving citizens the trouble of having to go through multiple channels.
Third, we will continue to improve Government digital services for businesses. In the same survey that we did last year, we found that 65% of businesses were satisfied with the Government's digital services. This compares against the 77% satisfaction rate for citizens which I highlighted earlier. So, clearly there is still more work that we need to do on the business side.
Many businesses need to go through the process of applying for grants and Government licences. So, we will strive to make these transactions more convenient. The Business Grants Portal was announced last year during the Budget. It is a one-stop shop for businesses to identify and apply for the right grant. The portal now offers six grants, including SPRING's Capability Development Grant.
By the end of this year, businesses can look forward to four more grants, including the Building and Construction Authority's (BCA's) Mechanisation Credits and the National Park Board's (NPark's) Landscape Productivity Grant. So, we will continue to review and streamline the grant application process.
For licence applications, we have rolled out LicenceOne progressively since 2014 to provide businesses with a one-stop business licensing portal. The portal contains several pro-business features, like an integrated application for multiple licences from different agencies and an integrated dashboard to check the status of applications. Currently, there are over 80 licences from 16 agencies on LicenceOne and, by FY2017, more than 100 licences will be available.
Payment is also an important transaction for businesses and we will improve the e-payment landscape to make it more convenient for businesses to transact with the Government. In June 2016, the Accountant-General's Department (AGD) launched the Vendors@Gov mobile app which caters specifically to the needs of SMEs that transact frequently with the Government. Sixty-five percent of these businesses have since downloaded the app. In addition to submitting electronic invoices to Government agencies, these businesses can also receive alerts on the status of their invoices and accounts and keep track of their projected cash flows. So, this will save businesses precious time. Indeed, within three months of the launch, we saw a 21% drop in the number of payment-related enquiries. We are also very proud that AGD clinched the \"best mobile Government service award\" at the World Government Summit last month.
Next, let me highlight how we support businesses through Government procurement.
Many Members spoke on this issue and asked that the Government do more to support local companies, especially SMEs, through procurement. I understand these sentiments. Indeed, Government procurement has played a useful role over the years in spurring lead demand and building capabilities in certain industries like defence and water.
But let us also remember that Government procurement must, first and foremost, abide by the key principles of fairness, transparency and value-for-money. Our procurement processes are also governed by a clear set of rules, with checks and balances, calibrated to the value and risk of the purchase. This is a point that Ms Sun Xueling made and also about the need to have safeguards against potential abuses.
In our desire to help companies, we must never compromise our principles of Government procurement. I am glad, listening carefully to all the speeches made by Members, none of you has suggested doing so. Government support should not become a crutch for uncompetitive companies.
I remember what the former civil servant Mr Philip Yeo used to tell us about his work at the Chartered Industries of Singapore (CIS). He was Chair of CIS for many years. CIS, Members would recall, was set up as an independent corporate entity to manufacture small arms ammunition for the Singapore Armed Forces (SAF). As Mr Philip Yeo used to remind us, then Defence Minister Dr Goh Keng Swee was insistent that CIS be treated on an arms-length basis − it had to bid for MINDEF work in competition with other foreign suppliers. So, CIS was motivated. In fact, it was forced to work hard to maintain a lean and efficient operation and it rose to the occasion and delivered good service to the SAF in competition with foreign suppliers.
That is the approach we should take – maintain stringent standards in Government procurement. Ensure that these standards are fair, transparent and offer value for public monies. But, at the same time, as we go about this work, we also build capabilities in our businesses and SMEs and give them maximum opportunities to win Government procurement tenders on their own merit. I think this is a better approach than to artificially set aside a certain proportion of Government tenders for SMEs.
If Members look at the statistics, so far, our SMEs are doing quite well. Each year, over 80% of Government contracts, comprising about half of total Government contract value, go to SMEs. So, 80% of the number of contracts and about half of contract value, go to SMEs. This is a respectable result even when compared to developed countries like the UK and the US. By the number of contracts, more than 40% were won by companies with revenues of less than $10 million. And of these contracts, almost half were won by micro-enterprises with revenues of less than $1 million.
Going forward, we will continue to do more through Government procurement. So, let me elaborate on some of the measures.
First, Government agencies are making use of crowdsourcing methods to look for solutions. This approach is ideal for the Government to partner businesses, the community and individuals to reach out to smaller players to provide innovative solutions, which several Members spoke about.
For example, at the recent Designathon 2017, organised by the DesignSingapore Council, there was a focus on developing solutions for persons with disabilities. The winning team comprised students from the Singapore University of Technology and Design (SUTD), and they developed a device for converting a manual wheelchair into an electric one at a fraction of the price of a regular electric wheelchair.
Another example is an idea that emerged from HDB's Cool Ideas challenge. This is an idea for a safer gas hob because fires caused by unattended cooking cause a significant proportion of fires in residential buildings. So, the students from Republic Polytechnic and Anglo-Chinese Junior College proposed a gas hob with a safety device that cuts off the gas supply when the flame goes out, preventing fires. They worked with City Gas, the company, and Aerogaz, commercialised the idea and eventually brought this to market in 2015. So, crowdsourcing is a useful platform for the Government to engage the community, small players and come up with more innovative solutions.
Second, Government agencies will continue to ensure that tenders are appropriately sized to give SMEs a chance to compete for them, as suggested by Dr Tan Wu Meng and Mr Henry Kwek. Here, a balance needs to be struck. Some contracts need to be of a large enough size for the supplier to invest in innovative solutions or technology to improve productivity. At the same time, Government agencies are interested in ensuring that tenders are not too large that only a very small number of suppliers can tender for the project. That is why, even today, a very high proportion of about 90% of contracts called by Government agencies each year are below $100,000 in value. There were more than 30,000 of such contracts in 2016. Only about 5% of contracts are above $1 million.
Several Members spoke about construction projects and, when we think about construction projects, we think about the big ones entailing hundreds or even billions of dollars. But, in fact, for construction contracts, about 80% of them have values that are less than $650,000 and can be carried out by contractors registered with BCA without a track record. Eighty percent of contracts in the construction sector are less than $650,000 and contractors without track record can carry them out. More than 90% of construction contracts are less than $10 million and are accessible to the smaller players.
For some larger projects, where it is appropriate, the Government may call separate tenders for different parts of the contract or different parts of the project, giving smaller companies an opportunity to participate. We already do this. For example, the construction of a single Mass Rapid Transit (MRT) line is often carried out in many parts.
Separate tenders may also be called for individual MRT stations, or MRT stations with connecting tunnels, depending on the complexity of the railway lines. Often, smaller companies will tender only for the \"station\" project, and then larger companies will tender for \"station with tunnel\" contracts. So, this is already happening for MRT projects. Some smaller companies have also formed consortiums with others to tender for larger and more complex projects.
Third, we will help SMEs without track record to participate in Government procurement. Again, here, there were various suggestions made by Members, including Miss Cheryl Chan, Mr Chen Show Mao, Mr Saktiandi Supaat, Ms Sun Xueling and Mr Yee Chia Hsing.
Minister Iswaran had highlighted the new scheme called Gov-PACT in MTI's COS last week. Gov-PACT provides grants to SMEs and startups to collaborate with and undertake innovative projects initiated by Government agencies. SMEs and startups will be funded at various stages of product and solution development for these innovative projects.
Under this scheme, SMEs and startups whose projects are approved are eligible for up to 70% funding support for the qualifying development costs. One example is the Smart Elderly Monitoring and Alert System (SEMAS), which is now being piloted in Yuhua. The system helps families take better care of elderly dependants by allowing them to monitor the safety of the elderly at home and sending them alerts when the mobile panic button is pressed during an emergency or when living patterns that are out of the norm are detected. This is a very useful system that is now being piloted. HDB worked with the SMEs that were involved to develop the business model, paired them up with telecommunications companies (telcos) and helped to deploy the system. Hopefully, this works well in the pilot and we can scale it up in more housing estates.
Last year, we highlighted the Accreditation@IMDA scheme, which helps promising and innovative Singapore-based technology startups to establish their credentials. So far, the scheme has helped 59 companies by providing assistance to strengthen their products and advice on fundraising and business pitches. Seventeen of these companies have been accredited, out of which, 13 have won contracts. We expect more to do so over time and they will benefit from the $60 million of Government pipeline opportunities that have been generated to date.
A good example of an SME that has benefited is SenseInfosys. SenseInfosys focuses on data fusion, analytics and fraud detection in military-grade intelligence projects in the security and maritime domains. Its product enables enterprises to analyse data to gain timely and accurate insights to improve their operational processes and make more informed decisions. The company was founded in 2013 and received accreditation in May 2016. It subsequently went on to win six Government projects when they were still a young company without a significant track record. Last year, the company raised $2 million from investors to help accelerate the company's growth.
We are also introducing platforms to facilitate small players to take part in Government contracts. One such platform is the Government Electronic Business System (GeBIZ) Mall, which makes it easy for suppliers who want to sell to Government agencies. Under GeBIZ Mall, suppliers are given electronic \"shelf-space\" to sell their goods and services. Each supplier can list 10 items on their online \"shelf\" for free. So, Government agencies can then buy directly from these suppliers if the purchases are below $5,000, or they can call for quotations.
Over the last five years, an average of 5,000 orders per year have been placed through GeBIZ Mall. This amounts to a value of $3.5 million per year and we intend to encourage greater participation on this platform.
We are also making it easier for agencies to buy from smaller players. GovTech has started an experiment. It is a website experiment called govBuy. This allows Government agencies to post small projects or tasks for IT programmers to work on, and no track record is required to participate on this platform. So, these are the various things we are doing.
There is one more thing that we will do to promote best-sourcing practices and innovative solutions. Several Government agencies have already adopted outcome-based procurement where the desired outcomes are spelt out, giving tenderers the flexibility to propose the solution.
MOF, for example, has been working with various Government agencies to implement outcome-based procurement in the cleaning, security and landscape sectors. The Ministry of Education (MOE) has been doing this for school cleaning since 2014. For example, its tenders for school cleaning list the sites to be cleaned, the quality standards and the KPIs, and tenderers have the flexibility to propose an operations plan.
Various Ministries are also adopting outcome-based contracts for their security services. For example, MOM's tender for the provision of security services lists several desired performance outcomes and then invites tenderers to propose technology to optimise manpower resources. And the examples of technology that have been proposed include an automated self-service system for pass exchanges and a licence plate recognition system. So, through such outcome-based tenders, we can encourage more innovative solutions from the private sector.
In situations where the results are uncertain and some experimentation is required, we are encouraging agencies to adopt a spiral contracting approach. This means that the agencies will award the project in phases, starting with a more experimental phase. If the initial experimental stages are successfully completed, then the subsequent phases of the projects are awarded to the same supplier to continue.
One good example of this is what the Jurong Town Corporation (JTC) did with a tender to remotely manage its facilities and estates. Tenderers were not confined to any particular approach, and a spiral contracting approach was used, which started with a proof of concept to test out the solution on JTC's premises. And then, after the proof of concept, an evaluation was made to see which is the best, and then a decision made to proceed with a full rollout of the solution. So, that is another useful approach which more and more Government agencies are adopting.
Mr Zainal Sapari gave several suggestions on fair procurement practices. So, to respond to this point on policy changes that affect costs, the Government makes it a point to announce these in advance, as we have done with the introduction of PWM. This allows suppliers to factor in their higher wage costs when bidding for contracts. If a contract had started before the announcement and would continue beyond the effective date of the new policy, MOF has asked buyer agencies to accede to requests by suppliers for mutually agreed termination to allow a fresh tender to be called.
On the issue of liquidated damages, I will confirm that these are not intended to be punitive. The Government's procurement rules clearly require agencies to ensure that any liquidated damages imposed are commensurate with the losses suffered if the supplier fails to fulfil contractual obligations. And we encourage the unions and suppliers to seek clarifications and give feedback to the agency involved if there appears to be unfair clauses in their tenders.
Dr Tan Wu Meng and Mr Zainal Sapari also spoke about the Government's ability to shape labour market norms through responsible procurement, and I agree with them and the Government will do its part.
We want to work with service providers who are responsible employers and who adopt good HR practices. So, wherever possible, Government agencies will take into consideration the HR and tripartism records of tendering companies. In particular, we focus on the sectors that are more at risk of cheap-sourcing and suppressed wages, like in the cleaning, security and landscape sectors. For example, the Government buys only from accredited service providers that adopt the PWM for cleaners. And we also proactively encourage service providers to adopt the NWC guidelines on wage increments for their employees, and to factor in wage increments in multi-year contracts.
As mentioned at MOM's COS yesterday, we will also be putting in place further measures to safeguard the basic employment rights of outsourced workers under Government contracts.
Mr Liang Eng Hwa asked about capabilities in procurement. This is, indeed, an area of priority. We have started the work of building up capabilities to enable Government agencies to be smarter buyers and we will continue to do so. And this includes understanding the industry and technology well, so that we can stay on top of what the suppliers are doing and ensure that tender specifications are well crafted. So, these capabilities can help to minimise the likelihood of being locked-in to certain tenderers, especially to incumbent suppliers, which is a point that Ms Sun Xueling made just now as well.
Let me touch next on how we can foster a corporate regulatory environment that allows us to be competitive whilst strengthening our reputation as a trusted international financial and business centre. I hear Dr Tan Wu Meng raised several points about corporate regulations. MOF continually reviews our corporate regulations to ensure that they remain robust yet business-friendly.
Last year, the Accounting and Corporate Regulatory Authority (ACRA) had undertaken reviews in areas, such as the requirement on holding annual general meetings (AGMs) and filing annual returns. We will simplify these requirements to give greater clarity to companies. We will exempt all private companies from holding AGMs, provided they meet certain conditions, and we will also remove the requirement for companies and limited liability partnerships to use the common seals. This will help reduce business costs.
Other than amending regulations directly, we are also cutting red tape and improving our systems and processes, to reduce compliance and regulatory transaction costs for businesses. For example, Trade Facilitation and Integrated Risk-based System (TradeFIRST) is an assessment framework that Singapore Customs uses to determine the type of trade facilitation that is to be provided to a company. The checklist was revised to reduce the number of criteria by about 50%. So, with the revised criteria, each trader can save around 14 man-hours of application time.
Another example is the revamped electronic transaction system, BizFile+, which was launched by ACRA in January 2016. This system has streamlined processes, removed over 100 ad hoc fees and included mobile options for key transactions. The enhancements will benefit 450,000 registered business entities.
The tax-filing process will also be improved for businesses this year. IRAS has extended tax filing using a simplified corporate tax return to companies with annual revenues of less than $5 million, instead of $1 million. This will help an additional 28,000 companies ease their tax filing compliance.
We will continue to review and strengthen our regulatory and governance framework so that it is more robust and transparent. We will amend the Companies Act to allow companies registered in another jurisdiction to transfer their registration to Singapore, or what is also known as inward re-domiciliation. This will make it easier for foreign companies to relocate their businesses here to tap on Singapore's strengths and ease of doing business.
We will also amend our laws to require companies and limited liability partnerships to maintain non-public registers containing the particulars of their beneficial owners, and by enhancing efforts to combat money laundering and terrorism financing. This will strengthen our position as a trusted financial centre.
Besides updating our corporate regulations, we also want to ensure that our overall regulatory environment remains conducive to business innovation. As the Minister for Finance mentioned in his speech, we are creating more space for innovation through regulatory sandboxes where rules are suspended to allow for greater innovation and experimentation. And Miss Cheryl Chan is right that, in doing so, we also have to exercise judgement and make sure that we are fair to the different entities and, particularly, to ensure a level playing field that is applied to all entities that are being regulated. There are also ongoing efforts by the Pro-Enterprise Panel to address regulatory concerns that businesses face. The panel comprises both business leaders and senior public officers, and has received more than 1,900 suggestions, with over 1,000 of these leading to changes in rules or regulations.
Finally, several MPs raised points about taxes. Assoc Prof Daniel Goh proposed for opt-in tax deferment for retrenched workers for six months. I believe that this is a point that Ms Foo Mee Har had also suggested in the Budget Debate and this was addressed by the Minister for Finance. I would just reiterate that we already allow taxpayers on IRAS' GIRO scheme to pay their income tax in up to 12 monthly interest-free instalments. A taxpayer who faces financial hardship may apply to IRAS for longer instalment plans.
With regard to Mr Low Thia Khiang's query on the considerations for introducing new taxes, again, the Minister for Finance has spoken about them in his Budget Round-up Speech. Let me just reiterate a few points.
First, we would all like the Government to do more, but we must always ensure that our fiscal system is one that secures a better future for the next generation and not leave them with a bigger debt burden. Any programme we put in place must be sustainable for the long term. And that is why we are studying all options carefully to determine the best way to raise revenues to support our future expenditure needs.
Second, we must ensure that the overall fiscal system remains competitive, supports economic dynamism and reinforces individual effort. So, whatever adjustments we make, these key principles remain. Then, we can continue to keep our economy growing and create more jobs for Singaporeans.
In this regard, Assoc Prof Randolph Tan is right that we also have to be mindful of income tax changes in other countries. Around the world, corporate income tax rates have been falling, and some countries have announced plans to further reduce their corporate income tax rates. At 17%, our corporate income tax rate is still competitive internationally. But we will continue to monitor the trends and ensure that our tax system remains competitive and pro-growth.
At the same time, I should add that our competitiveness is not just based on taxes alone. We compete on many other factors − our quality workforce, rule of law, good corporate governance and infrastructure. All these have helped to build Singapore's reputation of trust, integrity and reliability and given businesses the certainty to invest here for the long term. We will continue to build on these strengths and the CFE recommendations provide clear steps for us to take over the coming years.
Finally, we want to maintain a progressive system of taxes and benefits. It is a system where the higher-income households contribute more of the taxes and the lower-income households receive more of the benefits. And this is also why we have designed our GST system with a permanent scheme of GST Vouchers so that the overall system is progressive, with the rich paying more. And this is how we help lower- and middle-income Singaporeans to have better lives and build a society that all Singaporeans can truly benefit from. So, we will continue to build on this progressive system of taxes and transfers, even as we consider revenue options for the future.
Mdm Chairman, the Singapore economy is now more complex and diverse than it was in the past. There are more interests and stakeholders involved. So, no single command entity can drive our economy. We need to forge stronger partnerships to reinforce our mutual efforts, tackle common challenges and move forward together. MOF and the Government agencies are committed to working with our partners in this shared effort. I believe I have addressed Members' questions on the first cut and I will leave Senior Minister of State Ms Indranee Rajah to take the others.
The Senior Minister of State for Finance (Ms Indranee Rajah): Mdm Chairperson, Mr Low Thia Khiang suggested that we set up an independent Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR), such as those in other countries, and he referred specifically to the OBR in the UK.
While it is always useful to look at what other countries do, it is important to remember that what is done in one country is not always necessary or relevant to another. In determining whether to adopt institutions similar to those elsewhere, it is also important to understand the context in which those institutions were established.
The OBR was set up in the UK in 2010 and the context in which it was set up is as follows.
The new Conservative Liberal Democrat coalition government had just taken over from the Labour government after the general election. They were burdened by a huge deficit inherited from the previous government. There was little confidence in government economic and fiscal planning. This can be seen from the speech of the then Chancellor Mr George Osborne when he announced the setting up of the OBR. And this is what he said:
\"So, today, less than a week after taking office, I want to explain some of the early arrangements for dealing with the fiscal crisis left by the last Government.
First, let me just tell you some of the stark facts. Last year, our budget deficit was the largest ever it has been in our peacetime history. This year, it is set to be among the largest in the world. According to the IMF and the European Commission, it will be the largest in the G7 and the largest in the European Union. This is the legacy of thirteen years of fiscal irresponsibility.\"
Mr Osborne went on to highlight the urgent need to tackle the deficit and said that the first part of their approach was to boost credibility and confidence in the UK's fiscal framework. In that context, he said the UK urgently needed a full, independent assessment of how bad their problem really was.
He went on to say, \"Over the last 13 years, the public and markets have completely lost confidence in government economic forecasts. The last government's forecasts for growth in the economy, over the past 10 years, have, on average, been out by £13 billion. Their forecasts of the budget deficit three years ahead have, on average, been out by £40 billion. Unsurprisingly, these forecasting errors have almost always been in the wrong direction. The conclusion is clear. We need long-lasting change in the way we put together the budgets in this country. The final decision on the forecast has always been made by the Chancellor, not independent officials, and that is precisely the problem.\"
Mr George Osborne's view was that a significant part of the problem in the UK was because of \"the temptation to fiddle the figures, to nudge up a growth forecast here or reduce a borrowing number there, to make the figures add up and that had proved too great\".
And so, there you have, in the words of the UK Chancellor, the context of the OBR and why the UK set it up − which is huge deficits and unreliable budgeting. Likewise, a number of other Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) countries have set up budget offices or fiscal councils in the aftermath of the global financial crisis as the surge of government deficits and debts\" left countries worried that fiscal rules were insufficient and \"governments wanted to boost the credibility of their financial promises\" to financial markets.
That is not the case here in Singapore. Our situation is very different. Our Government has a strong track record of sound finances. While many other countries are in a net debt position, we have consistently spent within our means and achieved a balanced Budget in each successive term of Government. A good example is the Pioneer Generation Package, announced in Budget 2014. We set aside $8 billion from Current Reserves to help fund this.
To ensure the long-term sustainability of our expenditures, this Government has consistently also taken the approach of preparing ahead for spending needs. This Budget is a good example of this approach. The Minister for Finance has highlighted the longer-term increase in healthcare and infrastructure needs and has signaled that we will be reviewing revenue measures to meet this expenditure. This is the right approach − spending prudently and effectively and growing our revenues fairly and sustainably.
We have in place a strong system of fiscal rules and safeguards to ensure fiscal sustainability. This is provided for in our Constitution. The Government is required to seek Parliament's approval for its expenditures during each year's Budget. The annual Budget Debate and COS provide the opportunity for Members of Parliament to raise questions and scrutinise Government policies and programmes. Parliament is supported by the Estimates Committee, which examines the Government's Budget.
The Elected President, advised by the Council of Presidential Advisors, holds the second key to our Reserves. At each year's Budget, the President may veto the Budget if he is of the opinion that it is likely to draw on Past Reserves. This effectively instils discipline for the Government to achieve a balanced Budget over each term of office. The Government's accounts are audited by the Auditor-General's Office (AGO). The AGO's findings are reported to the Public Accounts Committee (PAC), which can call on the relevant agencies to explain lapses or take corrective actions.
The net result is that markets have confidence in our system. This can also be seen from the fact that we are among the few countries today that continue to enjoy AAA credit rating.
I move on to Mr Leon Perera's cut. He had referred to the recruitment of a former civil servant in GLC. I should, at the outset, explain that the GLCs operate as commercial entities. The Government does not get involved in the recruitment of their senior management. That is something which they do very much as a matter of their own needs.
GLCs, like other companies, recruit senior managers based on their circumstances and their needs. At the more senior levels, experience can cover a wide range of domains. It may mean industry-specific knowledge or functional expertise, like recruiting a finance professional to be the Chief Financial Officer (CFO). It may encompass broader management experience in organisational transformation or leadership qualities.
At the end of the day, it is for each company to decide what is most relevant or useful for it. Mr Perera might have been under the impression that GLCs recruit only from the public sector, but that is not the case. If you take a sampling, for example, we have seen leaders who are promoted from within organisations, such as Singapore Telecommunications' (Singtel's) Group CEO, Ms Chua Sock Koong, who first joined Singtel in 1989, and then we have Singapore Airlines' (SIA's) CEO, Mr Goh Choon Phong, who joined SIA in 1990. These are people promoted from the ranks.
Then we also have lateral recruitment. There are leaders who are recruited from other companies, like Mr Tan Chong Meng, who was with Shell before joining the Port of Singapore Authority (PSA), and Mr Piyush Gupta who held various senior management roles at Citigroup before joining DBS Group as CEO, and Mr Neil McGregor who will succeed Mr Tang Kin Fei as Sembcorp Group President and CEO with effect from April 2017. Mr McGregor is currently the Senior Managing Director and Head of Energy and Resources at Temasek International. He was previously a CEO of LNG Corporation and Managing Director of YTL PowerSeraya.
So, you can see that the GLCs recruit from diverse sources. Obviously, the Civil Service may be one of those sources, but it is not the only source. At the end of the day, they recruit just as other companies do, which is, they look for the right talent for the right need and they recruit based on merit.
I move on now to some of the other cuts.
Some of the Members have also asked how we set the eligibility criteria for our social schemes. Mr Edwin Tong and Mr Murali Pillai asked if our means-testing criteria are sufficiently flexible to accommodate diverse circumstances. Assoc Prof Randolph Tan asked if our schemes can be made more targeted. The queries raised by the three Members reflect the wide and diverse views on how social schemes can be designed.
In designing our social schemes, we are guided by a few key principles. First, what is the objective of the scheme? If it is a scheme to support the needy, the eligibility criteria will be set to target the intended beneficiaries. If it is meant to benefit more, the criteria will have to be set for a broader coverage. Second, is the scheme design fair and progressive? We want to make sure that those with less receive more support. But at the same time, we want to design the scheme in a way that does not erode our societal values of family and community support and, more importantly, the value of a strong work ethic that Singaporeans share. Third, is the scheme sustainable? We have a responsibility to ensure that each generation does not burden the next with unsustainable spending.
This is why we have schemes with different objectives to support Singaporeans in different circumstances and with different needs. This is our approach of providing gradated tiers of support, so that every Singaporean can benefit from our social schemes in one way or another.
We have schemes that support strategic objectives, such as better education and health outcomes. These cover all Singaporeans, regardless of income or wealth. Those with lower incomes receive more assistance, which should be the case, but Singaporeans across the board receive some support.
For example, eligibility for the SkillsFuture Credit, the Pioneer Generation Package and the Marriage and Parenthood Package is not dependent on income or wealth. For schemes, such as childcare, education and some healthcare subsidies, all Singaporeans can receive benefits, but those with lower incomes generally receive more assistance, which should be the case.
We also have schemes that are more targeted. Some provide benefits not just to the lower income, but also to the middle income, for example, subsidies for housing and intermediate and long-term care. Others are more tightly scoped for those who need more help. These can range from MOE's Financial Assistance Scheme, WIS and the Silver Support Scheme. By the way, the Silver Support Scheme is not for all HDB dwellers, but only for seniors who have had low income through life and now have little family support; likewise, ComCare and MediFund as safety nets for those in need.
Assoc Prof Randolph Tan spoke about the \"broad\" coverage of the GST Voucher (GSTV). The GSTV has different components, each with a different objective. For instance, the GSTV − Cash payment, is meant to help the lower income offset some of the cost of daily living. The eligibility criteria are deliberately set such that coverage is broader than schemes like ComCare and MediFund which target only the very needy. In this way, we can cover more Singaporeans with lower income.
Meanwhile, the GSTV and Utilities (U)-Save are meant to help both lower- and middle-income households offset some of their utilities expenses. By extending the benefit to eligible HDB households, we cover about 70% of properties, including the middle-income group.
If we put together all our different social schemes, we have a progressive social system where support is extended to all, but those with greater need receive more. I agree with Assoc Prof Tan's caution that we need to avoid a creep towards all schemes giving something for everyone. By careful design, we can have a system that is sustainable.
Mr Murali Pillai and Mr Edwin Tong raised thoughtful points about our current means-testing system. Broadly speaking, our means-testing criteria consider income or wealth, or a combination of both, in order to determine how much support to give. For some schemes, we also consider the number of dependants in a household, with per capita means-testing criteria. This is fair and helps us target our schemes at those who need more assistance.
Nonetheless, we recognise that no criterion is perfect. Each come with trade-offs. For instance, a wealth criterion that requires an individual to report his personal savings may be a more accurate assessment of his wealth, but that would require the citizen to apply for benefits rather than receive them automatically. The annual value (AV) of property criterion, which does not need to be separately reported, allows us to deliver benefits automatically.
Different trade-offs arise with other means-testing criteria. I thank Mr Murali Pillai for pointing out the limitations of using household income and for his suggestion to migrate to family means-testing. Even if data analytics can map our family trees based on administrative data like births, deaths, marriages and divorces, it may not fully capture family relationships, which can be complex and fluid. The Government is also not privy to family dynamics.
Hence, to date, the household income remains the best available proxy for family support. But we will keep in mind good and practical ideas on how to improve on this. I thank the Members for their suggestions. There is another benefit of household means-testing. It enables us to make it more convenient for Singaporeans to benefit from our social schemes, as applicants do not need to provide information on family members who do not stay with them.
Mr Edwin Tong also spoke about schemes that do not apply to those who live in private housing. Our underlying principle is to provide support according to need, and those in private housing are generally better off than those in public housing. Nevertheless, there are schemes which extend to those in private housing.
For example, all Singaporeans, including those who live in private housing, can receive retraining support, subsidies for inpatient and outpatient care, and preschool and education subsidies. Education can be quite significant. For instance, a child entering primary school in 2016 would stand to benefit from over $100,000 in today's terms in education subsidies by the time he/she completes secondary school. With post-secondary education, it is even more.
When property is taken into consideration, many schemes consider the AV with a threshold of $13,000 and/or $21,000. The AV is reviewed annually. An AV threshold of $13,000 already covers all HDB flats, while the AV threshold of $21,000 covers about 80% of residential properties, including some lower-value private properties. This means only those who live in private properties with AVs in the top 20% are excluded. In short, while there is always room for improvement, what we have today is a system that is fair and inclusive. At the same time, we exercise flexibility and will consider appeals on a case-by-case basis. Those in genuine need of help will receive help.
Mr Edwin Tong highlighted cases in which a resident may be living in a private property under extenuating circumstances, for instance, renting only one room or living with friends in a private property on goodwill terms. For these, if they have any specific needs, the best approach would be to appeal to the relevant agencies, which will consider various appeals on a case-by-case basis and on their merits. There may also be schemes at the constituency level that can be tapped on, and these can be checked at the respective constituency offices.
Mr Edwin Tong has also highlighted that HDB dwellers receive on average about four times the amount of Government transfers when compared to private estate dwellers in 2016. I would like to clarify that this is correct if you compare the transfers received by 1- and 2-room HDB flat residents with those living in private properties. This is a reflection of our progressive system. But if you take into account 3-, 4- and 5-room flats, then the ratio is different.
We have been able to achieve good social outcomes, including when compared to other countries. For example, we have one of the highest home ownership rates in the world. More than 90% of Singaporeans, including many young Singaporeans, are homeowners. Compare this to Britain, for example, where the rate of home ownership among those aged 25 to 34 has fallen by about 20% in the past decade, from 59% to 37%.
Our education system provides our students with a good foundation. Our students consistently do well in many international education rankings. But besides developing our students intellectually, we have also placed a lot of emphasis on values and character development, as part of holistic education.
Our healthcare system is recognised for providing good quality and affordable care in a sustainable way. The Bloomberg Healthcare Efficiency Index, which considers life expectancy and total healthcare costs per capita and as a percentage of GDP, places us near the top consistently. We do not claim to have the best system, but we have done quite well over the years.
Going forward, we will need to manage rising healthcare costs, while helping older Singaporeans age well. The Government will continue to improve our social programmes and schemes to foster a caring and inclusive society. But the Government cannot achieve this outcome alone. As the Finance Minister has stressed in his Budget speech, we will need to work in partnership with community organisations and individuals, especially since many of our social challenges are complex and multi-dimensional.
Madam, allow me to conclude. One key theme has recurred in these discussions. It is about the role of Government in catalysing growth and building a strong and resilient society. We will do this within a credible and trustworthy system of checks and balances.
We have made good progress in these areas and we will continue to refine and improve. We are committed to work in partnership with our businesses, the unions and citizens in this journey.
The Chairman:\tMr Liang Eng Hwa.
Mr Liang Eng Hwa:\tMadam, I just want to ask the Minister on the progress of the MyInfo portal which was launched last year. How has the take-up been like? And given that this is a voluntary system where you need to get consent from the users, how does the Government intend to incentivise more users to sign up, and because this is really a good start to the digitalisation journey where there is just one touchpoint? There is this convenience of not having to fill up personal data in the system. So, what would the Government do to get more sign-ups in this area?
Mr Lawrence Wong: Madam, as I mentioned earlier, later this year, we will be making available MyInfo service to all SingPass users. So, that will mean that all SingPass users can potentially access this service where, through one touch, you can automatically fill up information and forms with different Government agencies. I think it is a very convenient service.
The Member is right that we cannot force people to use the service. Ultimately, Singaporeans must also give consent for their data to be shared for privacy reasons. There will be effort to reach out and educate people and to show them how useful the service is, what can it do for them, the convenience that it provides and, through that, we hope the take-up of the service will eventually start to go up over time.
The Chairman:\tMr Low Thia Khiang.
Mr Low Thia Khiang: Madam, I asked two specific questions on GST. I would like to seek clarification from the Minister: one, would the Government raise GST before the end of this decade, whether it is yes or no?
Secondly, does the Minister agree that GSTVs do not fully offset the amount of GST paid by lower-income households?
Madam, on my cut on OBR, I would like to thank the Senior Minister of State for her explanation why OBR is not needed here and also for explaining the context in which OBR was set up in other countries. I have the following clarifications: one, do we need to wait till the international market loses confidence in us to set up such institutions? I thought the Government is always preparing for rainy days? We are talking about \"未 雨 绸 缪 \".
The second clarification: does the Senior Minister of State not agree that such an independent institution will enhance public confidence in the Government's expenditure and why the need to raise the tax? I suppose it would be easier to justify when such an independent organisation explains.
The third clarification: does the Senior Minister of State not agree that such an independent institution could provide useful input to the Elected President? Or whether the Government draws from past Reserve? Currently, the Elected President has no independent institution that can help him except advice by the Government?
Mr Lawrence Wong: Madam, in response to questions that Mr Low raised, I would say that, as the Finance Minister said, we are studying all revenue options. Let us do not jump to the conclusion of which particular tax is going to be increased or when. The point is that we are preparing ahead and we are studying and keeping all options open at this time.
GST is a progressive tax the way we have designed it. It is not a question of whether the offsets are sufficient to cover everything that the low income has to pay, but it is the overall progressivity of the system. The way we have designed GST with a permanent voucher is to make it a progressive consumption tax. That is the way the system is designed. We have had many debates in this House about this particular design feature of our GST system. More fundamentally on this issue, we have to ask ourselves, and if I could ask Mr Low these two questions.
Firstly, do we agree that our longer-term expenditures, despite our best efforts to be prudent in spending, whatever we do, do we agree that our long-term expenditures are going to go up, particularly in areas like healthcare, with a population that is ageing rapidly and with huge infrastructure requirements that we do need to put in place to prevent our basic infrastructure from deteriorating and decaying? Do we agree that these long-term expenditures are going to go up?
Second, if we agree that long-term expenditures are going to go up, is it not proper and responsible and prudent for the Government to start thinking ahead of what these expenditure needs are and preparing for all options and studying what revenue options we need to prepare for this eventuality?
That is where we are today, and that is why the Finance Minister has highlighted in his speech to study all options.
The Chairman:\tMr Low Thia Khiang.
Mr Low Thia Khiang: Madam, I would like to clarify in response to the Minister's questions, that yes, I would expect the long-term expenditure to go up because of the ageing population and the need for infrastructure development. But that does not mean that you will have to raise taxes. Are there other forms of revenue that we can look at, for instance, revenues from land sales, which my colleague has brought up during the Budget Debate?
Secondly, is it not what a responsible Government should do to have an independent institution, like what I suggested, so that the independent institution can study the expenditures by the Government on what is necessary, what is not or what can be cut back, and also explore other possible revenues, rather than raise taxes? It could also look at what are the taxes that should be raised and whether it is justifiable to do so.
I would expect a responsible Government to allow information to be accessed by an independent agency. And then, people can have ample time and ample advice by an independent institution, rather than MOF.
Mr Lawrence Wong: Madam, I believe the Finance Minister had explained in the Budget Round-up Speech that land sales, revenues go into our past Reserves. So, unless the Workers' Party would like the Government to use past revenues, then this option is not going to be made available.
And Mr Low said we should study all taxes, all different forms of revenues, before making a decision. But this is what we are doing. We are studying all revenue options, we are keeping all options open, and we are looking at different possibilities to ensure that we have a sustainable fiscal system for the long term.
And on the point of accountability, I will leave the Senior Minister of State to make the clarifications.
Ms Indranee Rajah:\tMdm Chairperson, before I answer, may I just clarify with Mr Low his first and second clarifications? For the first clarification, he said, \"Do we need to wait until the international market\", and then something? I am sorry, I missed that word. Could he just repeat?
Mr Low Thia Khiang:\tLose confidence.
Ms Indranee Rajah:\tLose confidence, I see. Lose confidence in us, you mean? All right. And the second clarification, because Mr Low went so quickly, I am afraid that I could not catch his question. Something about having such independent institutions to enhance something?
Mr Low Thia Khiang:\tPublic confidence.
Ms Indranee Rajah: All right. I thank Mr Low for clarifying that.
With regard to the first clarification on whether we should need to wait till international markets to lose confidence before setting up such an institution, I think the correct approach to take is to make sure that international markets do not lose confidence in us to begin with.
This has actually been our approach for the last 50 years. It is an approach of fiscal discipline, financial prudence, effective spending, sustainable revenues. And this is all underpinned by the constitutional safeguards. So, the short answer really to that clarification is that we must make sure that we never get to that situation. We are already in the situation where international markets have confidence in us, and that is indicated by our AAA rating. So, we must continue to do as we have been doing, which is to maintain fiscal discipline and financial prudence.
The second question on whether having such an independent institution will enhance public confidence, it really goes back to the same thing. You have to make sure that whatever you do, you spend within your means, you do not rack up huge deficits, that you stay within your forecasts and you just make sure that, basically, you do not spend beyond your means. So, the answer to the second question is really the same as the answer to the first question.
The Member's third question was whether or not, having such an institution could provide useful inputs to the Elected President. The Elected President, of course, has access to the Council of Presidential Advisors, but he is not precluded from seeking expertise from consultants or any other sort of expertise that he may need in order to make the kind of decisions that he needs to make under the Constitution. So, it does not necessarily have to take the form of an OBR. The expertise is out there available to him, and he can avail himself of it as and when he needs it, if and when he thinks he needs it.
The Chairman:\tMr Liang Eng Hwa, please withdraw your amendment.
Mr Liang Eng Hwa: Mdm Chair, I want to thank Minister Lawrence Wong and Senior Minister of State Indranee for the comprehensive answers, notwithstanding a very short guillotine time, and also the hardworking MOF team for the Budget, and Minister Heng for coming back and delivering a far-sighted Budget and staying the course and readying Singaporeans for the future landscape with confidence. With that, Mdm Chairman, I beg leave to withdraw my amendment.
[(proc text) Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. (proc text)]
[(proc text) The sum of $800,157,600 for Head M ordered to stand part of the Main Estimates. (proc text)]
[(proc text) The sum of $184,120,400 for Head M ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates. (proc text)]
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Committee of Supply − Head T (Ministry of National Development)","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OS","content":"The Chairman: Head T, Ministry of National Development. Mr Alex Yam, please take your two cuts together.
Mr Alex Yam (Marsiling-Yew Tee):\tThank you, Madam, I beg to move, \"That the total sum to be allocated for Head T of the Estimates be reduced by $100.\"
Our housing policy is a key cornerstone of Singapore's social fabric. Our Housing and Development (HDB) public flats have influenced our way of life and Singapore society since Independence. As we continue to develop and evolve as a future-ready city, our housing policy will similarly evolve. One pertinent question is how housing in our future-ready city will potentially integrate and how accessible they will be to ordinary Singaporeans.
Our current Central Business District (CBD) has several pockets of public housing. As of 2014, this comprises an estimated 34,400 residents in 12,609 HDB flats − very small compared to the rest of the island. The reasons for this very small concentration are obvious. The prices were high and available developmental space was limited. Trying to plant in pockets of public amenities and housing resulted in the creation of very small enclaves.
So, what about our new CBDs in Jurong and the greater Southern Waterfront? I sense an opportunity to have better urban integration. Both will be almost \"green field\" sites, allowing for housing, commercial and public spaces to integrate from the very beginning, without having to plan around existing buildings or constraints.
One such example of integration would be Vienna's post-war experience. Much of the historic city lay in ruins after World War II and Austrians had the unenviable task of rebuilding their capital. At the 1945 Vienna Reconstruction Conference, a 14-point plan was introduced which, at its heart, stood this very particular vision that: \"The human-being should in future stand at the centre of all considerations and plans, and not in the income and profit of the few\".
Between 1947 and 1958, Vienna completed rehousing of residents with much of the social housing integrated into a reconstructed city. This was followed by an urban housing rehabilitation programme between the 1970s and 1980s. As the city expanded, housing areas saw revitalisation. Rather than standing apart, they became an unmistakable part of the cityscape.
Vienna had the opportunity to develop this successful social housing model because the city itself was in need of major reconstruction after the war. While Singapore is not emerging from a post-war crisis, we similarly have an opportunity to do so, as we journey towards a future-ready city.
The Viennese were bold in their approach in the revitalisation efforts from the 1980s. A mix of social housing, council estate, apartments, condominiums and commercial properties were offered side by side in revitalised estates to achieve a better social mix, regardless of class, income and background.
At the end of the Cold War, there were further challenges to development with an influx with the fall of the Iron Curtain and, therefore, they were able to explore radical ideas for metropolitan housing. These include the concept of developers' competitions, which were open to all firms, public and private, leading to unique estates, such as the car-free Autofreie Mustersiedlung − I would first apologise to anyone who speaks Austrian by my mangling of the names − the family-centric Frauen-Werk-Stadt, which was designed by women architects, built by women engineers; and a very ecological term Thermensiedlung, which is heated by natural hot springs. I believe Dr Lim Wee Kiak has a question on the Sembawang hot spring, so perhaps this is something to consider.
Even today, despite political changes in Austria and a more centre-right leaning public policy, at least half of all new subsidised apartments in Vienna would be built in the inner-city areas. A strong Social Architecture and Citizen Participation system dominates Vienna and entrenches the belief that urban developments and housing cannot be left completely to the free market.
It is important at this point to note certain important caveats. First of all, Singapore does not have the luxury of land as the Viennese have. Secondly, Vienna is predominantly characterised by low blocks and smaller communities, something that Singapore can ill afford. Thirdly, unlike Singapore's core home ownership policy, 80% of Viennese currently live in rental apartments, due partially to the 1917 Tenancy Act which sets a cap on the maximum rent collectable.
In Singapore, we have a successful housing policy and our HDB housing is often cited along Vienna as two examples of how a city or a city-state can provide comfortable and affordable housing for its citizens. Vienna sees value in Singapore's lessons in intensification. We can also learn from Vienna in seamlessly integrating social housing into the fabric of their city and also promoting civic participation in the development process.
In terms of future housing in Singapore, many people aspire to projects, such as the Pinnacle@Duxton, but there is certainly a worry though. In November 2015, a 5-room unit in the Pinnacle was transacted at a whopping $1.08 million. That works out to be $945 psf. Though the price was also inflated due to the scarcity of supply, housing in Singapore has largely been influenced by location.
Minister Lawrence Wong himself emphasised at last year's Kent Ridge Ministerial Forum that maintaining equity will be the biggest challenge as we develop Singapore further, and how we avoid the \"lottery syndrome\" for those who manage to successfully ballot for flats in prime areas should be something that the Ministry would look into.
One way to look at the issue of equity is perhaps for the Ministry to relook at the leasehold periods. This is not new as we have already introduced varied leases for flats, such as those under the Fresh Start Housing Scheme.
But overall, my focus has been to look at how we can build communities in our future-ready city, not just infrastructure. To be able to look at achieving a new integrated city that focuses on community, rather than just the economy.
Our future-ready city should not be cold, hard monuments to the pursuit of economic growth but also serve as focal points for the aspirations of citizens. If we can successfully integrate a balanced neighbourhood that has a good social mix, avoids gentrification, and one that looks after the interests of many, will be one city, one nation that we can be proud of.
We should be sensitive to three things: honouring the past; acknowledging current challenges; and moving everyone forward.
In honouring the past, we need to protect our heritage and preserve our history. Progress is often relentless and unkind, but not having a past, not recognising where we have come from means the future can only be bleak and soul-less. Therefore, I urge the Ministry to do more to promote our built heritage and also preserve the intangible memories that come with them.
In acknowledging our current challenges, we need to be cogent to what hurdles some may face within our midst. Divorcees who feel they are dealt a double whammy when housing becomes a problem, singles who feel they are hard done by, vulnerable families who feel that they cannot progress in a housing market that is geared against them, younger Singaporeans who want to live close to their parents but are priced out of the resale market.
The Government is doing much to address these issues, but we also need to plan and foresee future problems and have future-ready solutions, for example, the Central Provident Board (CPF) Housing Grant for resale flats which was announced recently in the Budget Statement. This will have a positive impact on young Singaporeans wishing to settle down in a flat of their own close to their loved ones. The grants, though reasonable, show the Government's commitment towards ensuring affordable public housing for all and a subtle nudge towards nurturing closer family ties, where young Singaporeans can opt to stay near their parents or in-laws.
But I do have a concern that has been echoed, both in the media and amongst people in the industry, that the HDB resale market is still a free market: willing buyer, willing seller, as we have seen in the price for the Pinnacle@Duxton. So, how do we then ensure that the increased housing grant will not become a net negative if prices are, therefore, artificially jacked up, leading to an artificial inflation of not only HDB resale property prices, but the real estate market on the whole?
The end losers would be buyers unable to fulfil their genuine needs and the Government which may be blamed as helpless and being unable to rein in unfair marketing practices. The Ministry has managed to clear the backlog of applicants for Build-To-Order (BTO) flats. If the unintended measure to spread out demand for HDB flats fails, young couples may end up back on the BTO list. Would we have a future-ready solution to deal with a future problem?
Lastly, how do we ensure that everyone moves forward together as we journey towards a future-ready Singapore? As our population ages, we will need to provide for our seniors to age in place and to age gracefully with family and in the community. Are we planning ahead of the curve and ensuring that a youthful and vibrant city does not abandon nor alienate our older residents?
The lower-income, the vulnerable should also not be made to feel unwelcome in the future-ready city. As they stare down current challenges, they must not be met by a cold wall when the future arrives. Part of this is perhaps already happening. While many of our new attractions are free and accessible and our city has redeveloped and is reshaped, one cannot but feel pressured by prices and costs of everything else in that same space and also feeling out of place. I remember one resident, an older resident, sharing with me that it is nice to visit these places, but just try getting an affordable drink or meal at Gardens by the Bay or Sentosa or even in the city itself.
The Ministry of National Development (MND), HDB and the Urban Redevelopment Authority (URA) will have their work cut out for them, looking not just at how to shape up our future city but to also make it viable and open to all. I would urge that greater citizen participation in the process will only prove helpful.
I, therefore, look forward to our future-ready city, but I also hope that it is one that is future-ready for all of us and not just for some of us.
[(proc text) Question proposed. (proc text)]
The Chairman: Assoc Prof Randolph Tan.
Assoc Prof Randolph Tan (Nominated Member): Budget 2017 increases the CPF Housing Grant to couples who are first-timer applicants, giving more to those who purchase 4-room or smaller resale flats. There are several types of CPF Housing Grants, each catering to different types of buyers, such as whether they are applying for the first time and the citizenship of the spouse.
The grant increase is aimed at making HDB resale flats even more affordable for the target group. But by driving up demand, will they have the effect of also pushing up prices?
The prices of HDB resale flats are correlated with those of private property residential units. Although HDB resale prices have moderated, this did not occur before the private property cooling measures were introduced. When sellers of HDB flats look for replacement housing, they add to the demand for residential property. Any increase in demand for HDB resale flats will feed into the private property market. In this way, the impact on the overall property market is unavoidable.
The market for HDB resale flats continues to be very active and is hardly in a weak state. An alternative would have been to increase supply by modifying the restrictions on resale if the buyers were young families and first-time buyers. Could the Minister clarify why a grant increase was decided on instead of non-monetary alternatives which could have also relaxed the constraints in a targeted manner?
Er Dr Lee Bee Wah (Nee Soon): I understand the need to prevent property bubbles so that homes remain affordable. But with the implementation of the Total Debt Servicing Ratio (TDSR), are the rest of the property cooling measures still relevant? In particular, the Additional Buyer's Stamp Duty (ABSD) for Singaporeans.
Many Singaporeans who have the income to spare would like to invest in private property. However, due to ABSD, they have turned to the overseas markets. Some ended up buying in ghost towns or buying from plans that never get built and they would never be able to recover their hard-earned money. Besides that, Singapore is losing out on these funds. Was this considered when weighing the retention of ABSD? Can the Government consider removing ABSD at least for Singaporeans? Mdm Chairman, in Mandarin, please.
(In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] The Government has already implemented TDSR as a policy measure to cool the property market. With TDSR, is the ABSD still necessary? Some Singaporeans want to invest in properties, but because of ABSD, they have turned to overseas markets instead. This has not only caused capital outflow from Singapore. What is worse is that some Singaporeans may end up losing their hard-earned money. Will the Government consider removing ABSD at least for Singaporeans?
The Chairman: Mr Gan Thiam Poh, please take your four cuts together. Mr Gan is not here. Mr Zainal Sapari.
Mr Zainal Sapari (Pasir Ris-Punggol): Madam, studies show that global life expectancy will increase, on average, by 2.5 years every decade. That is an increase of three months every year or six hours per day. Singaporeans' life expectancy is increasing by 3.5 years every decade. At the national level, current policies must be redefined and even revamped to prepare for these 100 years of life. If our workers are living up to 100 years old, it means that we have to work longer or save more.
Hence, the issue of assets becomes a very important consideration for many of our older citizens. Property, in particular, would become an asset for many Singaporeans, especially when they consider monetising their properties for their retirement needs. However, the current Lease Buyback Scheme (LBS) is extended only to the elderly living in four-room flats.
I have come across residents who have downgraded their housing to a smaller unit even though their desire is to remain at the flat that they had lived for a long time. Likewise, some of these residents are financially tight but do not have the option to participate in LBS because of their bigger flat size. Hence, I would like to propose to extend LBS to all our elderly living in HDB flats but subject to the existing income eligibility criteria.
Miss Cheryl Chan Wei Ling (Fengshan):\tMadam, can I take both cuts together?
The Chairman: Yes, please.
Miss Cheryl Chan Wei Ling: Thank you. Housing is one of the most basic needs for everyone. In society, there is a plethora of family circumstances and needs. While we cannot fulfil the needs of all, advancing some aspects of the policies may help certain families. I will focus on two groups here − single parents and young couples with a foreign spouse.
Both groups are typically single income or no income for some, especially the single parents. Being a sole breadwinner, some have to undertake two jobs to make ends meet. Often, they would fail to meet the HDB rental limit cap of $1,500 per household. I agree that the Minister had earlier replied in a Parliamentary Question (PQ) that this can be managed through an appeal process and many have been assisted. Although help has been rendered, often, single parents are under enormous anxiety with the looming uncertainty whether a shelter is immediately available after divorce proceedings. Can HDB help to ameliorate their anxiety by establishing a direct appeal channel? For those undergoing divorce proceedings, can HDB allow them to be in the queue for a flat allocation before the final decree is available?
For those young couples with a foreign spouse, can rental flats be offered as interim housing as they work towards a permanent home, or an option to enable them to own a 2-room flat without subsidies? And to prevent those from gaming the system, a longer Minimum Occupation Period can be imposed.
For those already living in rental flats, they have a different challenge. With the progressive wage structure, it is likely that they would be earning an income of at least $800 to $1,000 per household. With wage increase over time, some of them found that the increase in their wages has been used to pay off the increase of the quantum in the larger rental rates that they are paying. This deprives them of any savings towards owning their next flat. Can the existing HDB rental increase structure be reviewed to be more gradual to minimise the disincentive of them earning more, or a mechanism be used to offset the increment towards their next flat purchase?
And for the single parents, I would think the issue here is that they have a short timeframe from the disposal of their flat to moving out of its premises. What more can the Ministry do to support transition home planning for these families?
Since the LBS was introduced, we have encouraged the elderly who need extra cash to unlock the value of their asset. There are takers for the scheme but seemingly not very high. Some of their concerns are: one, lack of understanding of the scheme; two, unsupportive spouse or family members preventing them to proceed; three, no Lasting Power of Attorney (LPA) in place.
For some elderly who live in 5-room flats or larger, this has resulted in conflicts because they do not have spare cash and they generally have fewer subsidies because of their flat type and some do not belong to the Pioneer Generation.
I would like to ask if the Ministry can consider raising awareness and encourage all home owners of public or private property to sign an LPA. This will help alleviate concerns in different situations and reduce the burden of costly legal processes subsequently.
To assist married couples to obtain their first flat sooner, several measures have been introduced. But what about their elderly parents who wish to move closer to their children to provide extended family support? What is the Ministry's position on this?
And our last group would be the private landed elderly home owners who wish to downsize to an HDB flat over time. The debarment period rule after the sale of their private property does not help to ease their transition. Even for the resale HDB flat, they need to dispose of the private property within six months. This will be challenging during economic downturns or when the property market is weak. Many would not have cash and they cannot borrow from a private bank loan. What can be done to assist them to downsize?
Mr Saktiandi Supaat (Bishan-Toa Payoh): Madam, the Fresh Start Housing Scheme has started accepting applications since December last year and I note that the response from the ground has been generally positive. Many families, children especially, are looking forward to a stable life in their new homes. But while the scheme caters to second-timer families with young children, \"married, divorced or widowed\" applicants, what about the single parents? Understandably, our policies are largely pro-family. However, children born under any sort of circumstances are innocent and should not be denied an equal footing in society simply because of their birth. They already have a more challenging start because they only have one parent. Moreover, bringing up a child single-handedly requires a lot of strength and courage, and single parents should be respected for that.
So, in relation to single parents, I hope more can be done to help them. Examples could include offering more flexibility to access housing, waiving the levies and providing child benefits as long as the parents are looking or holding on to their jobs. Their children, at the very least, deserve the same benefits as all other children in Singapore are entitled to.
Ms Kuik Shiao-Yin (Nominated Member): I tell the story of HDB's beginnings to the students that I teach with real pride. I remind them that we were once labelled by the British as having \"one of the world's worst slums\" because so many of us here were living in squatter conditions. I tell them also about a man called Lim Kim San who was so affected by the struggles of the poor that he volunteered to chair the HDB and power his way through bureaucratic red tape and rigid regulations to ensure that low-income Singaporeans could gain quick access to low-cost housing as soon as possible.
The foundations of the HDB story were one marked by an urgent compassion and an ambition for social impact, and that is why it is regarded as one of the most successful social housing schemes in the world. And I do see the continuation of Lim Kim San's extraordinary legacy whenever I hear stories of compassionate officers in the Public Service working quietly and ambitiously to help every housing challenge that comes their way, especially those of single parents who have fallen through the cracks.
My cut is about how we can help financially burdened single working parents, be they divorced, widowed, unwed or those with incarcerated spouses, to allow them to consistently experience HDB as a compassionate and trusted guide in their difficult journey of finding stable housing for themselves again. So, I will focus on four interventions that I believe can help.
First, expand the terms of the Assistance Scheme for Second-Timers (ASSIST) scheme so that more single parents can qualify. I understand there already is a priority housing scheme for divorced or widowed single parents since 2013. I have read that HDB sets aside about 740 flats for the scheme as of December 2014, but the take-up has been slow and only 130 flats have been booked. So, I am not sure if that is because of the eligibility criteria. To qualify, applicants must have sold their matrimonial flat before their divorce. However, anecdotally, many single parents sell their matrimonial flat after their divorce, disqualifying them for the scheme. Can the Minister verify and update us on the take-up rate of the ASSIST scheme? I hope he can also explain the underlying principle of why only applicants who sold their flat before the divorce need apply and whether this scheme can be expanded to include those who sold their flat after their divorce.
Second, allow divorced single parents with split care and control of children early access to subsidised housing. I understand that divorced couples are subjected to a three-year time bar where only one of them is allowed to own a subsidised flat. If both of them cannot agree on which one of them will get that privilege, only the parent with care and control of all the children can be exempted from the debarment period when buying a second subsidised HDB flat.
Some of these lower-income divorcees ordered by the Courts to split the care and control of their children thus feel trapped in between the three-year debarment for HDB home ownership and also being denied rental housing options simply because they do not have care for all the children. Can the Minister share whether it is possible to lift the three-year debarment period for access to subsidised housing for financially-challenged divorcees with split care and control of children, especially those who do not have kin who can house them?
Third, consider unwed mothers and their child as a family nucleus so that they can apply for HDB housing. The Government has recently made really encouraging strides in showing compassion towards the situation of unwed mothers, giving them equal maternity leave and access to Child Development Accounts (CDA). I have a special respect for single mothers who choose to take the hard road of raising a child on their own when they could have chosen to abort or abandon their child out of fear for their own future. They have chosen an uncommon path and, in light of our low birth rates, I believe such mothers should be supported rather than penalised for choosing to take responsibility for raising their child.
Currently, because unwed mothers and their children are not considered a family nucleus, they do not qualify for family housing grants and they may only purchase a flat under the Singles Scheme at 35 years old.
I know there is the current argument about how \"Singapore is a conservative society that does not accept unmarried single-parent families.\" I would like to also present the observation that many conservatives also pride themselves on their reverence for the sanctity of life, loyalty to kin and protective care of the next generation, family-centred values that many single unwed mothers have shown, and they share as well, because of their decision to raise their child. It is possible that there is more support from conservatives from this angle than we think.
I am aware from stories on the ground that there have been exceptions made for certain single unwed mothers, but the successes seem to be credited to a mixture of arbitrary reasons, like individual stubborn insistence, Member of Parliament (MP) appeals, HDB discretion or diligent advocacy by a public servant or social worker. So, it is quite unclear to an inexperienced observer what is the best process for an unwed single mother to take if she feels she has a good case. Can the Minister share what would be the most recommended path for an unwed mother under 35 to take through the system to afford a house of her own?
My fourth and final point is for HDB to consider prototyping a user experience journey based on the single parent trying to navigate the HDB system. Many single parents share stories about depending on discretionary interventions by HDB personnel or MPs to secure a flat. The default answer of \"please talk to your MP\" to solve housing issues is actually quite prevalent on the ground even from voluntary welfare organisations (VWOs). Some parents have gone beyond asking their MPs to write appeal letters to even having their own children write the letters, believing that only emotional appeals would help move the needle on their housing situation.
But it cannot be that access to housing comes down to who has the most sympathetic story or the most passionate advocate. I am very sure that this is not the HDB or whole-of-Government way. The current lack of clarity by this particular user of how to navigate the system surely results in a great deal of wasted time and energy for everyone involved − the time-poor single parents themselves, the time-poor letter writing MPs and the time-poor civil servants juggling all the multiple cases. So, could we experiment with forming a small support unit within HDB that specialises in communicating and coordinating housing services for all families transitioning to single-parent households? That would be a most exciting piece of social innovation.
The Chairman: Mr Louis Ng, please take your two cuts together.
Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang (Nee Soon): A single unwed parent who is under 35 years old is currently unable to purchase an HDB flat or enjoy the housing grants under the family scheme. It is difficult enough being a single parent and we should help rather than penalise them. So, similar to what Ms Kuik Shiao-Yin has just mentioned, can the Ministry consider allowing a single unwed parent and his or her child to form a family nucleus when applying for an HDB flat? If we cannot consider helping the parent, then, surely, we should consider helping the child.
Next, it cannot be easy to go through a divorce, especially when children are involved. I am sure the biggest worry for any parent is whether they can provide their children with a roof over their heads. We do have the ASSIST programme, but I hope we can allow them to start the housing application upon getting the interim judgment of divorce since it is uncommon for the proceedings to not continue. This will help ensure that the children are not left homeless after the divorce is finalised, and ease the transition into the next chapter of their lives.
Ms Rahayu Mahzam (Jurong):\tMadam, as a divorce lawyer, I have seen many cases involving disputes or issues relating to the arrangements of matrimonial HDB flats post-divorce. Making housing arrangements post-divorce is a challenge for the parties and usually contribute towards their acrimony. If they have children, sometimes, parties fight over care and control as they feel that the party with the children stand a better chance of getting subsidised HDB housing upon their divorce.
Even if parties are amicable, it is often not easy to finalise the arrangements on their existing HDB flat as decisions on sale, transfer or retention of flats will have significant implications for both parties. They will have to worry about issues of refunding of CPF monies to the other party if there is a transfer, getting a further HDB loan, finding a suitable new flat, debarment from rental and purchase of a new flat or paying the resale levy in the future.
These issues are not new and have been raised before and are being raised again here. They also continue to be a perennial issue. I note that the Association of Women for Action and Research (AWARE) had also recently made recommendations on single parents' access to public housing based on findings from their research project. At the Meet-the-People Sessions (MPS), I also see many divorcees who seek assistance on housing issues and make appeals to HDB. In particular, I have met divorcees who do not have children or did not get care and control of their children and have difficulties finding housing after divorce.
I note that, over the years, changes have been made to help alleviate difficulties faced by divorcees, especially those with children. For example, ASSIST was introduced to benefit second-timer divorced and widowed parents. HDB also exercises great flexibility in assisting individuals with difficulties in appropriate circumstances.
However, could the Ministry do more to look into policies relating to housing for divorcees? For example, could HDB assist divorcees to obtain housing, regardless of whether the individual has care and control of the children? Could HDB also reconsider some of the rules in respect of debarment for rental or purchase of flat, housing loans and resale levies when the transaction for the flat arises from a Court order in a divorce?
Mr Pritam Singh (Aljunied): Mdm Chairman, HDB rental flats can be a life saver for many vulnerable families. They also represent an important safety net for the children of rental lessees or their next generation. I wish to take this opportunity to acknowledge the flexibility granted by HDB and the compassion extended to rental flat applicants for my MPS cases who narrowly missed the qualification criteria and to single mothers and divorced spouses in particular.
In this context, I have noted a small group of new rental flat applicants coming to my MPS with increasing frequency. These are foreigners who were either married to Singaporeans in the past and who have Singaporean children or, separately, low wage-earning Singaporeans married to foreign spouses.
As the rule stands today, neither group qualifies to apply for rental units and many are told of this when they visit HDB branch offices. More generally, the Government has reported a rise in the number of citizens marrying non-citizens.
While I recognise the limited number of rental units available for needy Singaporean families, the non-citizen spouses I spoke of earlier have a very close connection to Singapore by way of their children's place of birth or by way of marriage to Singaporeans.
Would HDB allow such individuals to apply for rental flats? There is some policy justification in favour of this by virtue of the non-citizen spouse scheme which recognises Singaporeans married to foreigners can buy an HDB flat. But I am just referring to the rental market right now. I hope HDB would allow foreign spouses or ex-spouses to rent directly from HDB so as to allow the individuals concerned and their families to get back on their feet.
The Chairman: Mr Gan Thiam Poh, please take your four cuts together.
Mr Gan Thiam Poh: Madam, thank you for giving me the opportunity. I would like to ask what the take-up rates for the Parenthood Priority Scheme have been and whether HDB has been able to meet the demand to date. Which estates and flat types are most in demand? How successful has the scheme been in encouraging married couples to have more children and as early as possible in their married lives?
The Minister shared in October last year that the waiting period for BTO flats will drop to two to three years, down from the current three to four years. How would the Ministry go about achieving this and what would be the steps taken to expedite the construction process? Will additional costs be incurred in order to shorten the waiting time for the construction to be completed?
What is the total number of BTO flats that HDB intends to build ahead of the launches? Would the Ministry also share how many flats for each room type will be built and where will the locations be?
Next, I would also like to ask how successful has the Parenthood Provisional Housing Scheme (PPHS) been? Can HDB lower the rental and allow the rental to be used to offset against the purchase price of the BTO flat? Can the scheme be extended to couples still in the process of applying for flats?
Next, will HDB reconsider extending LBS to HDB flats other than 4-rooms and below? This would really enable many senior citizens to age in place. I would also like to appeal for the eligible age to be lowered and for approval to be granted for cases involving residents with special needs on compassionate grounds.
Mr Kwek Hian Chuan Henry (Nee Soon): Madam, in our rental flat schemes, single seniors are usually asked to share flats. This can be a good thing, as our single seniors can provide company and support for one another.
But sometimes, things do not work out. There are many senior rental flat residents who experienced considerable difficulties in staying with their flatmates, usually resulting in bitter disputes. I am sure many of our fellow Members have experienced that kind of appeals.
However, it is often not easy for our HDB officers to help them find accommodation, either by helping these individuals to sometimes stay alone or by pairing them up with other seniors, and many of these are due to the shortage of rental flats. Will HDB consider increasing the supply of rental flats by some amount so that there can be more room to accommodate seniors facing this issue?
Mr Png Eng Huat (Hougang): Madam, the Senior Minister of State for National Development had said that HDB adopts a comprehensive management system to track construction process of all BTO projects. In an answer to a Parliamentary Question in January 2016, the Senior Minister of State outlined 10 stages of checks and monitoring to ensure BTO projects are properly supervised, building materials and equipment are of acceptable standard, and potential design, safety and maintenance issues are identified. In addition to this, this House was also informed that HDB conducts regular audits at different stages of construction to ensure compliance and quality control.
While it may be good to know that HDB takes a no-nonsense approach to ensure the build quality of its projects, the reality on the ground can be a big letdown at times. Some of the designs and quality of BTO flats and upgrading projects I have encountered in Hougang are not acceptable. At Hougang Dewcourt, a mixed development of 4-room flats and studio apartments, the design is not even elderly-friendly. The lift lobby lacks natural lighting in the daytime, which is a safety concern for senior citizens living there. Were these potential design, safety and maintenance issues identified early, as mentioned by the Minister? Does HDB expect the Town Councils to turn on the lights 24 hours a day at such lobbies to address the design concern?
The Town Council also found undulating corridors due to poor workmanship, garden areas that do not have adequate sunlight, and designs that do not make sense. One such design is the sheltered linkway connecting Dewcourt to the older parts of the estate. The overhang of the shelter falls so short of the apron drain that when it rains, the water hit the walkway directly and turns it into a flowing river. Instead of protecting residents from the rain, a few senior residents had fallen navigating that link as a result.
The Lift Upgrading Programme (LUP) is another project with diverse designs and quality issues. Some are well-designed while some are not. Some are just plain bewildering. We have lift lobbies that are small to be effective and shelters that are not consistently applied across the estate. Some blocks have them and some do not, for no apparent reasons.
Madam, in some of the new lift shafts, we found water on top of the lift cars, at the bottom of the lift pits, in the controller panel and in places you never thought water could get in. Yet, some lift shafts are so well built that the Town Council has very little issue maintaining them. So, where and when do the assurance in quality and control come in?
To further compound the issue, the Town Council has to take over a project whenever the HDB says so. Is the Town Council expected to do a thorough check for defects when it has neither control over the design nor oversight on the work progress and workmanship? Is it even proper for HDB to hand over an incomplete project to the Town Council to maintain in the first place?
While some of the issues I mentioned are being rectified at this moment, either by the contractors or Town Council, why are these issues not picked up during the regular audits at the different stages of construction, as highlighted by the Minister? A lot of time and effort were wasted trying to chase down contractors to make good the defects and design anomalies. I have residents who asked me how did their BTO flats pass the Building and Construction Authority (BCA) in the first place.
Madam, wear and tear does not happen within a year or two upon completion of the projects. It certainly has something to do with the design, inferior material used or ineffective quality control on the ground. The comprehensive management system implemented by HDB to oversee its projects is all good but it must translate into acceptable results and quality on the ground consistently.
Er Dr Lee Bee Wah (In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] Imagine two HDB blocks. One was built in 1986 and has been renovated; the other one was built in 1987, although it is already 30 year old, it is not covered under the Home Improvement Programme (HIP). Yishun South is one such example. Half of the blocks are eligible for HIP while the other half is not, although they are only slightly newer.
My residents always tell me, \"Sister Wah, I have lived here for 30 years and I am now old; my flat is also getting old, the wall tiles are falling off and the toilet bowl is almost broken. Can you help us?\"
We can see that HIP is very important and everyone needs it. I would like to ask the Government to set aside funds to allow those 30-year-old flats to be included in HIP. This is because there are many residents who have lived there from the start and would very much like to have a brand new flat, especially a new toilet. Minister, can you help us?
(In English): I would like to highlight another issue. Recently, certain residents have given me feedback that they have difficulty in buying 2-room flats. A resident aged 50-plus told me that she has been trying for the first time and still not successful. Last night, I saw a couple who want to downgrade, right-size, and they told me that they tried six times, still cannot get it. So, perhaps, there is a shortage of 2-room flats.
Ms Jessica Tan Soon Neo (East Coast): Mdm Chairman, HDB flats that were built after 1986 that are 30 years old or those turning 30 years old are not eligible for HIP. These flats, for example, those flats in the constituency that I serve in Changi Simei have aged and do need essential upgrading, such as repairing of spalling concrete and structural cracks, replacement of waste and soil discharge stacks, replacement of pipe sockets and new clothes drying racks.
While we understand that upgrading is a major expenditure, but these upgrading works are essential due to the age of the flats and for the safety of residents. As these flats do not qualify for HIP, can I ask the Minister what plans does the Government have to address the upgrading needs of these ageing flats?
Mr Saktiandi Supaat: Madam, I am pleased that the Finance Minister has given special mention to the people with special needs in his Budget speech. To nurture a distinctively Singaporean and inclusive home for the people who may need a little help with mobility, the elderly, the disabled, key facilities and amenities must be distributed nearer to homes. Our vision is to move towards a smart city, which should make it easier to facilitate barrier-free accessibility and greater travel convenience. But we should not only be reliant on the physical aspects to create an inclusive, well-connected city. New innovative growth centres just outside the downtown area as well as innovative work arrangements are just some examples of how we can better connect everyone in other aspects of living.
Next, I want to talk quickly about the price of public housing. The Government has introduced cooling measures to bring down housing prices from an absurdly high level. They have worked somewhat, but it is undeniable that HDB flats are expensive and out of reach for some, especially young couples who have only just started working and do not have much savings.
Back when HDB was trying to encourage home ownership, Singaporeans were less affluent, but many could contribute to the nation's vision of a home for everyone. Most of these home owners have already paid off their loans and are debt-free. The situation is in the reverse now. Singaporeans are more affluent these days, but housing prices have rocketed and the younger generation feels enslaved by debts.
Maybe we need to reintegrate the principles of public housing which some have perceived have diminished slightly, even the perceived view that HDB prices are being commercialised. I would like to hear the Government's plan for building an affordable, global city that is in sync with the digital revolution.
Mr Darryl David (Ang Mo Kio): Mdm Chairman, the Global Talent Competitiveness Index published annually by the Institut Européen d'Administration des Affaires (INSEAD) consistently ranks Singapore as one of the most talent-competitive countries in the world. This is a testament to Singapore's abilities to develop, attract and retain talent.
The Committee on the Future Economy's (CFE's) recommended strategy of developing a vibrant and connected city of opportunity further homes in on the point that it is important for us to be well-connected externally and rejuvenate our internal landscape over time to attract talent and support economic growth and development for our citizens.
Singapore's progressive and forward-thinking attitude towards urban rejuvenation has helped us to avoid the problem of urban decay that many major cities in the region are now facing. One example of how urban planning can be aligned with growth strategies to spur economic development is the transformation of the Marina Bay area. With integrative planning, the Marina Bay area has been transformed from mudflats and empty plots of reclaimed land into a vibrant financial and service hub that combines both work and recreation.
The challenge that we now face is this: how can we continue to plan boldly and more integratively to attract talent not only for our citizens' benefit and attract this elusive \"creative-class\" that, according to the University of Toronto's Prof Richard Florida, will drive economic growth in an increasingly talent-starved world?
One of the CFE's recommendations is to create new spaces underground. While Singapore has already begun to explore this option with MINDEF's underground ammo storage and Kim Chuan depot, the largest underground train depot in the world, would this also be a viable and sustainable housing option? If the answer is yes, how will this impact our way of living?
The Chairman: Order. I propose to take the break now.
[(proc text) Thereupon Mdm Speaker left the Chair of the Committee and took the Chair of the House. (proc text)]
Mdm Speaker:\tI suspend the Sitting and will take the Chair again at 5.25 pm.
Sitting accordingly suspended
at 5.02 pm until 5.25 pm.
Sitting resumed at 5.25 pm
[Mdm Speaker in the Chair]
[(proc text) Debate in Committee of Supply resumed. (proc text)]
[Mdm Speaker in the Chair]
The Chairman: Minister Lawrence Wong.
The Minister for National Development (Mr Lawrence Wong):\tMdm Chairman, I thank Members for their keen interest and suggestions on MND matters. With your permission, I would like to show some slides on the light emitting diode (LED) screens.
The Chairman:\tYes, please. [Some slides were shown to hon Members.]
Mr Lawrence Wong: Madam, I would like to start by sharing the story of Mr and Mrs Sin. Mr Sin is from the Pioneer Generation and his wife is 66 years old this year. They used to live in cramped conditions in a rented flat in a Chinatown shophouse.
When HDB started the Homeownership for the People Scheme in 1964, they were among the first to sign up for a 3-room flat in Havelock Road. The flat gave them a home to call their own and a concrete stake in the wealth of the nation. They stayed there in the same home for almost 50 years, brought up two children who are now married and have their own families. Last year, Mr and Mrs Sin decided to right-size to a 2-room flexi-flat near their second child. They converted some of their home equity into cash and CPF savings. They are financially independent and they can now enjoy their golden years with their two grandchildren.
This is the Singapore Dream, HDB-style, and their story is not unique. I am sure many of us can relate to this in our lives or that of our parents or we would have met many residents like them. While we have achieved tremendous success with home ownership, I recognise that Singaporeans are still concerned about the future. It is reflected in the speeches of many Members during the Budget Debate and I have also met many parents who worried about their children's future as well as young Singaporeans who ask me whether they can look forward to a better life than their parents had.
I understand these concerns and they are not unique to Singapore. They are felt everywhere around the world. Enabling home ownership is a major challenge in cities everywhere. Young people struggle with high living expenses and home prices. For example, I read a recent report of the situation in the UK. In 1998, it took an average worker about three years to afford the downpayment to buy a home in the UK. Today, it takes 20 years − from three to 20 today. As a result, many young people in the UK have no chance of buying a property.
Our situation in Singapore is very different from the UK and other countries and this did not happen by chance. It is because we made home ownership a strategic priority from the start of nation-building and have continually invested in it over the decades, a point which Mr Alex Yam and many other Members of this House made earlier. That is why couples are today assured of a quality home at an affordable price even before they get married, something that no other country in the world can offer.
We are committed to keeping this Singapore dream alive − to help couples secure their flats more quickly, start their families, sink roots into the community and have a concrete stake in our nation. As Mr Gan Thiam Poh highlighted just now, first-timer married couples with or expecting a child already enjoy priority under the Parenthood Priority Scheme. As with many other first-timer families, mature estates and larger flat types are popular with such applicants. But I would encourage them to apply in the non-mature estates, where nine in 10 applicants of BTO flats are successful. In fact, if you are a first-timer applying for a BTO flat in non-mature estates, you can book one within the year, unless you insist on choosing a specific town or location. So, if you apply for a flat in a non-mature estate today, the waiting time comprises mostly of the construction time of about three to four years.
But I know that there are many young couples who hope to move into their homes quickly to embark on this marriage and parenthood journey together. So, we have looked into their requests seriously and I am happy to announce that HDB will offer BTO flats in some projects with a shorter waiting time. We are achieving this not by rushing the construction but by commencing construction ahead of launch. So, the waiting time will be cut to around two and a half years.
We target to launch the first batch of such flats in 2018. We will start with about 1,000 flats spread out among our non-mature estates. In addition, we will launch these projects with special quotas to further prioritise young couples who are ready to settle down.
At least 95% of 4-room or larger flats will be set aside for first-timer families, which is a 10-percentage point increase from the existing BTO quota. These flat types are the most popular amongst first-timer families. The quotas for smaller flat types will remain unchanged to meet the housing needs of second-timers, singles and the elderly who right-size.
Besides BTO, our Sale of Balance Flats (SBF) exercises are also a popular option for couples who wish to get their new flats quickly. Due to their large scale and variety, balance flats are currently only offered twice a year and applicants will apply for a specific town and the flat type. But there are some balance flats left unsold after each SBF exercise. Each time we put out an SBF exercise twice a year, there will still be flats that are left unsold.
I have asked HDB to offer these unsold flats for sale in a more efficient manner. Instead of releasing these unsold flats by specific towns and flat types, we will pool together unsold units and put them out for balloting at more regular intervals. Then, those with urgent housing needs and who are less particular about location can apply and need not wait for the usual SBF exercise which only happens twice a year.
This will be a new sales mode with balloting priority given to first-timers. HDB will launch the first such exercise in the latter half of this year and will announce more details when ready.
Regardless of how long the waiting time is, as highlighted by Mr Gan Thiam Poh, PPHS allows couples to start building a life together while waiting for their flat to be completed. To date, about 2,000 households have lived in PPHS flats and we have welcomed more than 400 \"PPHS babies\".
One such couple is Mr and Mrs Leong. They booked a BTO flat in 2013, and then while waiting, they moved into a PPHS flat in Dover Road with their three-month old daughter. While they were there, they welcomed the arrival of not just one, but two other daughters while staying in the PPHS flat. Their new 4-room BTO flat in Keat Hong is ready, and the family of five will be moving in soon. So, I think Ms Josephine Teo and the National Population and Talent Division (NPTD) office will be very happy with what we are doing.
We know that every dollar counts for a young family just starting out. That is why HDB rents out PPHS flats at subsidised rates. Mr Darryl David and several Members have asked whether we can lower the rents even more.
We have studied this very carefully. To help families further, we have decided to lower PPHS rents by $200 to $400 per month, depending on flat type and location. So, in the example of a 3-room flat in Jurong, with the new rent, it will be $600; and in Commonwealth, it will be $700. Effectively, the new rentals will be about or less than half of market rentals, and couples taking up these options can save more than $1,000 a month by renting a PPHS flat instead of a flat in the open market. This will give young couples more affordable options to start their lives together while waiting for their new flats to be completed.
Mr Gan Thiam Poh and Ms Tin Pei Ling also suggested making available PPHS flats to couples who are still applying for BTO flats, meaning to say, their flats have not been booked yet, but they are still in the process of applying. We can study this but let us remember that PPHS rentals are highly subsidised, so it is fair that we set clear timelines for the couples to stay in PPHS. The best way to ensure this is when they have already booked a flat, and then we know that the flat is booked and there is a specific timeline for which they need the PPHS rentals.
Finally, there are always resale flats for couples who want to move in quickly and have specific preferences on location, for example, if they wish to live close to their parents. And there are many more options to choose from in the resale market. We know that affordability can still be a concern for such young couples, especially when they are just starting out. That is why we have increased the grants for resale flats, as announced in the Budget. With the enhanced grants, most young couples should be able to afford the downpayment for their resale flats. In fact, together with existing grants, resale flat buyers can enjoy as much as $110,000 in housing subsidies.
Mr Alex Yam and Assoc Prof Randolph Tan asked if the enhanced CPF Housing Grant will push up resale prices. We are aware of this risk and have studied the matter very carefully. But we expect resale prices to remain stable for a few reasons.
Firstly, there is currently a healthy resale flat supply. A good number of owners will be selling their existing flats when they move into their newly completed homes. So, that additional supply will help to soak up the increase in demand.
Moreover, sellers will need to be realistic in pricing their flats because home buyers always have the option to buy a new flat from HDB. So, that puts some reality check on the prices that sellers would be able to set.
The resale price is also linked to the overall state of the property market. Er Dr Lee Bee Wah suggested removing the ABSD for Singaporeans. Several other Members have mentioned this on previous occasions as well. I note the suggestions. The property measures have helped to achieve a soft landing in prices. Today, housing demand remains firm, given the current interest rate environment and income growth. So, we will continue to monitor this carefully to maintain a stable and sustainable property market.
Mr Yee Chia Hsing had at the Budget Debate suggested reviewing the concept of ownership of residential properties, such that if a residential property is held by a corporate entity or a special purpose vehicle, and the shares of the company are transferred from seller to buyer, the normal residential stamp duty should apply.
The Government has been studying this issue. In principle, we should treat transactions in residential property on the same basis, regardless of whether the property is transferred directly or through a transfer of shares in a company whose primary business is in residential property in Singapore. So, we plan to make legislative changes to effect this. The aim or the intent is not to impact the ordinary buying and selling of shares in such companies when they are listed on the stock market by retail investors. However, significant owners of residential property holding entities will be subject to the usual stamp duties when they transfer equity interest in such entities, like what would happen if they were to buy or sell the property directly.
With the changes in CPF grants, let us take a look at how a resale HDB flat compares against the BTO options today.
Let us take the example of a couple looking to settle down in their first home together and looking to buy a place near their parents in Tampines, a mature estate. The price of a 4-room new flat in Tampines is about $300,000 to $360,000. A 4-room resale flat in Tampines is now selling for about $430,000, before grants. With the grants, the resale flat price will be comparable to a new flat price. So, a young couple looking for a flat in Tampines can buy a resale flat and move in immediately.
We will do one more enhancement for the resale market, and before Members get excited, let me assure Members that it has nothing to do with price or grants, but we are going to do something for the transaction process.
Today, doing a resale transaction can be quite an involved process, even with the help of an agent. It takes about 16 weeks to complete a resale transaction and requires two appointments with HDB. We can do much better than this. So, we can leverage technology and make the process faster and more streamlined. HDB is working on this and will announce the details by the end of the year.
I hope that all these measures will make housing more affordable and accessible for young couples and help them to start their marriage and parenthood journey early. At the same time, I encourage young couples to do your research and consider the different housing options. Be prudent and find a place that is within your budget and means.
If you are looking for resale, choose a flat with a sufficiently long lease to cover your needs. Then, like Mr and Mrs Sin, you will have a home and a nest-egg that you can tap on for retirement later in life.
While our focus is on helping first-timers, HDB flats also meet the housing needs of Singaporeans at every life stage. Our family, job and financial circumstances change over the course of our lives. The housing arrangement that was suitable when we were young may no longer be the right fit some years down the road.
For those who come back to HDB again as second-timers, we are helping them with a number of measures that we have introduced or enhanced in the past few years. For example, some may wish to move closer to family members after their grandchildren are born, or as the grandparents age, for mutual care and support. These families can benefit from the enhanced Married Child Priority Scheme (MCPS), the Multi-Generation Priority Scheme (MGPS), or 3Gen flats if they are buying new flats; or they can benefit from the Proximity Housing Grant (PHG) for resale flats which we introduced earlier.
We are also providing more housing options for singles. We have opened up 2-room BTO flats to singles in 2013. The initial response was very strong. And the application rate was 57.5 in the first exercise in 2013. We have brought this down to 6.6 last year. To date, 9,700 singles have successfully booked a flat. We will continue to put out more 2-room BTO flats to meet the needs of singles.
Singles can also opt for a resale flat and benefit from the enhanced CPF Housing Grant announced in this year's Budget. For example, for a first-timer single buying a resale flat under the Single Singapore Citizen (SSC) Scheme can now qualify for the CPF Housing Grant of $25,000 for a 4-room or smaller flat, or $20,000 for a 5-room flat. Eligible singles applying under the Joint Singles Scheme (JSS) will receive the CPF Housing Grant of the same amount as first-timer families.
Several Members − Ms Kuik Shiao-Yin, Mr Louis Ng, Ms Rahayu Mahzam and Miss Cheryl Chan − also asked about how we are helping vulnerable groups, including divorcees and single unwed parents. We are fully committed to helping them with their housing needs and making sure no one falls through the cracks.
If they are unable to afford a flat and do not have alternative housing options, HDB will assist them with a rental flat, and we are continuing to build more rental flats to meet these needs. In the last three years, HDB has helped nearly 2,000 single parents with a public rental flat. And by single parents, we mean divorcees with children as well as unwed mothers with children. This is about 27% of all households who were allocated a public rental flat during that time.
Every case that HDB receives is unique and our officers will review each case very carefully. If necessary, they will work together with the local social service agencies − the SSOs, the Family Service Centre social workers − to assess the family's situation and they will exercise flexibility for those in difficulties.
Besides helping with rental, we also introduced the Fresh Start Housing Scheme last year. This was to provide additional grants for second-timer families living in rental flats, so that they can purchase their own homes. Mr Saktiandi mentioned this and asked about the status. We have just opened up for applications in December and I recently visited some of the families who applied for the scheme.
One of them is a single mother who moved into her rental flat a few years ago, together with her daughter who just entered secondary school. They are getting support from various parties, including from the family. The grandmother helps to look after the daughter after school so that the mother can work. There is an aunt who takes her daughter to the library because she enjoys reading. There are Ministry of Social and Family Development (MSF) officers who check-in with them regularly to see how they are doing. So, it shows that this is not just about getting a flat, as important as that is. It is about the family having all-round support which the Government and the community can provide. That is what we are doing with Fresh Start.
In this case, the family will be applying for a new 2-room flexi flat by the end of the year. We are very happy for them and we wish them all the best in their Fresh Start journey. I have shared broadly our approach in helping these vulnerable groups. Minister of State Koh Poh Koon will elaborate further and give more updates on the progress of the Fresh Start scheme.
Another important group that we watch out for is our seniors. They have a nest egg in their HDB flats and many would like to tap into this nest egg so that they can live out their golden years comfortably. Today, seniors who wish to monetise their flat can consider a range of options. They can rent out a room, they can apply for LBS. Mr Gan Thiam Poh and Mr Zainal Sapari suggested extending LBS in various ways. In fact, we have already extended the maximum lease under LBS to 35 years. We do not currently plan to extend further. But HDB will exercise flexibility to allow some needy seniors below the age eligibility criterion to tap on LBS on a case-by-case basis.
We have also extended the LBS to 4-room flats to cover the majority of seniors. For those in larger flats, it is better to tap on other monetisation options, such as right-sizing to a smaller flat. So, I want to dwell a bit on what we want to do to make right-sizing more attractive.
Today, if you right-size, you already get the chance to get a Silver Housing Bonus of up to $20,000. We are providing more options for seniors to do so. That is why we introduced the 2-room flexi scheme, with flexibility on the choice of lease length, the flat size and internal fittings. We are building more of these 2-room flexi flats and setting aside supply of such flats specially for seniors. We are also offering priority to those moving near their existing flat or near their married children. So, we are seeing better success rates for seniors who are applying for these 2-room flexi flats.
Currently, the numbers who take up the right-sizing option are not large. When we survey and ask people, they tell us that the process is sometimes quite daunting. So, we will work at making the entire process of right-sizing much easier through three moves.
First, we will introduce more hand-holding for our seniors. Seniors who are interested in exploring their monetisation options can walk-in to the HDB Hub or branches and receive one-on-one financial consultation. To make their experience more comfortable, we have implemented an elderly priority queue at the HDB Hub so that they can get prompt attention and our officers will guide them through the right-sizing process.
Second, we will allow right-sizing seniors to defer the full downpayment until key collection. We know that some seniors find it difficult to fork out the minimum 5%-10% downpayment, as their monies are locked up in their existing flats. So, to help them, we will allow all buyers aged 55 and above who are right-sizing to a new 3-room or smaller flat to pay the downpayment and the balance purchase price later, at the point when they collect the keys to their new flat. This will be a big help to the seniors who are right-sizing.
Third, we will introduce a new Temporary Loan to help those with cash flow issues at the key collection stage. Currently, those who are right-sizing can make use of the HDB cash contra facility. What this means is that when you sell your existing flat and you buy a new one, you can contra. But this requires some coordination in timing because you complete the sale of the existing flat and collect the keys to your new flat on the same day as a back-to-back transaction. This is not always easy to do. In practice, we all know that it takes time to sell the existing flat and it is not always possible to time the transactions so perfectly. So, we will provide right-sizing seniors with a Temporary Loan, which allows them to complete the sale of the existing flat after key collection. While we have seniors in mind, we will extend the Temporary Loan to our non-elderly who need this, so that a wider group of home buyers can benefit as well.
So, we have these three moves that we hope will make right-sizing more convenient, more accessible for all our seniors. We hope that this tailored package of measures will make the whole right-sizing process a more pleasant one for our seniors, from start to finish.
Madam, a home is not just about the flat we live in, but the quality of our overall living environment − that means our HDB towns and also the rest of our city. That is something that we have always been very mindful of. What we enjoy today is the result of long-term commitment, meticulous planning and painstaking implementation, year by year, decade after decade. That is why, today, we have beautiful HDB homes set in lush greenery and waters, like what you see here in Tengah Forest Town where we are going to put up the first batch of flats by next year.
I note what Mr Png Eng Huat said earlier about quality issues and defects. I will be the first to admit that HDB is not perfect. But which developer is? In all building projects, there will always be some defects here and there, and that is why there is a period where the developer will come in to remedy the defects. I would say, let us be fair and objective in assessing HDB's quality over the years and decades. Any objective assessment of the quality of HDB's projects would show that the quality has, indeed, improved. If you look at independent scoring of quality, like the CONQUAS score, which measures construction quality, indeed, they have improved over the years. And whenever we see that there are defects or issues, we will make sure that HDB goes in to remedy them and put things right. And if there are specifics in the case of what Mr Png had mentioned, we will look at them.
We are doing this in our HDB estates to make them more beautiful, to make them more inclusive as well, so that we have an inclusive environment for people of all ages and abilities. We are building a more vibrant town with its own distinctive character, heritage and identity − attributes that Mr Alex Yam mentioned. We are also building more integrated mixed-use districts where people can live, work and play together.
We are also taking steps to rejuvenate our older estates. So, it is not just about new towns, but we are also taking steps to rejuvenate the older ones. I note the suggestions by Er Dr Lee Bee Wah and Ms Jessica Tan to extend the HIP. I have explained before our position on this. We are still in the process of working through the current batch of upgrading for HIP. So, let us finish this first. We are studying the subsequent batches but, as I have mentioned before, this is contingent on the resources of the Government to fund such a programme because any upgrading programme is a major commitment that spans over many years. We have undertaken upgrading projects before and we will continue to do so. Senior Minister of State Desmond Lee will elaborate more on this.
Madam, there is much that we can be proud of in Singapore, but we must never take this for granted. We have significant infrastructure demands in our next phase of development. We need to replace existing infrastructure assets which are ageing and also invest in new infrastructure projects.
Members already know about our plans to expand Changi Airport and Tuas Terminal. And we have other infrastructure needs, too, including in our public transport system, our utilities system like water − which we had discussed extensively in the Budget Debate − sewage, waste, our power grids. All these are crucial in enabling economic growth, generating jobs and improving the quality of life for our people.
We cannot assume that all new infrastructure will be automatically put in place and old ones will be automatically upgraded by the Government. Look at the situation in many first-world democracies where infrastructure is deteriorating. Just take America as an example where some cities are literally still relying on water and sewage pipelines that were built more than a century ago. Why is this happening? Partly because of \"Not in my back yard\" (NIMBY) mindsets and opposition from various interest groups, because it is not in my backyard, I oppose a new infrastructure next to my home. It is partly also because infrastructure projects are very expensive and many governments do not have the resources to fund them. Private financing has been cited very often as a way around this, but public-private partnerships (PPPs) are not the silver bullet. Ultimately, someone still has to pay, which means either higher user charges or taxes. Because of all these difficulties, there is a tendency for politicians to kick the infrastructure can down the road and focus on short-term deliverables. And that is why you see the situation you see in many advanced developed countries − infrastructure gets neglected and the result is deteriorating infrastructure.
We are not immune to these pressures, so we must never assume that infrastructure will automatically get done in Singapore. If the economy fails, if there are no fiscal resources, if there is an incompetent government, then nothing will happen and infrastructure will stagnate and Singapore will decline.
Some people have also asked me if there is a lot more we can do, given our land constraints. What more can we do in Singapore where everything is already developed? But the fact is that we have yet to reach our physical limits. We are optimising land use to free up more space. I mentioned this last year where, through the movement of Paya Lebar Airbase and the city ports, we can free up much more space for new developments. We are exploring ways to expand space options, including underground space, as Mr Darryl David mentioned just now. And underground space is not so much for underground living. I do not think we are ready for that. But we can certainly put utilities and storage facilities and many other things underground. Then, valuable surface land can be freed up for housing, greenery and other uses.
So, there is tremendous potential to dream big, think boldly and build a new Singapore for the next 50 years. We must not let complacency set in or, worse, allow a culture of stasis to take root and ossify our society. The same spirit of innovation that we need for the economy must be applied to planning our future city and home. We must find innovative ways to build new infrastructure for the future. We must develop new and innovative urban concepts that will make Singapore a more attractive, sustainable and liveable home.
Take the example of how we have succeeded in building a Garden City. Some of you would have read the recent reports of how Singapore was ranked as the city with the highest density of trees worldwide. It is a result of decades of hard work, with a strong personal push and commitment by our founding Prime Minister Mr Lee Kuan Yew. But now that we are where we are today, what comes after this? Are we done? Is this the climax of all that we need to do?
In fact, our next phase is to be a City in a Garden. And this is not just a slogan or a clever turn of phrase. It is a strategic imperative. We must continue to enhance our greenery further, not just at the ground level, but even sky-rise level. We must enhance our biodiversity and learn to live in harmony with nature, the flora and fauna around us for all to enjoy.
Likewise, on economic infrastructure, we are known for good economic infrastructure, which attracts companies from around the world. But we cannot afford to stand still while others catch up and move ahead. So, how can we invest in new infrastructure to make Singapore even more competitive, attract more investments and create more jobs for our people?
CFE had studied this and set out several recommendations, as several Members have also highlighted. Let me share some of the areas that MND and URA are working on.
Our aim is to create new growth centres not just in the downtown area, but all over our island. And these new centres can be nodes for related industry clusters to come together, including in new growth areas like FinTech and cybersecurity. We will also set up more innovation spaces for incubators, accelerators and startups. This was something that Mr Liang Eng Hwa had suggested earlier in the Budget Debate. These new centres will be attractive spaces for Singaporeans to live, work and play together.
One such centre is Jurong Lake District which, Members would be aware, is also the site of the High-Speed Rail (HSR) Terminus to Kuala Lumpur. This is no ordinary site because when we consulted with many experts, including experts from abroad, they have told us that it is very rare to find such a site in other cities, which is located in a setting of lush greenery and water, the way we have in Jurong Lake District now.
So, we will integrate our new developments with the surrounding greenery and water bodies in Jurong Lake Gardens which, itself, is being enhanced and revamped as our new National Gardens in the west. This will be a beautiful new setting for waterfront housing and office spaces.
When we complete the High-Speed Rail Station, it will not only be a major transport node connected to our Mass Rapid Transit (MRT) lines but will also have a central linear park on the surface, connecting to Jurong Lake Gardens.
This will not just be a second CBD. But it has the potential to be a centre with multiple dimensions. The High-Speed Rail Station will make Jurong Lake District a new gateway to Singapore and a regional hub for ASEAN businesses.
Jurong Lake District is near the new Tuas Terminal that we are building in the west. It is also close to other knowledge and economic centres, like the Jurong Innovation District, the CleanTech Park and the Nanyang Technological University campus. So, more than just another CBD, this can be a Central Innovation District, an incubator for new ideas and innovation and a catalyst for Singapore's next stage of transformation, the way Jurong Industrial Estate kickstarted our manufacturing sector 50 years ago
Another new area is Punggol North. This is a mixed-use area comprising residential land uses, the new Singapore Institute of Technology (SIT) campus and also commercial and business park users. This growth cluster within Punggol New Town will have a focus on the digital and cybersecurity industries, and Punggol will be a key area for us to drive our Smart Nation initiatives. We are designating this as our first \"Enterprise District\" where we will try out several new planning concepts.
First, we will appoint a Master Developer for the whole district and allow more flexible land use within the area. In the Punggol cluster, most of the developments are undertaken by Government agencies, so we will appoint Jurong Town Corporation (JTC) as the Master Developer. JTC will then have the flexibility to develop the district based on land use and gross plot ratio guidelines at the overall district level. In other words, instead of having planning controls imposed on individual land parcels, JTC will be able to optimise land use across the entire development and find ways to integrate the needs of different users.
For example, since SIT's campus and the JTC's business parks are located side by side, we can have closer integration of the facilities. SIT's research labs, incubator spaces and learning facilities can be located inside JTC business park buildings and shared with the industry. At the same time, SIT can host industry research and development facilities and startup spaces within their buildings. This will help to create synergies between students and businesses, between academia and businesses, facilitate test-bedding and prototyping of new innovations.
The second benefit of having such a master developer is that it can help to more comprehensively design and implement good pedestrian connectivity and public spaces. Traditionally, a desired network of public spaces and connectivity links can only be realised over a long period of time as the various land parcels are developed step by step. With a master developer overseeing the implementation of an enterprise district, the key pedestrian routes and public spaces can be identified upfront and a more comprehensive network can be implemented.
Thirdly, the master developer will plan for and implement district-wide systems like district cooling, pneumatic waste conveyance system to support the district, all of which will help to reduce energy usage and enhance the sustainability and attractiveness of the environment.
Beyond Punggol, we are also looking to introduce the master developer approach in other new residential and mixed-use districts, where private developers will be given greater flexibility in planning and developing at a district level. We will provide for such an opportunity in Kampong Bugis, which is a new residential precinct. The whole precinct is about 17 hectares in size. The traditional approach would be to carve it out and put out individual plots for sale. But this time, we will tender out the entire site for a master developer. We will give flexibility for the master developer to come up with the overall plan and develop the project by phases, in line with market demand.
But the master developer will also have to be responsible for certain outcomes. We want this to be a people-centric, car-lite precinct. We will require the master developer to put in place a more comprehensive network of pedestrian walkways, cycling paths, as well as community and green spaces. We will also want the master developer to put in place district level systems to manage waste and storm water.
The development of Kampong Bugis will form part of our larger rejuvenation efforts for the Kallang River. Along the way, we will enhance the river with more greenery, seamless jogging and cycling paths. More homes will be introduced and the older industrial estates in the area will be rejuvenated. All these will be done in a way that is sensitive to the rich heritage and biodiversity of the river so that, over time, we can transform the entire riverfront and bring back new life and vibrancy to the area.
Mdm Chairman, I have just shared a few of our urban transformation plans. There are many more that are being worked on. These are major moves that will take decades to complete and the Government cannot do this work alone. We will need close partnerships with the community and private sector and the collective efforts of all to develop new innovative urban solutions. So, I call on Singaporeans to join us in this exciting journey to build and remake our entire city.
The best cities in the world are defined not by their buildings or infrastructure, but by their people − it is the spirit and imagination, the culture and identity of our people. So, we must be prepared to adapt to change and constantly innovate and improve. We must continue to embrace diversity and welcome new ideas and talent. We must be prepared to work hard and make sacrifices today so that we can reap the fruits tomorrow. That is what our Pioneers did for us; and that is how we can, in turn, pay it forward for our next generation − a greater city, an endearing home, a better Singapore. [Applause.]
[Deputy Speaker (Mr Lim Biow Chuan) in the Chair]
The Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Social and Family Development and Ministers for Education (Assoc Prof Dr Muhammad Faishal Ibrahim): Sir, MSO plays an important role to improve the Government's overall coordination and delivery of municipal services.
Since its inception, MSO seems to have grown in its engagements with other agencies and types of issues it helps to address. For example, during last year's COS Debate, Minister Grace Fu shared with the House that MSO would work with the Town Councils to help coordinate their responses to municipal issues in housing estates. The Minister also shared that MSO would look at improving coordination over a few issues, such as high-rise littering and pigeon-feeding.
I would like to ask the Minister how MSO has strengthened its service delivery and interagency coordination over the past two years.
Mr Ong Teng Koon (Marsiling-Yew Tee): Sir, Singaporeans place a lot of importance on having efficient public services to see to the upkeep and maintenance of their living environment and neighbourhood amenities. We take great pride in the fact that our municipal services function well and are generally up to the task of meeting the high standards that we Singaporeans set for ourselves.
MSO was set up two years ago precisely to improve upon such service delivery. With the myriad of Government agencies that participate in providing municipal services, it is not surprising that members of the public could easily get confused about which three-letter acronym to call when they are in trouble.
Within my own constituency, I am grateful to MSO for facilitating residents' feedback and organising joint action by different agencies. There was this case where MSO was involving the Agri-Food and Veterinary Authority (AVA), the National Environment Agency (NEA), HDB and Town Council to resolve a resident's complaint about a group of 50 bird enthusiasts who were using the linkhouse in front of a resident's flat to train parrots. And the second case involved a resident playing saxophone in a public park in the evenings which affected the peace of the surrounding flats. Unfortunately, this fell outside the purview of Town Council, HDB, NEA and the Police. So, fortunately, MSO was there to coordinate.
At this juncture, I would like to ask MSO to provide an update on the overall progress that it has made, especially over the past year. How successful have efforts been in bringing together different agency stakeholders to the same table to coordinate and improve upon municipal service delivery? I understand from last year's COS that all 16 Town Councils have given their agreement to work with MSO. Can MSO provide some specific examples of initiatives that have taken place in tandem with the Town Councils to the benefit of residents?
Last but not least, MSO has sought to leverage the prevalence of information and communications technology (ICT), such as cellphones, among Singaporeans. Can an update be provided on how effective the OneService App has been since its rollout and what plans there are to further improve upon this OneService App in the context of the Smart Nation Initiative?
The Chairman:\tMr Baey Yam Keng.
The Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Culture, Community and Youth (Mr Baey Yam Keng):\tChairman, can I take the three cuts together?
The Chairman: Yes, please.
Mr Baey Yam Keng: Thank you. MSO was formed to improve the Government's overall coordination and delivery of municipal services. MSO currently works with 11 Government agencies to resolve issues, particularly in areas where multiple agencies are involved. All of these agencies, and I would like to acknowledge each of them: AVA, BCA, HDB, Land Transport Authority (LTA), NEA, NParks, PA, Public Utilities Board (PUB), Singapore Land Authority (SLA), Singapore Police Force (SPF) and URA − not all of them have three-letter acronyms, by the way − all of them work very hard and, most of the time, tirelessly behind the scene so that we in Singapore can enjoy one of the world's highest quality living environments.
The beauty and strength of Singapore's Public Service is that every agency has a clear focus and has built the expertise to perform its role well. Hence, the potential of MSO should be more than the strength of the 11 agencies or, if we include MSO, more than the strength of 12 agencies. The sum should be greater than the parts. Let me illustrate with a common municipal problem that many Members would be familiar with, birds.
Singapore may be an urban jungle but we do have a lot of wildlife here: mynahs and pigeons. Their numbers have increased tremendously because of the easy access to food. One would assume that the birds would, therefore, only congregate at hawker centres and coffee shops, but no. In Tampines, I receive feedback from residents that their laundry has been soiled by bird droppings, and some even have birds flying into their flats. And these areas do not have food establishments nearby. I am sure this happens at other estates as well. The reason why the birds would gather at these areas is because there are people feeding them. There is food for them. People would throw bread, rice or other food either out of the kitchen window or onto the ground. I even know of an elderly man who would carry a backpack full of birdfeed. He would grab a handful, stretch out his hand and let birds feed from his hand. You can literally see birds flying around him as he walks around the estate. So, I call him the Snow White of Tampines.
Feeding of pigeons is illegal and AVA could fine an offender up to $500. Throwing food out of the window or on the grass is littering, which could attract an NEA fine of up to $2,000 for the first conviction, and even a corrective work order. However, both agencies can only apprehend the culprit when caught red-handed. But throwing out of the window is just a fleeting action. Usually, the Town Council will just have to clean up the leftover food, the bird droppings and the bird feathers.
However, I am sure there will be a lot of public feedback to AVA, NEA or Town Council through email, telephone or through the MSO app. If we are able to consolidate the data, we would have a better sense of where and when the feeder strikes and maybe even who the feeder is.
It does not need to be very sophisticated or hi-tech methods. Sometimes, residents or the cleaners themselves can offer invaluable information, just that there is no one lead agency talking to them, trying to piece together the various pieces of information or data, making sense of it and solving the problem. This approach can also be applied to issues of irresponsible cat feeding, high-rise littering and noise nuisances.
Chairman, Harvard professors Stephen Goldsmith and Susan Crawford wrote a book, \"The Responsive City: Engaging Communities Through Data-Smart Governance\". According to them, a \"responsive\" city is one that does not just make ordinary transactions like making paying a parking ticket easier, but one that uses the information generated by its interactions with residents to better understand and predict the needs of neighbourhoods, to measure the effectiveness of city agencies and workers, to identify waste and fraud, to increase transparency and, most importantly, to solve problems.
By using its own data and social media, a city \"should learn what its citizens are saying about their needs and the issues in their communities. It should learn across agencies about the solutions to problems; it should learn from the data about good actors and bad actors.
The way most governments are organised tend to focus on specific key performance indicators (KPIs) and some people would call it the silo-ed nature of public services, often pointed to as a factor behind inefficiency or poor outcomes.
However, our public agencies are not doing shoddy work. But because they are specialised agencies handling specific problems, there is a greater need for better coordination, closer collaboration and integrated solutions. When responsibilities fall onto different agencies which does not work in an integrated way, opportunities to intervene earlier or more effectively are missed. For transactional or back office services, a lack of integration will lead to duplicated activity and poor services experienced by residents, such as having to provide the same information over and over again. This problem of silo-ed working can apply to data as well, as silos extend to the data they hold, making it difficult for services to view data held by other agencies.
This is a huge missed opportunity as, in recent years, the power of linked and integrated data to provide insight into complex phenomena has become more apparent. Typically, concerns about the legality of data sharing and information governance have prevented the creation of large, linked datasets across public services. But there are now pioneering local authorities around the world which are starting to build large linked datasets across local public services, opening up powerful insights. And the MSO OneService app is a good start.
Linked data is effectively the creation of an online information architecture, sometimes referred to as data warehousing. It offers the ability to access data involved through an online portal.
On OneService app, there are data from across the 11 agencies. For example, I find that one low-hanging fruit that we can consider is the 62,000 Police Cameras (PolCam) in HDB estates. While the PolCam initiative was targeted at deterring and solving crime, the cameras and data collected would be very useful to solve many municipal issues.
In the Budget speech, Minister Heng spoke about using funds to support cross-agency projects, including those from MSO. So, I would like to ask the Minister how MSO is seeking to use this fund. Under the impetus of the Smart Nation initiative, I hope that MSO would also develop a vision where technology could be adopted to improve municipal service delivery, and consolidated data could be better used for improvements to operations and service delivery.
The Chairman: Mr Gan Thiam Poh, can you allow Minister Grace Fu to answer?
The Minister for Culture, Community and Youth (Ms Grace Fu Hai Yien): Thank you, Sir. MSO takes a people-centric focus in bringing about better municipal services. We work with agencies to streamline processes for complex or cross-cutting municipal issues. In the short two years, we have undertaken many initiatives towards this goal. Mr Ong Teng Koon and Assoc Prof Dr Muhammad Faishal have asked for an update.
One of our first initiatives was the OneService app, which made it easier for residents to provide feedback on municipal matters without the need to search for the right agency. The app has been well-received, with over 83,000 registered users reporting some 85,000 cases. This is an increase of over 70% in users and 190% in cases received since the start of last year. We have received many compliments from residents, who complimented agencies on their prompt responses and for taking residents' feedback seriously.
Going forward, in line with the direction of the Smart Nation initiative, we want to expand the app from a feedback tool to a multi-channel network that connects the Government, the people and the private sector with one another.
The first crowdsourcing feature in the app is called \"Spot Abandoned Trolleys\", and was introduced in April last year, which attracted over 4,600 reported cases. Last September, MSO launched the OneService Portal to complement the app, where residents can access information on services and updates in their neighbourhood. Recently, MSO also released a municipal case map on both platforms which show all feedback received by Government agencies over the past seven days. Users can see all the cases reported on their neighbourhood.
Besides improving the interface with the public, MSO paid attention to streamlining processes that involve multiple agencies. For instance, LTA was appointed as the First Responder for feedback on maintenance of connectivity-related infrastructure. Our efforts have paid off and agencies are increasingly taking on a collaborative approach in handling interagency issues.
For example, LTA received feedback last year from a concerned Mdm Ngeo on some uneven metal steps and a sunken manhole near a road junction. LTA approached PUB as the steps were on top of a drain. In view of public safety, PUB carried out repair works promptly. Concurrently, LTA reached out to Singtel which helped trace the sunken manhole to NetLink Trust, thereby facilitating rectification works. Mdm Ngeo, who witnessed the contractors hard at work, expressed appreciation to the agencies for their efforts.
LTA and PUB staff had taken upon themselves to go beyond their job scope − LTA in proactively reaching out to relevant parties for follow-up, PUB in moving in to rectify the issue in a timely manner. If they had not done so, MSO would not know better as an additional day or two taken would not affect their KPIs. This is just one of many cases that they handle on a daily basis. But it is because of what they did and collectively with other officers in our partner agencies, handling frontline customer services, carrying out operations on the ground, carrying out maintenance and rectification works, that we see a steady improvement in service delivery since MSO's formation. The time taken to close cases involving multiple agencies has decreased continuously from 21 days when MSO first started in October 2014, to 12 days by the end of last year. Routing accuracy of feedback has also improved from around 85% in late 2014 to 88% by the end of last year.
MSO also strengthened our partnership with the Town Councils, which play a key role in municipal service delivery in HDB estates. We have embarked on a number of initiatives together. First, we standardised feedback management processes. Then, we moved on to streamlining operations on the ground and establishing Standard Operating Protocols, such as the one for water issues between PUB and Town Councils. Recently, we connected the feedback management systems of MSO, those of our partner agencies and all 16 Town Councils. This means that public feedback can now be transferred seamlessly between agencies and Town Councils via the systems, thus ensuring proper follow-up.
MSO has also conducted a series of Learning Journeys, where representatives from Town Councils and Government agencies were brought together for learning. This fostered a better understanding of each other's work and resulted in better alignment of the work processes and information-sharing for issues like high-rise littering which Assoc Prof Dr Muhammad Faishal and Mr Baey Yam Keng mentioned.
Indeed, in one of the sessions we had with NEA, the Town Council participants found it useful to learn how NEA deploys its cameras to capture high-rise littering offences, as well as some of NEA's operational challenges. The coordination between the Town Council and NEA in addressing high-rise littering has improved as a result. Given the positive response, MSO is planning to expand the Learning Journeys to involve more agencies and Town Council officers.
As we continue to facilitate more collaborations between our partner agencies and Town Councils, we want to expand our role to an enabler, one which equips our agencies and Town Councils with tools to be more productive. This is particularly critical in view of the tightening labour market and technological disruptions. Municipal service delivery will need to adapt and take advantage of new technologies to be better and more efficient.
Many of MSO's partner agencies have already started to leverage technology for service delivery. For example, SLA and the Government Technology Agency (GovTech) have successfully completed a Proof of Concept on the use of drones and video analytics to automatically detect defects on state properties and land.
To enable our partner agencies to pursue more of such innovations, MSO has worked with MOF to set aside a fund of up to $5 million a year to support interagency projects. This fund will be channeled towards the development of technological initiatives by our partner agencies to enhance productivity in municipal services. From May this year, agencies will be able to tap on this fund to develop their ideas fully. In this regard, MSO plays the role of a coordinator and facilitator. We facilitate the participation of the relevant agencies, coordinate efforts and remove roadblocks to projects that cut across different agencies. We also aim to promote the application of one agency's technology in other areas so that we can achieve greater benefit from technology use.
For instance, MSO facilitated the development of a height sensor prototype for grass-cutting by GovTech, which measures the height of cut grass and uploads the data real-time as the contractor trims the grass. This allows the contractor to check his work against prescribed standards and perform rectification works if necessary before leaving the site. NParks officers can monitor the contractors' work remotely, thus reducing the need for physical inspection. A better outcome for grass-cutting is achieved with fewer man-hours required.
Following the successful trial, MSO will work with the Standards, Productivity and Innovation Board (SPRING) to find a commercial solution to the prototype. We look forward to working with the private sector, including SMEs, in commercialising the sensor. We hope to help our partner agencies to develop an innovative idea into a workable solution and enable the private sector to participate in the innovation.
Good municipal services should go beyond merely responding quickly to feedback. Managing municipal issues upstream and anticipating operational requirements can better address public concerns. We agree with Mr Baey Yam Keng that integrated data has great potential in this aspect. As a start, we have leveraged our integrated feedback management system to study data received across agencies to better identify the location, timing and the cause of key issues. We can deep dive into these hotspots to identify the root causes and devise holistic measures to address them.
An example that I would like to quote through our data analytics is a strong correlation that we have identified between incidents of stray dogs reported with the start of construction sites. Our analysis has shown that the clearance of forested land, which precedes construction, would drive dogs out of their habitat, and food waste from construction sites might be a source of food for the dogs. Based on these findings, AVA worked with HDB to establish an arrangement to trap stray dogs before and after infrastructure works, as well as to check the canteen areas in HDB construction sites to ensure proper food waste disposal. AVA also worked with their Animal Welfare Group (AWG) partners to rehome suitable trapped dogs.
We also developed the Municipal Services Dashboard with GovTech, which allows Government and Town Councils to access visual representations of a whole range of cases by location, time, block and so on. This allows them to view patterns and trends which, in turn, give them useful information for operations planning. With better planning in terms of timing and frequency, our agencies can provide comprehensive, responsive and effective municipal services.
Going forward, apart from feedback data and in line with what Mr Baey said, MSO will also be working with agencies to facilitate other kinds of data sharing, such as camera footages, to improve the resolution of municipal issues.
Sir, ultimately, MSO's work is not merely about improving agency coordination. What we hope to achieve is, in fact, a deeper, cultural transformation to change how agencies work and how they collaborate with one another. We want to create a work environment where agencies feel supported to explore new ways of doing things and try out new technologies, a culture where openness and empathy is the norm, a system where different parts of the Government work well together and collaborate with the private sector and the community.
And at the heart of our work is our many officers who believe in providing good efficient services to the public, officers who take pride in their work, go the extra mile in serving the public, and serving with honour.
I would like to end off by giving credit to their efforts. Since my involvement with MSO, I have been consistently impressed by the enthusiasm and positive attitudes taken by the officers of our partner agencies who needed little persuasion to work towards the goals of MSO. Once constraints, such as inter-organisational boundaries and limitations in resources were alleviated with our help, the staff quickly adjusted their work process on the ground and took up their new responsibilities willingly and with urgency.
I have received many compliments from different people on the prompt and thorough follow-ups by agency officers. Hence, I would like to record my gratitude to all the staff of our agencies for their positive attitude and service to the public. We in MSO can do what we do only because of their cooperation and dedication.
The Chairman: Mr Gan Thiam Poh.
Mr Gan Thiam Poh:\tSir, the Government will bring forward $700 million worth of public sector infrastructure projects in this fiscal year. Out of these, how many new projects will be under the Ministry? What would be the total valuation of these projects and what specific initiatives will MND inject into the market to help our contractors?
Er Dr Lee Bee Wah: Let me first declare my interest as a professional engineer and my involvement in the public listed companies in real estate and the construction sector. Our construction sector is in dire need of stimulation. Many of them are fighting for survival. Our local contractors are losing business to foreign contractors, some of whom can provide cheaper raw materials and labour from their home countries while some have more impressive track records and support from their parent companies. I know that in some cases, the Government is breaking up large projects into parcels to enable local contractors to participate. But more can be done.
The $700 million of additional public construction projects is much welcome and I hope all the projects will be awarded to our local contractors, creating opportunities for them to build on their construction capabilities.
Certainly, I agree that more innovative ideas are needed to boost productivity. Why are our contractors not so keen to embrace new technologies? Many said they may not be able to get sufficient projects to recover their investment. Perhaps, the Government can have some schemes for them that ensure them of the volume of projects should they invest in new technology.
There are many ways to achieve productivity. Concrete Prefabricated Prefinished Volumetric Construction (PPVC) is one but not the only one. Steel construction could be equally productive if we know the know-how. Besides that, giving more time in upfront planning and design can go a long way in saving resources and time. In Singapore, very often, the moment the developer gets the land, he would want to rush the design submission so that he can launch his project for sale as soon as possible. Architects and engineers are building Building Information Modelling (BIM) models just good enough for submission and get approval. Later, when the contractor comes on board, he builds his own BIM model. Where is the benefit that BIM is supposed to bring to the team?
For the HDB's Early Contractor Involvement (ECI), I was told that four to five teams of contractors are called in. Is it not a waste of time and resources? I hope that the Government, being the largest developer in Singapore, can lead by example.
I would like to take this opportunity again to urge the Ministry to do more to support the growth in the capabilities of our local contractors and professionals. The Ministry should help them to build up track records and get them on board government-to-government (G-to-G) projects overseas. Singapore can benefit from a more resilient, reputable and capable construction industry with in-house local competency.
Mr Png Eng Huat: Sir, the last of the Housing and Urban Development Company (HUDC) estate has been privatised but, for many HDB residents living in the vicinity of the privatised estates, they have to grapple with safety issues and unexpected challenges they never thought existed.
HUDC estates are an integral part of the HDB towns. Many common areas, facilities, footpaths and road access are shared by residents living in both estates. More thought has to be put into estate planning post-privatisation or else such issues will surface.
Let me highlight some of the problems faced by residents after the privatisation of the HUDC estates in Hougang. For the estate at Hougang Avenue 2, HDB residents living at one block of flats suddenly find themselves cut off from the road that is listed as their legal address in their National Registration Identity Card (NRIC) after the privatisation of the HUDC cluster. There is no way to access Block 712 Hougang Avenue 2 from Hougang Avenue 2. Calling a taxi, ordering a delivery or having friends over for a party requires precise directions to be given.
Over at Hougang Avenue 7, a whole new set of issues surfaced after the fencing of the privatised HUDC estate went up. Residents living in the surrounding HDB estate no longer have a safe passage to the main road. The original footpath used by all residents for over three decades is now sitting inside a private estate. Residents are forced to walk on the fringe of the fencing or on the service road to get to Hougang Avenue 7. It gets more challenging for residents on wheelchairs or with baby prams as they have to navigate a narrow zig-zag two-way traffic road. At times, vehicles have to stop to allow these residents to pass safely.
The Town Council and HDB could not even cut the shrubs and lay some concrete slab to create a simple footpath at the fringe of the private estate for residents to walk safely as the turf is now sitting on private land as well. Three lamp posts lighting that service road there had their power cut off a couple of times as these lights were tapping electricity from the private estate.
The Town Council has to repatch the power supply from one of the nearest HDB blocks in the estate or else residents, especially school students, will have to walk in the dark every morning to the bus stop at Hougang Avenue 7.
Sir, in the privatisation of HUDC estates island-wide, were there any planning done to ensure HDB residents will not be inconvenienced in any way with the redrawing of the boundaries caused by the privatisation process? And who is responsible to maintain the HDB car park service road now that it is made to serve both public and private estates after privatisation? Were there any considerations given to replace footpaths for residents due to safety concerns? What should residents do when the road address in their NRIC no longer means what it says?
This Government prides itself on planning ahead. I certainly feel that there was not enough planning done or consideration given to the surrounding estates affected by the privatisation of HUDC estates. I urge the Ministry to look into this and address the safety issues as soon as possible.
Mr Muhamad Faisal Bin Abdul Manap (Aljunied): Sir, I have been receiving feedback from a number of Kaki Bukit residents mentioning that their blocks' newly-built lifts constructed under LUP is warm and stuffy, especially during hot days. Aljunied-Hougang Town Council (AHTC) has also been receiving similar feedback from residents living in other parts of the town. The Town Council has conducted checks on the in-car fan system for these respective lifts and found that everything is good and running well.
After much observation, it was suspected that the metal lift shaft might be the main contributing factor. AHTC had highlighted the matter to HDB twice, informing that the warm air might be due to the metal lift shaft which resulted in conduction of heat, hence, causing the air inside the lift to be warm. I am quite confident this could be the reason because, for Kaki Bukit ward, the affected residents who feedback on this issue stay in blocks where the lift shafts are exposed to the direct afternoon sun.
During my recent house visit to one of the affected blocks, a resident expressed concern over this matter. He cited an example of a man trapped in such a situation during a hot day. The trapped passenger, especially one who is an elderly or an individual who has medical conditions, may experience related complications, such as dehydration, respiratory problems and, in the worst-case scenario, a heat stroke, due to the condition of the lift.
Sir, I do hope HDB could address this issue so as to avoid any unwanted incidences.
Mr Pritam Singh: Chairman, trees and greenery are an unmistakable part of the Singapore story since Independence. Many HDB flats built in the 1970s and 1980s today host trees that have grown very large and are an indelible part of the community.
However, a percentage of these trees, whilst aesthetically pleasing and growing healthily, have started to host overgrown roots, damaging common property and increasing maintenance cost significantly, and also posing a safety hazard in some cases, especially for the elderly and infirm.
However, removing a tree is probably one of the hardest things to do for any Town Council. My understanding is that HDB and NParks officers tend to err on the side of caution and would prefer to leave a tree in its place and take the position that a mature tree should not be cut down if that outcome can be avoided; and I can understand this position.
However, exceptions should be made in selected cases and one occasion is during the HDB's periodic cyclical HDB car park upgrading exercises. A few years ago, the surface area at Block 601 Bedok Reservoir Road was upgraded by the HDB, upgrading that comes by once every 25-odd years.
A mere two years later, the Town Council started to receive feedback about dislodged car park slabs as the surrounding trees continue to grow and their roots expand further, encroaching into the car park. Chopping off a part of the route by the Town Council contractors to reinstate the car park slabs and prevent slabs from popping up pose a high risk of destabilising the tree. As this problem is more unique to mature HDB estates, a parallel concern is the increasing number of elderly who misjudge the height of curbs damaged by overgrown trees.
This problem should be addressed with a holistic assessment that is not encumbered by conservation concerns alone but takes safety considerations and the long-term maintenance costs to the Town Council in mind as well. The current HDB requirement to plant three new trees for every one fell would ensure that Singapore remains a city full of trees and greenery.
Mr Dennis Tan Lip Fong (Non-Constituency Member): Sir, recent incidents relating to fallen trees, especially the fatal incident at Botanic Gardens and, two days later, a serious case at Yuan Ching Road, have brought closer scrutiny on the inspection and care of our trees, of which there are about two million in Singapore. In a reply to my Parliamentary Question last week, the Minister said that NParks currently employs 200 arborists, and NParks and MND continually review resources to ensure that there are sufficient arborists to handle the work requirements. I am happy to hear that.
I would like to seek a clarification from the Minister. I understand from NParks' Tree Management Programme published in January 2013 that tree inspection details are recorded and entered into a database. For how long are these records required to be kept in the database?
Further, to complement the work of the arborists, I would like to ask the Government to consider engaging external tree experts to conduct independent investigations in cases where fallen trees have caused significant damage to property or have led to personal injury or death, which I understand is the practice elsewhere.
The process should be a fact-finding exercise, and evidence such as the manner in which the inspections were conducted and what was looked for during those inspections should be preserved to ensure the integrity of the fact-finding process during investigations. In cases of injury or death, a rigorous investigation into the facts of the case conducted by an independent third party may also better assist affected families to seek closure.
Ms Sylvia Lim (Aljunied): Sir, a nation is grounded in its history and common frames of reference. The names we put on public buildings become part of our nation's consciousness, a collective memory for present and future generations.
Today, we see the commercialisation of facility names all over Singapore. We have the DBS Singapore Gallery and the UOB Southeast Asia Gallery at the National Gallery Singapore, the Far East Organisation Children's Garden at Gardens by the Bay, the OCBC Arena and the OCBC Aquatic Centre at the Singapore Sports Hub.
Had there not been a public outcry over naming rights, the sports hub and facilities flanking our National Stadium might be known as OCBC World today. Our public universities, too, are dotted with many examples, like the College of Alice and Peter Tan, and the Mochtar Riady Building. While the generosity of donors should be encouraged and accorded due appreciation, what kind of message are we sending by naming even a children's playground after a corporate entity?
Some clarity from the Government was seen in 2013 when it came to national icons, such as the National Stadium and Sports Hub. Then Acting Minister for Culture, Community and Youth Lawrence Wong noted in a Parliamentary answer that while OCBC had donated significantly to the project, the names of such national sports icons would not be commercialised.
Apart from sports, what about the naming of other landmark facilities, such as our public hospitals? We now have the Khoo Teck Puat and Ng Teng Fong General Hospitals. These hospitals were fully-funded from Government grants, with the donors reportedly giving a fraction of that towards various healthcare programmes. Understandably, naming these hospitals after the two donors has caused controversy, with public chatter that the naming rights were sold relatively cheaply. Could and should the hospitals have been named in a more meaningful way?
URA has guidelines for the naming of buildings, which say that the names of persons, living or dead, should not be used unless there is significant cause to do so. Persons who are honoured have to be \"outstanding persons who have made significant contributions to Singapore.\"
Before granting approval of names, how carefully does the Government assess the reputation of donors? What safeguards are there against donors who may be trying to shore up their reputation in the name of philanthropy? The issue is even trickier when the donor is a living person, as his legacy could always turn from good to bad if he gets into personal, financial or legal problems later.
The question is to what extent the names of our public buildings should be sold to the highest bidder. Should we have loftier aspirations instead, by naming public facilities to reflect ideals rather than wealth? In comparison, names like the Lim Bo Seng Memorial bring abundantly more to the national consciousness and to future generations.
Miss Cheng Li Hui (Tampines): Sir, in recent years, our 117 coastal fish farms in the Southern waters, east and west Johor Straits have had to deal with an increasing number of oil spills and harmful algae blooms. What measures have been implemented to prevent their reoccurrence and assist these farms? What have been the long- and short-term impact on our coastal seawater, beaches and marine life due to these spills? What measures can we take to mitigate the impact of global warming on our marine life?
Mr Darryl David: Sir, Singapore has always prided itself as a Garden City and is now moving toward the concept of being a City in a Garden, as Minister Lawrence Wong mentioned earlier. Indeed, despite having many built-up areas, we also have pockets of greenery, such as our many parks and nature reserves that provide a respite from the hustle and bustle of urban living.
What is also significant is the amount of greenery that has been incorporated into our buildings and built structures. This is something that MNDs' two agencies, URA and NParks, have worked hard to achieve, and has also rooted the strength and success of our landscape architecture industry.
In high-rise and urban greenery, landscaping must not be seen as a form of \"green-washing\" or an afterthought. As space becomes scarcer in Singapore and our living areas become denser, it is all the more important to ensure that proper landscaping and carefully integrated and designed greenery help to enhance not just the aesthetics of the development, but the holistic mental and emotional wellness of the individuals working and living in that development as well. This would be in line with the CFE's strategy to \"plan boldly for growth and city rejuvenation\".
I would thus like to encourage MND to work with landscape architecture companies and bodies, such as the Singapore Institute of Landscape Architects (SILA), to develop and enhance the industry in terms of talent development, opening up pathways for career growth and also raising the professional standing of landscape architects.
This growth could not only be in terms of enhancing the domestic landscape industry, but perhaps we could also use our expertise and leverage on our \"City-in-a Garden\" reputation to support our landscape architects to make an impact regionally and internationally as well.
The Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministers for Trade and Industry and the Ministers for Education (Ms Low Yen Ling): Chairman, the plan to develop the Rail Corridor is a welcome one. Several groups of Singaporeans are looking forward to the potential upside the 24-kilometre (km) master plan will bring, from nature and recreation to tourism and history.
For nature lovers, it is a much-awaited oasis and urban respite and a chance to learn about Singapore's biodiversity. In terms of recreation, the Rail Corridor will offer attractive choices − cycling paths, running tracks, rock-climbing, cafes and even an outdoor cinema.
For history lovers, the Rail Corridor will restore to the area its historical significance and promote greater appreciation of the Singapore-Malaya rail link that started in 1903. Also in the vicinity is the gallery: \"Surviving the Japanese Occupation: War and its Legacies\". The confluence of rich history, greenery and recreational opportunities in the Rail Corridor makes it a unique experience and attraction that can enhance tourism.
The Rail Corridor could very well become Singapore's iconic equivalent to New York City's High Line, which is an old railway transformed into one of the most innovative and inviting green public spaces in Manhattan. The High Line is now a favourite spot for New Yorkers and tourists alike.
To reap the same success as the High Line, access and transport to the area is vital. Residents in Hume, who live in the backyard of the Rail Corridor, are keen to know the status of developments of this upcoming iconic attraction. For instance, will the anticipated rise in human traffic to the area be a key factor for the building of an MRT station in Hume? Or do the authorities foresee the potential traffic to the Rail Corridor and its attractiveness, and so act in tandem to boost Singaporeans' enjoyment of our rich heritage and also enhance the tourist experience with good and easy access to the Corridor? Does MND regard the site as having potential for further developments? May I know if MND will consider releasing new sites around Hume for Government land sales (GLS)?
The potential movement of people to the Rail Corridor is immense. Under the Rail Corridor development, there is a 16-hectare site in Choa Chu Kang within the stretch of former Keretapi Tanah Melayu (KTM) railway line that will be a test-bed for a future housing concept with 3,000 units.
With its unique proposition as a residential and community oasis as well as promising tourist spot, we hope MND will give serious consideration to the surrounding developments of the Rail Corridor so as to enhance the area's liveability and attractiveness, making Singapore an endearing home and also a distinctive global city.
Dr Lim Wee Kiak (Sembawang): Sir, I brought up this hot topic at last year's COS. I am glad the media picked up the topic and did an excellent documentary on the Sembawang hot spring, which attracted a lot of public attention. The Ministry of Defence (MINDEF), after the COS last April, has announced that it was prepared to return the land occupied by the hot spring to SLA, which will then transfer the land to NParks for further development.
More recently, an open tender by NParks for multi-disciplinary consultancy services for the hot spring area to be developed into a park has sparked public interest and media interest as well. The Sembawang hot spring has a lot of potential as a recreational and educational spot. I share the sentiments of many Sembawang residents and fellow MPs that the place should not be too commercialised and, as far as possible, to maintain the rustic kampong atmosphere.
I would like to ask for an update on the development and suggest that public opinion should be sought to find out how Singaporeans would like their one and only one hot spring to be developed.
Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang: Disruptive innovation is here to stay. As the Prime Minister mentioned, old models are not working, new models are coming in thick and fast and we are having to adjust and keep up because of technology and globalisation. And the disruption will happen over and over again, relentlessly.
Rather than ban short-term rentals, we should regulate it by perhaps introducing a licensed and a tiered quota system. For example, a person is allowed to rent out the property for 50 nights a year for a start. If there are legitimate complaints received, then the licence can be revoked or the number of nights decreased. A review can be made each year and, if URA is satisfied, the number of nights can be increased or, if they are not satisfied, they can be decreased. The property owner is thus incentivised to ensure that no disamenities are caused.
Can we also implement a compulsory deposit for the guests, which I understand is currently not the industry norm, and the deposit should be forfeited if legitimate complaints are received. In this case, the ball is in the court of the guests to ensure that no disamenities were caused to avoid forfeiting the deposit. I urge the Ministry to consider this proposal and ensure that we embrace and regulate rather than ban this disruptive innovation.
Dr Tan Wu Meng (Jurong): Sir, I have met residents who wanted to take up overseas work deployments, but they had only recently purchased their flat, being a young couple, and HDB would not allow subletting of the home during the Minimum Occupation Period. So, they were paying off the loan on the flat, without the benefit of rental income, and being overseas working and paying for their own upkeep overseas as well.
Would MND and HDB be able to look into how we can better support our young Singaporeans, as we regionalise our economy?
Er Dr Lee Bee Wah: I would like to share with this House an issue faced by my residents. On 19 December 2016, a resident came to my MPS. He told me that he had a season parking lot for his lorry along Yishun Avenue 1. However, some parking lots had been removed recently and by the time he came back late at night, there were no parking lots available. Hence, when he continues to park along Yishun Avenue 1, he received summonses from LTA.
I sent an email to URA asking them to quickly look into this issue. I told URA that for those who have valid season parking, URA should arrange alternative parking before the lots are removed. They told me that they will do a quick check. About a month later, on 16 January 2017, another resident came to see me, telling me the same problem. Again, I emailed to URA asking them what is the status of my previous email.
This time, they replied quite fast, two days later, explaining the reason why the parking lots were removed and they said that they had earlier informed LTA to adopt a light touch on enforcement. Poor LTA officer. Is he expected to remember which area to light-touch and which area not to light-touch? Some of my poor residents had paid up the fines. They came to see only when they − if I may put it in their language − \"buay tahan liao, diam diam dio\".
In January 2016, the Senior Minister of State said that MND is looking into ways to help heavy vehicle owners and workers to find more convenient parking lots. Can the Minister update us on the progress and how many applicants are on the waitlist in general, and Nee Soon South in particular. How long is this wait? The last time I heard, it was six months to a year, now is it better?
The Chairman: Senior Minister of State Desmond Lee.
The Senior Minister of State for National Development (Mr Desmond Lee):\tMr Chairman, in the course of my presentation, may I have your permission to show some slides and a video?
The Chairman:\tYes, please. [Some slides were shown to hon Members.]
Mr Desmond Lee: Thank you. Sir, cities with the size and density of Singapore tend to be jungles of concrete, glass and steel. People have to travel out of the city to connect with nature.
As a city-state, we have taken quite a different approach from Day 1. Our nature reserves and the nature parks that buffer them are green gems in the heart of the city. Biodiversity hotspots are connected through urban areas by nature parks, nature ways and lush streetscape greenery. Nature envelops our urban city completely, as greenery courses through the veins of our cityscape and now, up our skyline.
Being in such close proximity to nature, there is so much that Wild Singapore offers us. As Ms Ria Tan, a nature advocate, often says, and I quote: \"Singapore is probably the only place in the world where one can visit a rainforest, a mangrove and a coral reef, all within half an hour from our city\".
Proximity to nature, however, means increased human-wildlife interactions and the potential for conflicts. Today, Singapore is recognised by experts and academics as a Biophilic City, where nature and greenery are integral to our design and planning.
As the Minister said earlier, we have the opportunity to take things to the next level where people learn to co-exist more harmoniously with our natural heritage and wildlife. This can only be achieved through extensive outreach and education and by different stakeholders working together as stewards of our natural heritage and adopting a scientific approach to managing urban ecologies. MND will work closely with our nature groups and animal welfare groups, as well as our Friends of the Park communities, and find opportunities in the course of the year to share more of our thoughts with fellow Singaporeans.
Let me now address Members' cuts on greenery and the environment.
Many stakeholders have played a part in greening our city. I join Mr Darryl David in affirming the efforts of our landscape architecture industry. NParks collaborates with the Singapore Institute of Landscape Architects (SILA) to establish industry best practices. It supports SILA's accreditation programme through workshops and seminars in horticulture and landscaping, for continuous professional development. NParks also partners SILA and the Landscape Industry Association of Singapore (LIAS) to organise international trade shows and conferences and promote knowledge-sharing and showcase industry development.
Ms Low Yen Ling asked about the Rail Corridor. In May, URA will share the design for the four-km stretch of the Corridor, from Bukit Timah Railway Station to Hillview Road. This stretch is rich in greenery and heritage. Work will begin in 2018. To prepare for this, URA will launch a 400-metre test track along Choa Chu Kang Road later this year to test possible types of surface material that may be used for the Rail Corridor trail, while retaining its rustic character.
We will invite public feedback to help us assess their suitability for the Corridor. When this four-km stretch is completed, residents can look forward to a trail that people of all ages and abilities can use, and basic amenities, such as toilets, drinking fountains and bicycle rentals.
Dr Lim Wee Kiak asked about the Sembawang hot spring. NParks will grow the area sensitively into a park, enhancing greenery while retaining its rustic character. Work will start at the end of this year. NParks will continue to gather more feedback from the community and residents on design. The park will be completed by end-2018.
Miss Cheng Li Hui asked about the impact of oil spills, algae blooms and global warming on our marine biodiversity. Sir, we have recently just answered a Parliamentary Question on the issue of algae blooms and oil spills, but in addition to what we have answered previously, climate change is, indeed, raising sea temperatures, contributing to algal blooms and ocean acidification.
To manage the impact, NParks is working with academia and environmental interest groups to enhance the resilience of our marine ecosystems. Studies show that this is the best way to help our ecosystems withstand and recover from the impact of climate change, including algal blooms.
Sir, let me now turn to our urban environment. Our Pioneers in the built environment sector have built up our world-class infrastructure. But things are never static. We need to look at new ways to construct our future City.
We want our built environment sector to be technologically-advanced, coordinated across the entire construction value chain, and be supported by a highly-skilled workforce with a strong Singaporean Core of professionals, managers, executives and technicians (PMETs).
Sir, just imagine at the design stage, all stakeholders of the value chain coming together and cooperating to work on a detailed, coordinated digital 3D model of the project. This means bringing in contractors at the design stage so that the model will be close to what will eventually be built. This reduces abortive work and wastage downstream. The digital model will then be sent to a one-stop portal for coordinated regulatory approvals, and rules-based automated checking can speed this up.
Madam, Er Dr Lee Bee Wah spoke about her concerns about early contractor involvement, which I have just mentioned as being one possible way to create a detailed 3D model of a project.
For those who are not familiar, early contractor involvement is a kind of procurement method where contractors are engaged early, in fact, right upfront, to provide inputs into the design of a project. For traditional procurement, contractors will bid for a project based on a fixed design and they cannot influence the design upfront. In contrast, early contractor involvement (ECI) allows the input of contractors to be incorporated at the design stage. As I have said, this reduces abortive work and leads to potential time and cost savings for the project. So, contractors do need to commit more resources for ECI, as they are expected to develop detailed design solutions. That said, the BCA's guide on ECI limits the number of tenderers under ECI to a maximum of five. This seeks to strike a balance between giving good tender options to ensure value for money and good design, while increasing the opportunities of winning the bids for tenderers.
In addition, tenderers are compensated for their efforts to come up with concept designs submitted for the ECI tender even if they are unsuccessful. So, as part of an effort to bring design in a detailed fashion upstream, we have to strike a balance.
Sir, the construction process will become more like manufacturing. The approved plans will be sent to suppliers in highly automated Integrated Construction and Pre-fabrication Hubs (ICPHs). Once completed, Design for Manufacturing and Assembly (DfMA) components will be sent, just in time, to be assembled onsite. Now I will just ask Members to watch a very short video which will show what DfMA is all about and what we are aspiring to achieve.
So, this is a video of an ICPH where robotics and machinery set moulds and concrete is cast, again using machinery, with precision quality control of each component. The prefabricated members are then packed once they are completed and are then sent by logistics to site, just in time to be assembled at the worksite. Sir, this transformation, if successful, will create good PMET jobs for Singaporeans. It is a bold vision. We are excited about it. But getting there is challenging, especially in times of economic uncertainty.
In 2016, the built environment sector had around $26 billion of building and civil engineering contracts or $1 billion less than in 2015. We expect between $28 billion to $35 billion in contracts to be awarded this year. But private sector demand is expected to remain subdued.
Earlier, Er Dr Lee and Mr Gan Thiam Poh asked how we can help construction firms during this period. The Government will push out a strong pipeline of major infrastructure projects in the next few years. These include Tengah HDB Town, LTA's Circle Line 6, Changi Airport Terminal 5 and more. We expect public sector demand to make up 70% of overall construction demand this year.
And to put things in perspective, in 2012, five years ago, the public sector demand accounted for about 30% of overall construction demand, with the private sector taking up 70%. And in 2017 and over the next few years, we might expect this ratio to flip around, with the public sector accounting for about 70% of overall demand.
In addition, as announced by the Minister for Finance during the Budget, we will bring forward $700 million in public infrastructure projects to start construction this year and next. These will be smaller projects, like upgrading of Community Clubs (CCs), sports facilities and Neighbourhood Police Posts and Centres (NPCs), which our small and medium enterprises (SMEs) can bid for.
We will also encourage public agencies to parcel out larger projects into smaller ones, where appropriate. This will help diversify risk and enable more local firms to participate. In the long run, the best thing we can do is to help our local companies remain competitive by strengthening their capabilities and improving their productivity. Our Construction Productivity and Capability Fund (CPCF) subsidises this process to help our firms level up. We will monitor if more measures are needed.
This period of uncertainty is a reminder that we need to strengthen our Built Environment sector by becoming more productive and future-ready. This is why we have been partnering the industry at every step of the way, especially when it comes to improving productivity.
Our efforts since the first Construction Productivity Roadmap in 2010 have yielded results. Almost $800 million has been made available to firms through CPCF. At end 2016, some $450 million of CPCF has been committed, benefiting more than 9,000 firms. Around 90% of these firms are SMEs.
One local contractor, as an example, Teambuild Engineering and Construction tapped on CPCF funding to develop a new prototype for concrete PPVC that can be better used for high-rise buildings and they are piloting this prototype at a residential project. This new system can potentially improve productivity by up to 40%. So, we will continue to assist firms through various funding schemes. But these funds are for them to apply and seize in order to innovate.
In tandem, our workers are becoming more skilled. Nearly 40% of construction workers are now at the higher-skilled (R1) level. It was only 20% in 2014 and just 2% in 2011. To sustain this momentum, BCA will consult the industry to review the minimum R1 requirements at firm level. I encourage firms to tap on Government subsidised funding schemes to upgrade their workforce.
Our annual site productivity, which measures work done per man-day, has also improved by 2% per year from 2014 to 2016. Compare this to a mere 0.3% per year in 2010. But we aim to achieve 2.5% to 4% annual site productivity improvements from now till 2020.
To achieve our productivity targets, we encourage the industry to adopt prefabrication technologies along the DfMA continuum. DfMA has many benefits. Offsite construction requires less labour onsite and shortens project time. There are less noise and dust. As Er Dr Lee Bee Wah pointed out, DfMA is not just about PPVC. There is a broad spectrum to choose from, including as you can see from the slide, Mass Engineered Timber (MET), advanced precast structural steel and other DfMA technologies.
We are looking to pilot a GLS site that will specify construction productivity outcomes without mandating specific technologies. This will give firms the flexibility to propose suitable technologies to meet the productivity outcomes.
To help increase our supply resilience for DfMA technologies, we will provide incentives to help more firms set up DfMA manufacturing facilities locally. We will extend the Land Intensification Allowance (LIA) scheme to cover the construction of ICPHs. ICPHs are high-density and highly-automated factories that manufacture DfMA components shown in the short video earlier.
Currently, we have four sites for ICPHs and will be launching more in the coming years. The scheme will provide tax relief on the capital investment needed to develop ICPHs. We will share more details of this later.
Sir, we know that there is a cost premium with DfMA technologies that our industry needs to ride out. To help lower this premium, the public sector will continue to take the lead to generate demand.
As announced during the Budget, we will implement the $150 million Public Sector Construction Productivity Fund to offset the premium for adopting DfMA technologies for public projects. This will allow us to roll out more tenders to benefit progressive builders. For example, some of MOE's upcoming sports halls will include the use of MET, and some of JTC's industrial premises will use structural steel.
To accelerate the transformation of our Built Environment sector, we will be working closely with the industry on a Construction Industry Transformation Map (ITM). We have consulted extensively and will continue to do so.
While still a work-in-progress, some preliminary ideas are to further adopt DfMA technology, do more digital engineering and encourage firms to internationalise to have access to new markets.
The Government will take the lead in adopting digital technology in the Built environment sector. We need to act swiftly to harness these benefits or we will be left behind. In fact, recently, I met some executives from a built environment firm which have ventured overseas. They said that they benefited from the regulatory requirement to use BIM in Singapore, and felt that it would be a competitive advantage. But when they went to these overseas markets, firms from that market were already using digital technologies, BIM, even though the regulators in that country were not BIM-enabled, had no rules mandating it, did not know what to do with the BIM models. In fact, the foreign firms had to dumb down their 3D models into 2D designs to submit as regulatory submissions. Yet, these firms overseas, without compulsion, saw the competitive edge that BIM and digital technology offered them in their own market and around the world.
That is why our ITM has initiatives to increase the adoption of BIM and Virtual Design and Construction (VDC). So, look at this slide. It is a virtual design and construction project, MapleTree Business City 2. In fact, if you have visited the BCA virtual laboratory and put on 3D goggles like what the firms do, you will literally be able to walk through the entire building, room to room, and be able to build virtually first, and then build onsite in reality.
This helps prevent abortive work downstream as architects, engineers and contractors can identify and fix problems before construction starts.
We are also improving implementation on the ground. We hear Er Dr Lee Bee Wah that BIM models are sometimes less useful because they lack the information required for construction planning. So, the architects put up one set to meet regulatory requirements, but they do not have enough information in the BIM model and, as a result, the contractors have had to redo everything, because they have to look at it from a construction angle.
BCA is working with the industry to bridge this gap by developing a Code of Practice. This Code of Practice will set out what the architects and engineers need to include in the model to make it more useful in a collaborative fashion. BCA is piloting the Code of Practice at a few projects to refine it and will formally launch the Code of Practice sometime at the end of this year.
To help our firms take up BIM and VDC, we will continue to provide funding support for collaborative BIM projects. We encourage firms to apply for these generous schemes. We need to build up industry capabilities in BIM and VDC and we encourage our firms to send their employees to attend BIM and VDC training at the BCA Academy. We subsidise these courses heavily, too.
To complement the submission of building plans via BIM, we will upgrade and redevelop the CORENET e-submission platform to make the process easier to use. New features will include rules-based automated checking software. This will improve service delivery and achieve higher productivity.
I am happy that younger generation professionals in the built environment sector seem to be embracing digital technology, BIM and VDC.
I met Ms Eunice Chen at BCA's Young Leaders Retreat in November last year. She started off as an architect, recently upgraded herself by pursuing a Master of Science in Real Estate in the National University of Singapore. Currently, as a Project Manager in Far East Organization, she is working with a team of consultants using BIM for a commercial project in Woodlands.
Information technology, digital technology like BIM and VDC opens up exciting and better opportunities for our millennials. In fact, I meet from time to time the young leaders of the built environment sector − the young architects, engineers and quantity surveyors - and they share with me how they look forward to this transformation and how technology can be used to bring our future city to a different level. For these young millennials, they take to technology like fish to water. In a sense, this process will take time and move with the generations.
In the long run, growing our built environment sector means looking beyond our shores. As Er Dr Lee Bee Wah said, there is a limit to what we can build here. But as the region develops, there will be increasing demand for sophisticated infrastructure. Our companies can help meet this demand. To venture overseas, companies need scale and niche competencies. The Government will help the industry achieve these aims as much as we can. Companies that wish to expand abroad may lack sufficient capital and overseas contacts. They may be unfamiliar with overseas markets and regulations and these are serious issues, so we have formed an internationalisation taskforce with public and private sector representatives to study ways where we can provide support.
The taskforce will identify synergies across the Construction, Real Estate, Security, Environmental Services and Landscape sectors to see if our companies can band together and provide integrated services. In fact, during one of our subcommittee meetings, one member of the built environment sector, an industry player, asked, \"Well, how big a fish can you grow in Singapore?\" Certainly, we can be nimble, sophisticated and productive. While we cannot be a big fish competing overseas, we could perhaps go as a school of fish, integrating across different sectors, different members of the value chain, going overseas under the Singapore brand, competing effectively. We will update this House on the results of the internationalisation taskforce's work when ready.
Taken together, these moves bring us closer to realising our vision of a productive and progressive sector that provides good jobs for Singaporeans.
Sir, Minister Lawrence Wong earlier described how our new HDB developments continue to push the frontier in terms of design, sustainability and liveability. For existing estates, we also need to constantly rejuvenate them so that they remain vibrant and liveable.
First, at the town level, the Remaking Our Heartland 3 (ROH3) programme adopts a ground-up consultative approach to conceptualise the rejuvenation of existing towns. Under ROH3, we are now refining the proposals for Woodlands, Pasir Ris and Toa Payoh based on the earlier round of feedback from 400 residents and local stakeholders.
So, for instance, in Woodlands, there will be a new \"Community Nexus\" located at the Admiralty MRT station that will serve as a \"one-stop\" hub of amenities for the residents, comprising new and existing facilities, such as Kampung Admiralty, the Admiralty Place Neighbourhood Centre and the Woodlands Galaxy Community Club. In Pasir Ris, residents can look forward to an enhanced walking and cycling experience with more facilities and greenery along key connections in the town. In Toa Payoh, the familiar \"Ring Road\", formed by Lorong 1 and Lorong 6 Toa Payoh will be enlivened with cycling paths to link facilities and transport nodes and pocket parks to provide rest points and gathering spaces. We will soon be holding public exhibitions in April and May this year where everyone can view the initial plans and provide another round of feedback.
Second, at the neighbourhood level, the Neighbourhood Renewal Programme (NRP) will continue to facilitate estate rejuvenation, focusing on precinct and block level improvements.
We also enhanced the Revitalisation of Shops (ROS) Scheme last year to help neighbourhood shops in the HDB heartlands to rejuvenate. Responses from HDB shop keepers and the Merchants' Associations have been positive: the number of applications for ROS upgrading works last year was the highest we have seen since the scheme was introduced in 2007.
Third, at the individual home level, we will finalise the selection of the approximately 70,000 remaining flats eligible for the Home Improvement Programme (HIP). By the end of the programme, more than 300,000 flats built up to 1986 will benefit.
So far, we have spoken about the building of our future city, the design of new estates and the rejuvenation of existing towns. An equally important but less frequently talked about aspect of our work is the active maintenance of our city, estates and infrastructure as they age.
Maintainability should be an important consideration in building design. HDB, for example, takes into account maintenance considerations upfront in the design of BTO and upgrading projects, with a focus on design and detailing, materials and finishes and access for maintainability.
As our infrastructure ages, we will need to spend more on maintenance and replacement. Often, we focus on building and building more but do not recognise enough the very long tail of maintenance, replacement and repair. We will need to manage this.
A good example is the maintenance of lifts. As with all machinery, lifts need to be maintained regularly. They have a limited lifespan before they need to be replaced. Lift owners, Town Councils and the lift maintenance industry all have a part to play in keeping our lifts reliable and safe.
We have taken active steps on two fronts.
First, we recently introduced a set of new grants and measures to provide additional financial support for Town Councils, specifically for lift maintenance. These include the new Lift Maintenance Grant, 50% matching of Town Councils' contributions to their Lift Replacement Funds (LRF) and the new Lift Enhancement Programme to retrofit some 20,000 older lifts with additional safety features. All in, this additional financial support to Town Councils will come up to more than $100 million a year, or over $1 billion over the next 10 years.
Second, we have enhanced BCA's regulatory regime to strengthen our oversight of lifts.
Third, we are also working with the industry to ensure a competent and sustainable lift maintenance workforce. These include building up technical competencies, attracting more locals to the sector, and improving productivity by encouraging the adoption of new technologies.
On a related note, Mr Faisal Manap suggested that better heat insulation for lift shafts that are exposed to direct sunlight be provided. He highlighted certain shafts in his estate. I do not have exact details but we will follow up on that.
Generally, to mitigate the heat built up in lift shafts, an insulation layer is incorporated in the cladding for all lifts. The lift cars are also designed to be well-ventilated with mechanical fans to improve the air quality and to purge trapped heat when the car doors open. For lift shafts that are exposed to direct sunlight, additional measures, such as increasing the capacity of the mechanical fans or programming the lift cars to allow the lift doors to remain open when not in use, can be adopted. But I do not know the details of Mr Faisal Manap's case; we will follow up on it.
Another aspect of maintenance we have been looking at is our building facades all over the city. Presently, BCA requires building owners to ensure that their buildings, including exterior features like windows and air-conditioning units, are properly maintained. BCA can require rectification if maintenance is poor.
For HDB blocks, while maintenance of facades comes under the purview of the Town Councils, HDB has in place several measures to assist them, such as the co-payment scheme, since 2004 for the repair of facade finishes, audit inspection checks by HDB officers and conducting technical training for all Town Councils twice a year since 2010.
Through normal wear and tear, older facades will need added maintenance and we are looking into enhancing the regulatory framework on facades, for both public and private buildings, to ensure that facades and exterior features are well-maintained, regularly inspected and remain properly secured.
Sir, maintaining our city includes checking and maintaining also our greenery, a point that Mr Dennis Tan has made. This is important for us, as a City-in-a-Garden, with some seven million trees around the island. The number of tree failures has dropped around three-fold from 2001 to 2016, with the introduction of NParks' comprehensive tree management programme. So, the numbers are from about 3,000 cases of tree failure a year in 2001 to over 800 cases in 2016 against a backdrop of seven million trees in total − two million along streets, streetscapes, parks that NParks specifically focuses on. But we are deeply saddened each time such incidents cause injury or loss of life.
Behind the scenes, NParks officers and contractors work hard to ensure that trees are healthy and safe. NParks has a comprehensive tree management programme that includes a regime of inspections and pruning. This is aligned with international standards. Tree inspection is carried out only by certified professionals and records are digitalised to facilitate information retrieval and to ensure that trees under NParks are checked and maintained according to schedule. This system also enables NParks to zoom in on and pre-emptively replace storm-vulnerable trees.
For fatal incidents, NParks will assist the Police Investigation Officer (IO) in his/her investigation. Independent arborists may also be engaged by NParks.
Given the more unpredictable weather conditions, NParks has stepped up inspections and taken measures to improve the general health of our trees. These include routine mulching to supplement the application of fertilisers, and pruning techniques to improve tree structure and balance. NParks is also developing modelling techniques to better understand the structural behaviour of trees under heavy rain and wind and also in micro-climatic conditions.
Mr Pritam Singh has suggested that we review tree replacement guidelines in mature HDB estates. He has articulated various examples that his Town Council had encountered. When trees need to be removed, HDB seeks to ensure that existing levels of greenery are generally maintained. Hence, his reference to the tree replacement ratios.
These tree replacement guidelines, therefore, take into consideration the size and amount of shade provided by the affected tree. HDB works closely with NParks to identify appropriate tree species for residential estates and takes into account existing site conditions, such as valuable planting space and proximity to residential blocks. NParks and HDB are also mindful that when you plant trees in estates, you also need to take care of its impact on residents, such as falling leaves, branches, insects, birds and tree roots.
Town Councils can also propose alternative replacement tree species for HDB to consider. In general, the tree species should suit the existing landscape and site conditions, take into account residents' considerations and provide sufficient shade and are easy to maintain.
At times, tree removal is necessary if a tree poses a risk to public safety or where trees are affected by new developments, upgrading or construction works. HDB's approval is required for all tree removal requests in HDB estates except where it is assessed that the tree may fall at any moment. In such cases, Town Councils should remove the tree first without HDB's prior approval and report the matter to HDB.
These guidelines have served HDB well thus far, but we will bear the Member's concerns in mind.
Sir, let me briefly address the remaining cuts. Er Dr Lee Bee Wah asked for more heavy vehicle parking in Yishun. On a nation-wide basis, the 43,000 heavy vehicle parking lots greatly exceed the 33,000 heavy vehicles registered with LTA. The issue is not at the national level; the issue is at the local level, as the Member is well aware.
In Yishun, there are 1,270 lots, of which 866 are public lots. As the public lots are near residential areas, they are heavily subscribed with about 250 applicants on the waitlist. It is not possible to fully meet demand for overnight parking of heavy vehicles through public heavy vehicle parks that are in or near residential areas as this is likely to pose a nuisance and traffic hazard to residents, especially the elderly and the young.
Instead, we are ramping up the number of heavy vehicle parking lots within private industrial developments, and do so whenever we launch such sites, including those in the northern part of Singapore, such as Yishun. In addition, heavy vehicle owners should provide transport arrangements for their drivers if they cannot help them find a lot near their drivers' homes. And we are actively looking at measures to achieve this.
Mr Louis Ng has suggested various ways to facilitate short-term rentals. His point is: do not kill innovation, embrace it, go with the flow. But on our part, we also have to balance various interests − those who wish to ride on the new economy, the sharing economy and also those who have a right to enjoy peace and quiet in their home environment.
During the recent debate on amendments to the Planning Act, the Minister for National Development had mentioned plans to allow such short-term rentals subject to appropriate conditions and safeguards. URA will be putting out the details on this soon and we will seek further feedback and inputs from stakeholders before finalising the regulations.
Dr Tan Wu Meng spoke about flexibility in the implementation of the Minimum Occupancy Period (MOP) to support young Singaporeans taking on overseas postings. As HDB flats are meant for owner occupation, flat owners have to fulfil an MOP before they can sublet their whole flat. But HDB recognises that there are some who may need to go overseas for a period of time for work or other reasons and who may not have met the MOP. And HDB will exercise flexibility on a case-by-case basis.
Mr Png Eng Huat raised some concerns about the impact of privatisation of HUDC estates in Hougang. I do not have all the details of each of these concerns he and his residents face. So, we will look into those.
But I understand that, for Hougang Avenue 7, and this is based on what available information I have, I understand that the Member has raised this specific issue to HDB. HDB is currently looking into options to construct a footpath for the residents, where feasible. If the Member has further questions or issues to raise, please surface them to us.
At a broader level and in general, when we issue or launch GLS sites located near to residential and HDB estates, URA does include in its tender specifications a requirement for the developer to, where feasible, provide connections to transport nodes, such as bus stops or MRT stations that are accessible to the public. So, imagine if there is a grass field that becomes a GLS site and there is a pathway that people normally use to get quickly to, say, the market or the MRT station, during the GLS site launch, where feasible, we will put that easement or right of way in some form as a condition.
On Ms Sylvia Lim's query on how public building names are approved, and to what extent donors can insist on naming rights, I would like to share that the Street and Building Names Board (SBNB) oversees the approval of names of buildings, estates and streets in Singapore.
For a select group of public buildings, such as education institutions under MOE, military installations under MINDEF, and community sports facilities under Sport Singapore, the relevant Government agencies need not seek the Board's approval for the naming and they will have their policies on the naming of such institutions.
In general, in approving building names, the agencies ensure that the proposed names are appropriate in the context of what the building is, where it is located and what it is used for. In addition, the selected name should seek to reflect the character of the place. The societal, historical and cultural context of the surroundings are also important considerations.
Some public buildings may be named after organisations or foundations to recognise significant philanthropic or other contributions to Singapore. Generally, when assessing the suitability of a name, the relevant Government agencies will assess the credibility and reputation of the proposed name and check to ensure that it does not undermine the associated interests and larger identity of the named public building. Financial contributions do not automatically warrant a naming opportunity and the Government retains the naming rights of public buildings, roads and other key public infrastructure.
Sir, our community and industry have been invaluable partners in creating and sustaining our Biophilic City. In transforming our built environment sector, the Government will continue to take the lead and assist our businesses in making the transition. In rejuvenating our estates, we are taking active steps to involve the community and we will continue to step up our maintenance efforts and regulatory regimes to enhance the living environment for all Singaporeans. With these efforts, we look forward to an even more exciting living environment, as well as a bright future for Singaporeans of all ages and abilities.
The Chairman: Mr Ong Teng Koon.
Mr Ong Teng Koon: Sir, the issue of water security − how to price it to better manage our water usage − has rightly been front and centre of this year's Budget Debate. Today, I would like to draw attention to the closely related issue of food security.
There are many similarities here with the water security issue. Like water, agricultural and food products are an essential resource, for which it is imperative that we find stable sources of supply. Given our land scarcity, we are dependent on imports for basic and essential staples, such as rice, wheat, vegetables and meat. As in the case of water, the fact that our supermarket shelves are constantly stocked may have dulled us to the reality of our intrinsic vulnerability on this front.
Across the world, the issue of managing food and agricultural resources will only grow in importance. This is because the world's population is growing, living standards are improving and households in developing countries are moving up the income ladder. The demand for food products that are typically consumed by households in that income strata will only increase − milk, cheese, meat and fish.
Furthermore, the threat of climate change has also added a new dimension to uncertainty. Extreme weather events can cause disruptions in agricultural output, lead to spikes and volatility in prices of key agricultural commodities. Over the past few years, we have seen on occasions news reports of mass fish deaths in our Singapore waters and kelongs, which our marine biologists have described as an indirect consequence of warmer temperatures that cause marine plankton to swell and compete for oxygen with our local fish population. Singaporeans may also remember that in 2005-2007, there was a bout of food price inflation due to volatility in the world markets, which led to some of our economy rice hawkers to raise the price of an additional bowl of rice by 10 cents to 50 cents.
These instances are important reminders of our unique vulnerabilities on this front. While many of the fundamental causes of price volatility are external and ultimately beyond our control, I would nevertheless like to ask the Government what strategy the country is pursuing to ensure that our food supply remains stable and our prices remain reasonable for the average man on the street.
Where possible, what efforts are ongoing to boost the local sources of agricultural and food products? Is there a clear roadmap ahead to develop our local farming supply? How does the Government plan to overcome the inherent land constraints that we face? And on the external front, are we actively seeking to diversify our sources of food imports in order to improve the resilience of our overall food supply chains?
Mr Darryl David: Mr Chairman, Sir, as a small nation with not much agricultural or arable land, Singapore ends up importing much of its food − some 90% according to AVA. Realistically, while it is likely that we will always have to end up importing the majority of the food that we consume, it is nevertheless heartening to know that there have been attempts to leverage technology and innovation to promote agriculture and aquaculture in Singapore.
I would like to ask how local food production fits into the Government's overall food supply strategy and whether the Government has a long-term roadmap to guide the local farming or aquaculture sector to scale up their production levels. Would AVA be working with local partners to promote the Recirculating Aquaculture System (ARS) in Singapore?
As the global population continues to grow, there might be uncertainty whether global food supply can keep up with demand, especially in these uncertain times when countries are becoming more and more inward-looking.
Also, while technology might be needed to enhance farming, aquaculture and the rearing of livestock in terms of techniques, the product does increasingly end up being enhanced as well. While this is acceptable to a certain degree, we also do not want to end up with food that have been genetically modified too much or enhanced too much as we would then be concerned about the potential negative effects of such food.
Would MND be able to give more information on how the Government intends to ensure that our food supply will remain safe and secure?
The Chairman: Mr Chong Kee Hiong, you have three cuts. Can you take them together?
Mr Chong Kee Hiong (Bishan-Toa Payoh): Thank you, Chairman. First, on food security. During last year's COS debate, the Ministry declared that strengthening our food security will be a priority in the coming years. Whilst the world faces a period of global food supply uncertainty, as the UN Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO) warned in a report last month, due to a growing global population, global agricultural output will need to increase by 50%. Singapore imports more than 90% of its food from 160 countries. This means that we are highly vulnerable when food crises occur. Therefore, we should work towards greater self-sufficiency.
Given the scarcity of resources, self-sufficiency does not necessarily just refer to increasing production. Reducing wastage will help us to do more with less. It is, therefore, important to look at or tackle food wastage.
Last year, each person in Singapore generated 140 kilogrammes (kg) of food waste. Besides conducting ongoing public education to urge Singaporeans not to waste food, we should also encourage retailers and food sellers to provide the option of smaller portions for sale so that consumers will not have to throw away food they cannot finish. In the US, under the Good Samaritan Act, companies are not liable for anything that happens to those who consume the food they donated. Are we able to adopt similar legislation to encourage more companies to step forward and donate unsold food that is still suitable for consumption?
In recent years, our 117 coastal fish farms have had to deal with an increasing number of oil spills and occurrences of harmful algae blooms. What measures does the Ministry have to prevent their recurrence and manage longer-term environmental risks? We have another six fish farms on land. Are they performing well? Will the Ministry assist more fish farms to convert to indoor, vertical farms for better control of the environmental factors? The Apollo Aquaculture Group will be setting up a high-tech farm in Brunei. Are there plans to set up similar farms nearer to Singapore?
In 2011, we began a push to increase the percentage of fish from our farms to 15% of the fish eaten here. Last year, we only reached 10%. When will we be able to achieve our initial target?
Twenty-five percent of our eggs come from three local egg farms. What is the target for the next five years? How much of the chicken meat consumed here are locally farmed? Do we have plans to increase production from local farms? Have there been studies done on overseas contract farming?
In 2015, our farms produced about 11,420 tonnes of leafy vegetables, up 21% from 2010. This amounts to 13% of Singapore's vegetable supply. What is our long-term target for vegetables and fruits grown locally? Can the Minister share what innovative technologies are being used to improve quality, productivity and output for our agriculture sector?
Would the Minister also provide an update on the $63 million Agriculture Productivity Fund (APF)? To date, how much of the funds have been utilised? What is the progress of our acquisition of farmland overseas by the Government and Singaporean companies and our partnerships with foreign agricultural companies?
There are estates that are built in the 1960s and 1970s and are still not selected for the Estate Upgrading Programme (EUP). Take my constituency, for example. The Soo Chow Garden, Adelphi Park and Pemimpin estates date back to the 1960s and 1970s, and there are portions which have fallen into disrepair. In dire need of attention are the unduly narrow footpaths and pavements. Those in wheelchairs and babies in prams have to be pushed on the roads. With cars parked by the side, the roads are, in fact, congested and highly dangerous to both the road users and pedestrians.
Some parts of the playgrounds and parks are also in bad shape. Community bonding has been affected as a result, since the parks are usual gathering points for the residents. We need the EUP to prevent the shared public areas from deteriorating into safety and health hazards. Could the EUP be sped up?
If EUP cannot be sped up, as my appeal to the Ministry last year showed, would it be possible for a special fund to be set up for urgent repairs, maintenance and upgrading works at private estates, where factors, such as safety and health, are of immediate concern?
Would the Minister also consider the number of residents living in the estate as one of the criteria during the selection process? If the estate has a higher density of residents, it makes sense to give it priority, other things being equal, as more people stand to benefit from the upgrading.
My third cut is on real estate and real estate-related industries. I declare my interest as a professional in the real estate industry.
In land-scarce Singapore, how do we foster more innovations in real estate development, so as to meet the needs of consumers and cultivate a sustainable market for real estate developers and real estate-related businesses, whilst achieving optimum land use efficiency?
Last November, the Minister mentioned that the Government is considering new partnership models with the private sector. One is the \"master developer\" approach where developers can do the master planning and optimise different land uses in an integrated manner for large parcels of land.
For developers in overseas markets, they have the opportunities to develop: (a) a township; (b) they could build entertainment complexes, such as a golf course and theme park, to enhance the surrounding residential or commercial development; or (c) they could build schools and hospitals or other public facilities which would be handed over to the relevant authorities to operate, with rights to develop real estate for residential or commercial use.
In these instances, the developer has the flexibility to plan and execute the development in phases and adopt varied sales and marketing strategies to achieve its return objectives, while complying with the tender specifications by the authorities.
Is the Government working along these lines? Would this be a possibility in Singapore, given the land constraints? Perhaps the development of certain Southern Islands can adopt such an approach.
The other approach is the Business Improvement Districts (BID) model where businesses and business-funded associations come together to improve a defined commercial area. Property owners and retailers work together to decide on how to create and build an attractive BID. The CFE recommended a BID to empower precinct associations, such as the Orchard Road Business Association. Would the Minister please elaborate on these schemes?
These collaborative approaches have had good results when implemented in other countries and I look forward to the Minister's updates about their feasibility in Singapore.
Ensuring environmental sustainability also includes implementing measures to expedite the adoption of more water- and energy-efficient technologies in our buildings and facilities. As we are a densely populated and highly built-up city, such measures will have a great impact. Will the Government share the good practices adopted by the industry so that more can learn from these examples? And will the Government consider incentives for developers who adopt more environmentally-friendly designs and technologies in their developments?
The Chairman: Mr Louis Ng, you have five cuts. You can take all of them.
Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang: Thank you, Sir. Consumers play their part in the anti-haze efforts if they consciously buy from companies which only source sustainable haze-free palm oil in their products. However, palm oil is often labelled as vegetable oil in Singapore, which means that consumers are kept in the dark about whether the products they buy contain palm oil. To inform consumers on what they are consuming, the European Union have changed their food labelling regulations to ensure that the types of vegetable oil used in food products were explicitly stated on the labels. Will AVA consider taking similar steps to improve transparency in our food labels?
Next, the Love Cats pilot programme, managed by the Cat Welfare Society and conducted in Chong Pang between 2012 and 2016, achieved far-reaching effects to help the Town Council, AVA and relevant agencies better tackle cat-related disputes in the community. In support of this pilot, MND provided a two-year grant. However, funding has since stopped, though the pilot continued with a robust mediation and resident engagement model, with much success in resolving neighbourly issues related to cats. Will the Ministry consider supporting and extending the funding of this pilot to more estates in Singapore?
Next, Singapore is frequently under the spotlight as a hub for illegal wildlife trade, but Singapore detected only 10 cases of illegal wildlife trade in the last three years at our border checkpoints, which suggests that wildlife trade continues to pass through our borders without our knowledge. To strengthen enforcement at our checkpoints, several non-government organisations (NGOs) have suggested the establishment of a sniffer dog programme, used effectively by many countries. Sniffer dogs are highly efficient at detecting contraband and also serve a deterrent function.
In South Korea, a dog named Simba detected major finds almost every month, totaling 142 separate animal parts and some \"live\" animals. In Hong Kong, sniffer dogs can detect ivory concealed in packages in just under five seconds. From 2008 to 2015, the dogs assisted in over 40 cases of smuggled animals or products and can identify 15 endangered species. In Thailand, the training and maintenance of the entire sniffer dog unit functions on merely S$58,000 annually. AVA stated that the sniffer dog programme was \"less cost-effective than other measures\". Can AVA clarify what the other measures are and whether they are already in place? Would AVA reconsider the decision to implement a wildlife sniffer dog programme in Singapore?
There are currently only three inspectors at the wildlife section at AVA. While other AVA, ICA and customs officers assist in detecting wildlife crime, it is clearly insufficient to have only three inspectors solely dedicated towards tackling wildlife crime in Singapore, considering as well that this is a 24/7 job. Can the Ministry increase resources and manpower for this section, considering again that Singapore continues to remain in the spotlight with regard to wildlife crime.
Sir, from 2011 to 2015, the number of feedback AVA received on animal cruelty and welfare rose from 410 to 840 cases. However, AVA continues to face substantial challenges in investigations, including the lack of eyewitnesses and direct evidence, as well as an increase in online crimes. As such, would AVA consider engaging animal welfare groups to complement its efforts, just as NEA engages and empowers citizens for anti-littering efforts?
The Chairman: Minister of State Koh Poh Koon.
The Minister of State for National Development (Dr Koh Poh Koon): Sir, Mr Ong Teng Koon, Mr Darryl David and Mr Chong Kee Hiong spoke about growing uncertainties in global food supply and how this might threaten Singapore's food security.
These are valid concerns because at the end of the day, we import 90% or more of the food that we consume. We are, to some extent, \"vulnerable\" in our food supply because we lack natural resources to grow all the food that we will ever need. But we have never passively accepted our fate as it is. Just look at how we deal with our water issue. It is an existential vulnerability, but we have gradually strengthened our water supply through our \"Four National Taps\". Our water story has been about transforming adversity into opportunity.
I believe we can do the same with food by embracing technology. We can intensify land use, as some Members have suggested, reduce wastage and increase the yields of our farms. We can transform our small but vibrant farm sector. And as some Members have noted, with global population growth and more extreme weather patterns, it is time for us to think ahead. With global supplies eventually being outstripped by demand, it is time for us to take more concerted action.
We should envision perhaps \"Three National Food Baskets\". The first of these baskets is imports from around the world. This is key because we do not have enough land to cultivate all that we need. But diversification makes this basket much more resilient. So, we will continue our efforts to look for more varied sources of food for import.
The second basket is internationalisation. This opens up new markets and helps our farms overcome land constraints in Singapore. We want to help local farms and food companies venture abroad to seek opportunities. Just last month, I led a delegation of Singaporean agricultural producers to Brunei to explore opportunities. Brunei is keen to attract our farmers as a way of diversifying their economy and, for us, we are interested to find alternative sources of food supply and for cultivation of the food that we need as well.
We had good bilateral discussions among ourselves, the delegation and the Bruneian officials. Naturally, we hope that some of the food that our farms produce there will eventually be re-exported back to Singapore for our local consumption. We also want some value-added operations to remain in Singapore, things like research and development (R&D), training, development of technology and innovation. We hope these will continue to remain in the farms in Singapore.
But overall, having our local food producers successfully operating overseas will strengthen our food security. In fact, some of our Singapore agriculture specialists have actually done so. With your permission, Sir, may I display some slides?
The Chairman:\tYes, please. [Some slides were shown to hon Members.]
Dr Koh Poh Koon: Thank you, Sir. For example, a Singapore-Brunei joint venture company, KR Apollo, for which I did the ground-breaking just a short while ago, will transform a 12-hectare site in Brunei into a high-tech vertical fish farm, the very first in Brunei. The yield is expected to eventually reach 5,000 tonnes a year. That is not a small number. That number alone would approximate the annual total output from all the fish farms in Singapore, just from this one farm.
Another local farm, Sky Greens, has ventured to Hainan in China. I shared about the development of Sky Greens at the COS last year and this year, I am happy to show that Sky Greens has taken a step further by also internationalising into China. They have deployed their vertical farming towers on 0.23 hectares in Hainan Island in China, and they plan to develop 20 hectares more. That is equivalent to 28 football fields.
The third basket is local production. Members have asked if local farms continue to play an important role. I say this is an important part of our food security because it provides a critical buffer against global supply shocks for especially key food items like vegetables, food fish and eggs. Our local food production targets are 10% for vegetables, 30% for hen eggs and 15% for food fish, and our production has generally been rising over the years.
But we certainly can do better. It cannot be business as usual if our local production is needed to strengthen our food resilience. So, the targets that we set are reviewed from time to time as our needs evolve and as technology becomes available.
Realistically, though, Singapore is too small to develop large tracts of land for farming. We will never have enough land to ever grow all the food that we need. There are many competing uses for land. That is something Members will understand. Just as we ask our SMEs in various other sectors to transform, automate, be more productive and to take on automation, we need our agricultural players to transform into one that is more productive as well. We need to adopt modern practices and embrace technology as a multiplier to do more with less.
We have been working with our farmers to help them raise their production levels. Over the past year, we have increased engagement with our local farms because they know the issues and challenges best as practitioners on the ground. We have visited them over the last six to nine months, spoken with them, seen how they operate and understand some of the constraints that they have and what they see as opportunities for the farming sector.
To enable our local farmers to play an active role in transforming our farming sector, we formed an Industry Consultation Panel (ICP) early this year. It consists of progressive farmers representing various food farm types, as well as academics who can help translate research in agricultural technology into practical implementation in our farms. Together, practitioners, academics and policymakers will work together to innovate, co-create and transform our farming sector through technology.
Many Singaporeans and, in fact, Members have asked whether local farming has a future in Singapore. That is a fundamental question, and I would say the answer is an unequivocal yes.
Farming will be a part of Singapore's future. But it will have to be a different-looking farming sector from what it is today in order for the sector to fulfil its important role of strengthening Singapore's food supply resilience and food security.
Through focus group discussions involving the ICP as well as meeting up with farmers directly, we developed a Farm Transformation Map (FTM) to guide the transformation of our farming sector in four areas − physical space, innovation, people development and the larger broader ecosystem. Let me address these one by one.
Firstly, to overcome space constraints, we need to go upwards into the sky, downwards into the ocean and even inwards into our buildings. I have already spoken about Sky Greens and Apollo using vertical technology to grow more with less space. Even traditional vegetable farms like Kok Fah are using advanced greenhouses and irrigation systems to mitigate the impact of extreme weather changes on their crop growth. Fish farms like Barramundi Asia are growing seabass in deep underwater netcages, just off Pulau Semakau. Farms like Panasonic and Sustenir are growing vegetables in climate-controlled, multi-tiered indoor spaces. Another company, ComCrop, is even growing vegetables on our rooftops! These are all innovative solutions that help us grow more food with less space, and we should explore more opportunities and options to scale these up.
Second, we need more innovation. To optimise limited space and increase production yields, we need to push technological boundaries. We need to pursue water and energy efficiency. We need to automate and we need to integrate the systems through robotics and sensors. We have to adapt our solutions to protect against climate change that affects the yields of the crops. For instance, technologies like closed containment aquaculture systems (CCAS) can reduce the vulnerability of our coastal fish farms and their stocks to environmental risks.
In response to Miss Cheng Li Hui's question on how we can help our coastal farms to mitigate consequences of coastal oil spills, this is one good example of how our farms can adopt technologies to protect themselves from untoward circumstances, especially those relating to environmental pollution or weather pattern changes.
Even some of our other farms, the bean sprouts farm, for example, and I have seen it for myself, are using technology to transform the way they pack their bean sprouts. It is a fairly automated process from how the bean sprouts are being put into a sorter, automatically weighed, put into packets, sealed and ready to get into the freezer and sent out to our shops.
Our egg farms as well have adopted a lot of automation such that the eggs are automatically collected on a conveyor belt, sorted by some form of infra-red scanning to make sure that the eggs are not broken, have no micro-cracks, and then sorted into size, and packed and ready to be shipped out as well.
Through technology, from my description, you will see that farming will begin to resemble an industrialised production process, much like any other factory we have. It will also attract and excite a younger generation of tech-savvy Singaporeans to consider venturing into this industry seriously.
This brings me to the third thrust. We need the right people to achieve our vision. Transforming the sector requires a knowledge-based workforce. Our modern farmers should be more appropriately called \"agri-technologists\" or \"agri-specialists\", not just farmers. We will need a generation of \"agri-specialists\" with multidisciplinary expertise. Farming will no longer just be about horticulture, no longer just be about aquaculture. It will no longer be just about toiling in the sun, doing manual labour, but about engineering, info-comm technology, entrepreneurship and R&D. The interactions among these areas will generate ideas to transform the farming industry.
Back to the example of Apollo. Apollo, as a vertical fish farm, has also adopted and invented some of their own technologies, their own software, their own sensors in the fish tanks, so much so that the operational room is an air-conditioned room where the operators sit in the room looking at computer monitors. They can tell the water temperature, the salinity of the water. They even have video cameras to tell how the fish are doing in the tanks and have automatic feeding as well to feed the fish in the tank.
In essence, this is a very high-tech process, and Apollo has worked with Temasek Polytechnic and Republic Polytechnic to provide internships for students in the agriculture course to be trained in using their high-tech systems. Many young people in these Polytechnics are now excited to join Apollo in their venture, especially now that Apollo has gone overseas.
Fourth, we need to grow the ecosystem. This means encouraging ancillary players. It means increasing demand for local produce, helping our farms to seek financing. Consumers, Singaporeans, must also pay a part and actively support our local produce. In other words, it is about creating an active ecosystem, an environment where our farms can thrive.
In this regard, the ICP pointed out that tight cash flows often limit the farmers from investing in more expensive technology. The current APF co-funds investments in technology but only on a reimbursement basis after the farmers have spent their own money. We have listened to the suggestions put forth by ICP. Therefore, from April this year, APF will disburse up to 30% of the approved funding quantum upfront to facilitate the adoption of technology. This will complement our move to increase the tenure of farmlands to 20-year leases, from the previous 10-plus-10, based on industry feedback.
AVA will also adopt a new \"account management\" approach to our farms. This means that each farm will have a dedicated account manager to advise them on business development, technology adoption and financial assistance. The account manager will facilitate the farmer's interactions with the many agencies and they will also work with stakeholders. Think of these account managers as the equivalent of SPRING Singapore for our farming industry.
AVA wants to help our farmers succeed. If they are willing and able to transform, AVA will walk this journey with them. In fact, one of the things AVA has been actively doing is to help our farmers to understand technology better. Just last year, AVA brought a group of our farmers to Japan to source for technology, to help them look at indoor farming technology which they may be keen to adopt. This year, in April, we will be bringing a different group of farmers to other advanced farms in China to understand land-based farming and some of the technologies they can adopt in Singapore.
This farm transformation map is just in its infancy. We will continue to work with ICP and other stakeholders to refine it as we gain momentum and as technology for farming matures. Over the next few years, this partnership will create practical initiatives and solutions that I hope will be impactful for the farming industry.
Therefore, to respond to the Members, the Government has a strategy. But it will not be without challenges going forward and we cannot do it alone. We need the cooperation and support of our local agricultural practitioners to transform themselves and the entire sector. I believe if we can do this well, we will have a \"food story\" to go along with our \"water story\".
The agriculture sector is not the only sector that has to transform itself to prepare for the future. The real estate sector also needs to change. Mr Chong Kee Hiong asked how the Ministry will help our real estate industry overcome the challenges that are posed by digital disruption. We are already seeing signs of such disruption in countries like the US, the UK and Australia where sophisticated online platforms have enabled consumers to conduct property transactions themselves. They have used online property searches and viewing, as well as e-conveyancing and other value-added services.
We have also seen quite a number of do it yourself (DIY) property portals sprouting up in Singapore in recent years. This has led to a growing number of Singaporeans choosing to complete their property transactions without the use of a property agent. To survive and thrive, the industry must consider new ways of doing things. MND is, therefore, bringing together industry stakeholders across the entire real estate value chain − this includes property developers, estate agents, conveyancing and valuation firms − to collectively develop a Real Estate Industry Transformation Map (Real Estate ITM). This is one of the 23 ITMs being developed under the ITM. Through the ITM, we hope to create a resilient and future-ready real estate industry that will continue to provide good jobs for Singaporeans. This will involve three broad thrusts: productivity, scale and skills.
First, we must help our real estate companies maximise the potential of their workers and raise productivity. This will allow them to remain competitive and continue to provide good jobs. On our part, Government agencies will consider how we can streamline processes to make the sector more productive, while providing consumers with added convenience and more positive experiences. HDB is already doing a review of its resale transaction processes with the aim of significantly reducing total transaction time. One possibility we are considering is to do away with one of the HDB's resale appointments by leveraging ICT technology. We will also explore how to streamline other transactions, such as for rentals for private properties.
Our second thrust is to help companies scale up and take advantage of new growth areas. With scale, companies can leverage on greater economies of scale, increase their value proposition, and better respond to market disruptions. Several real estate companies have done this by expanding into related areas in the property value chain or by venturing overseas.
One example is home-grown company, LHN Group. They have enhanced their value proposition by expanding downstream, from their original focus in space optimisation, to facilities management and shared services. LHN's efforts, with support from SPRING and International Enterprise (IE) Singapore, have allowed the company to take advantage of new areas of growth, including expanding into China, to manage mixed-use developments.
We need more of such examples. Expanding into new business areas or overseas markets is not easy. This is why, as part of the Real Estate ITM, we will work with the industry to identify new areas of growth and see how to support their efforts to deepen their expertise, develop competitive niches and enter overseas markets.
The third thrust is to ensure that our workers are equipped with the right skills. As we work with the sector to raise productivity and pursue new areas of growth, there will be new ways of doing things and new jobs being created. For example, with more information and services being online, it may be more important for property agents now to hone their skills in servicing clients and building up their credentials rather than just competing on marketing and closing transactions. We will be working with companies, industry associations and unions to ensure that there are training opportunities to help workers upskill and continuously refresh those skills throughout their careers.
Together, these thrusts will support a major transformation of the real estate industry. This will not be easy. But, as the CEO of Netflix, Reed Hastings, said, \"Companies rarely die from moving too fast, and they frequently die from moving too slow.\" The time to transform is now. Over the next few months, my colleagues from MND and the agencies will work closely with all stakeholders − companies, industry associations, workers and unions − to develop the ITM and the way they should take it forward.
Let me address some of the other queries raised by Members.
Mr Chong Kee Hiong asked about using EUP to address the deterioration of public infrastructure in older private estates. Let me clarify that EUP is not the most appropriate way to do so because it is meant to provide amenities in private estates that go beyond routine maintenance work.
Public infrastructure in private estates is maintained by public agencies like NParks, LTA, and PUB. If deterioration occurs and ad hoc repairs are needed, the public can alert the relevant agencies directly or through MSO's OneService app to do so. Mr Chong Kee Hiong's example of Clover estate, which is one of the private estates that he asked about earlier, under the EUP, the estate has already been approved for Batch Nine, and I believe we are in the process of calling for tender evaluation now to appoint the consultants. We do hope by June or July this year that we will finish appointing all the consultants, for which they can then work with the relevant working committees to plan for the schedule for EUP in Batch Nine, going forward.
Mr Chong Kee Hiong also asked about the master developer concept. As this has been covered by Minister Lawrence Wong's speech earlier, I will not elaborate further.
Mr Chong Kee Hiong also asked about the option of thinking about using BID in our planning. This is something we will study and we will be able to release more details when the study is completed.
Mr Louis Ng made several suggestions to better tackle animal crime, including increasing the number of AVA inspectors for wildlife crime, introducing sniffer dogs to detect smuggled wildlife and working more closely with AWGs. I thank the Member for his interesting ideas. We will certainly consider them. AVA already works closely with AWGs on animal cruelty cases. This has been found to be mutually beneficial and this cooperation has resulted in several successful investigations. I believe AVA is happy to engage more AWGs who can be helpful in this way.
Mr Louis Ng also asked whether we can extend the funding and support for the Love Cats pilot project to more estates in Singapore. We are currently in the process of assessing the Cat Welfare Society's proposal, but we do need to recognise that there are differing views among residents on this subject. We want to be a City in a Garden with its attendant flora and fauna. For that to be a reality, all of us need to play a part in finding the right balance between human-animal interaction and conflict. We expect pet owners to be responsible for their pets, just as we expect others to treat animals with respect and tolerance.
Mr Louis Ng asked about the possibility of labelling palm oil on food labels so that consumers can play their part in anti-haze efforts. This is an idea that requires further study. For instance, requiring this labelling on food labels could help consumers make more conscious decisions no doubt. However, this would also be stricter than current international standards and may be misperceived as a trade barrier. So, for the moment, we have taken the approach of encouraging the industry to voluntarily declare that their palm oil is from sustainable sources. The Minister for the Environment and Water Resources will talk more about the haze issue later in his COS session.
While we move to tackle the challenges ahead, we must also support the vulnerable in our community. Several Members asked whether we can do more for single parents. There were suggestions to waive the resale levy, to allow flat applications before finalisation of divorce, to lift the debarment and raise the income ceiling for public rental, to have a dedicated appeals channel and to give more help to single unmarried parents.
Let me just say that single parents are not a homogeneous group. Each may have their unique circumstances and challenges. Let us think back to all the residents we see in our MPS. There is no typical case of a single parent. There is no classic case where you say it fits a certain profile. They all have their unique social challenges, different family backgrounds and unique family situations. We have addressed some of these challenges on how we help single parents in previous Parliamentary Questions. But let me reassure Members once again that while certain rules and criteria are needed to achieve fair allocation and policy objectives, they are not applied in a blanket manner simply because there is no typical case, there is no typical profile. Therefore, we take a case-by-case approach and apply flexibility, taking into account those factors I said earlier.
I would like to share some actual cases just from last month, February 2017, where HDB has made exceptions to help families in need. A gentleman, let us just call him Mr A. He earns $1,800 monthly at a hawker stall. He is the sole breadwinner supporting his wife and two children and he sold his flat last year due to debts, a very common story that we may have encountered in our MPS. HDB waived both the income ceiling and the 30-month debarment for the family. They moved into a 2-room rental flat in Ang Mo Kio last month.
Another gentleman, let us call him Mr B. He earns $2,000 a month as a driver and he is close to retirement age. His wife is unable to work due to health issues and looks after their daughter. They had been staying with a friend but now the friend asked them to move out, another common story. HDB waived the income ceiling for them and, today, the family is in a 2-room rental flat in Bedok.
Another case, Madam C, a lady in her 30s. She is a single mother, unmarried parent with three children who were born out of wedlock. Her family turned her out and she could not turn to the children's biological fathers as they have moved out of Singapore − another sad but not unheard of type of story. She is unemployed as she needs to look after her children. HDB allocated them a 1-room rental flat in the northern part of Singapore.
All these families, and many others, were assisted by HDB because they were in need and had no other housing options and no family support, but each of them has a different story and different need at the same time.
I thank Members for their various suggestions and we will study them as we review our policies.
Ms Kuik Shiao-Yin asked what is the best approach for single unwed parents to access housing. I would say anybody who is in need is welcome to approach their MP for help, but they can also appeal to HDB directly. The examples I gave earlier show that HDB does take a compassionate approach towards these cases in need. HDB will seek to understand the facts of each case and evaluate all appeals fairly and objectively, and apply help where necessary.
Ms Kuik Shiao-Yin also asked for an update on the ASSIST scheme. Let me remind Members that ASSIST stands for Assistance Scheme for Second-Timers where we set aside 5% out of the 30% second-timer quota for 2-room flexi and 3-room BTO flats in non-mature estates for divorced or widowed persons with at least one young child.
Since May 2013, 887 flats were set aside under ASSIST. Of the 282 applicants received before 2016, 199 or 71% went on to book a flat. Of the remainder, 66 of them or 23% did not proceed despite qualifying. Perhaps, they already had alternative housing options. Another 42 applications are currently under process.
Ms Kuik Shiao-Yin also asked about the underlying principle of why only applicants who sold the flat before a divorce can apply for the ASSIST scheme. Let me just explain that ASSIST is meant to cater to those who are unable to own a place on their own after divorce. Therefore, those who were able to retain the matrimonial flat after divorce or those who are able to buy a flat after divorce − when they dispose of their old flat, they get some money and they are able to buy a flat on their own − will not qualify for the ASSIST scheme. So, their financial status is also something that we consider and whether they end up owning the matrimonial home subsequently. That is why the scheme is designed this way.
Our housing policies address the majority of our population and there will always be a minority whose circumstances are not addressed. The channels for appeal are always open to them. And they are not intended to create extra friction. Rather, it is to ensure fairness to the majority who have abided by the general policies. I urge Members of this House and members of the public to approach the agencies for assistance when necessary.
Miss Cheryl Chan and Mr Pritam Singh asked whether HDB can offer rental flats to Singaporeans married to foreigners. If they do not have Singaporean children, it is difficult to extend them the same level of subsidies as households with two or more Singaporeans. Nonetheless, as the Member has acknowledged, HDB does exercise flexibility and HDB has made exceptions to help those families in extenuating circumstances, and we will continue to do so.
Separately, on the JSS in public rental, we agree with Mr Henry Kwek that flatmates provide company and support for each other. For the minority who cannot get along, HDB advises them to seek mediation and, if that is unsuccessful, they may search for another eligible person or apply to rent another flat. We do not intend to allow singles to stay alone, but we are working to address some of the issues through design. Since 2015, HDB has made available 180 JSS rental flats with partitions for more privacy. Another 320 of such flats are now under construction.
I would now like to close with an update on the Fresh Start Housing Scheme, which opened last December for second-timer families in public rental. We have received 68 applications from families who meet the basic profile, in terms of demographics and housing situation. I am pleased to say that 13 families have been emplaced, and four of them have already applied for their 2-room flexi flats in HDB's sales exercise last month. A few more are awaiting their emplacement interviews and another 48 applications are being processed.
One of the emplaced families, the Lim family, visited the 2-room flexi flat show-flat at HDB Hub, and told us they were very excited at finally being able to have their own home. Mrs Lim, in particular, cannot wait to do up her own kitchen. It is every woman's dream to want to have a nice kitchen, I suppose. My mother certainly would never compromise on the furnishings in the kitchen.
Many applicants have told us that the help offered by Fresh Start is useful, from the grant, to the concessionary rate loan and the capping of the resale levy. Before Fresh Start, second-timer families would not have been eligible for any of these concessions, certainly not a second housing grant. This shows that we do consciously review our housing policies to make them more inclusive and to help families who would otherwise not qualify again.
I thank Mr Saktiandi Suppat for suggesting that Fresh Start should be extended to single unmarried parents in public rental. They are welcome to apply and HDB will take a case-by-case approach to assess their eligibility.
I am very excited for the emplaced families who have begun their journey back to home ownership. It is early days in this scheme and we look forward to welcoming more families to the scheme.
The Chairman:\tIt is now thirty-five minutes past eight. We have a little bit of time for clarifications. Mr Alex Yam.
Mr Alex Yam: Sir, four clarifications − two for the Minister, one for the Senior Minister of State and one for the Minister of State.
On the Temporary Loan scheme that the Minister announced earlier today, could he provide more details on who else will qualify for the scheme and how it will be rolled out?
Secondly, on the urban rejuvenation plans, I have two concerns. One, there has been a call for public participation in future development of these plans. How will this be carried out and how can the public play a greater role?
On the master developer scheme that was announced, these are huge projects. How will private Singapore firms be able to participate fully in these projects while competing with large-scale international firms and, of course, with public companies as well − and by \"public\", I mean Government companies.
For the Senior Minister of State on prefabrication, the ICPH, I understand that the current Kaki Bukit plant run by SEF SpaceHub has a production of about 100,000 metres cube annually. Does BCA have a target for the total number of ICPHs and also a production target by 2020?
For the Minister of State Dr Koh Poh Koon, I know he did not touch —
The Chairman:\tPlease keep your clarifications short.
Mr Alex Yam:\t— last one. I know he did not touch specifically on APF. Could he share how many farms have applied for it so far and whether there are any hurdles that prevent more people coming forward?
The Chairman:\tCan the replies be kept short?
Mr Lawrence Wong: Yes, Sir. On the first question, the answer is that anyone with an existing flat who wants to sell the flat and buy a new flat using the proceeds from the sale of the flat as well as their savings, so they want to do a back-to-back but then the back-to-back is very difficult to do. They have to do it on the same day so they typically need a Temporary Loan and we will extend that to anybody in that category. The Temporary Loan applications start from tomorrow.
The second question is on rejuvenation projects and urban projects. We already do a lot of consultation for these projects. We engage different groups and stakeholders. We go to the community and we get feedback. We are doing this for the Rail Corridor, for example. And for many of the projects which I talked about, in fact, all of them, be it the Kallang River Rejuvenation, Jurong Lake District, Punggol, we will have exhibitions, we will showcase the ideas and we will get feedback and inputs to improve on these ideas.
On local participation, this is already happening to the extent that these are Government projects and the Government is putting them out as a developer. We do encourage local architects, consultants, engineers and contractors to take part. In some instances, when it is a big master planning project, we will even require that foreign firms participating in the design of the master plan partner a local firm which has local knowledge of the environment.
The Chairman:\tSenior Minister of State Desmond Lee.
Mr Desmond Lee: I will respond to the Member's question on ICPHs. I said earlier that there are four sites for ICPH already out. Two are already operational and two are under construction. All four are Singapore firms. We target to have 10 ICPHs by 2020 and all should be operational by about 2022 or thereabouts.
Currently, DfMA adoption is about roughly 10%. We aim to target to push it up to 40% by 2020 and beyond. So, with these 10 ICPHs, a rough forecast would be that it should be able to provide up to 60% to 70% of the components we need locally and the rest from abroad. But this is an early estimate. A lot of it depends on how successful we are in persuading firms to take up DfMA.
Dr Koh Poh Koon:\tSir, in response to the question on APF, so far, $6 million has been awarded to 67 projects. Farms have previously tapped on what we had previously called the Food Fund in which about $31 million was awarded to 310 projects.
Farmers gave feedback, especially ICP, that cash flow is often a problem when they want to scale in technology, which is why based on the feedback from farmers and from ICP, we have decided to restructure APF such that they can have 30% of the grants given upfront to allow them to scale in technology as soon as possible.
The Chairman:\tMr Zainal Sapari.
Mr Zainal Sapari:\tMy clarification is for the Minister of State. Has there been any case where the HDB levy payable by a flat applicant had been waived before?
Dr Koh Poh Koon:\tSir, we usually do not waive the levy completely. We can do one or two things, that is, reduce the quantum or we can incorporate it into the loan so that it can be spread out over a longer period.
The Chairman:\tDr Er Lee Bee Wah.
Er Dr Lee Bee Wah:\t I have three clarifications.
The Chairman:\tShort ones, please.
Er Dr Lee Bee Wah:\tYes. I saw many beautiful pictures of other towns. My question is: will Yishun Swimming Complex be included in the $700 million projects? The second question: I have just clarified with the Singapore Contractors Association's President and he confirmed that contractors are seldom compensated in ECI. So, I would like to ask the Ministry whether there will be further studies to reduce wastage and compensate the contractors. He said, in the US, contractors are all compensated and only three contractors are called. The last question is on the Code of Practice, whether it would address the root cause, that is, not enough time is given to architects and engineers to do BIM modelling. Otherwise, the Code of Practice will just add additional pressure on them.
Mr Desmond Lee: I thank the Member for her questions. On ECI, these are BCA's guidelines. We encourage firms to follow these guidelines when they do ECI. It aims to strike a right balance between certainty of getting the contracts and the amount of effort that you put in. Certainly, we will encourage more firms to comply with these guidelines. But for the public sector, this is what we do.
On the question about Yishun Swimming Complex, let me go back and check.
On the Code of Practice, as I said, it is being piloted. We are using this in some private sector projects to see whether architects, in compliance with the Code of Practice, will be able to put in the information necessary for contractors to use the BIM model in a way envisioned by BIM/VDC. After the pilot is completed, we will then know whether they work. When we launch them, the Member will be assured that the Code of Practice would have been tested.
The Chairman:\tMr Dennis Tan
Mr Dennis Tan Lip Fong:\tA quick clarification for Senior Minister of State Desmond Lee. The tree inspection records − how long are they kept?
Mr Desmond Lee:\tThe tree inspection records will be kept indefinitely.
The Chairman:\tMr Chong Hee Hiong.
Mr Chong Kee Hiong:\tI have a clarification for the Minister of State on private estate upgrading. I was not referring to ad hoc repair and maintenance work. EUP focuses largely on estate-wide improvement work. And this will go a long way to resolving this issue.
The Chairman:\tPlease go straight to your clarification.
Mr Chong Kee Hiong: Yes. But these estates are already 50 years old, and they have to continue to wait out for more years. So, I am referring to whether we could bring back a programme, such as EUP, that was previously there.
Dr Koh Poh Koon: I thank the Member for his question. We would not be doing EUP at the moment. In fact, we are progressing with Batch Nine at the moment. The budget has been allocated for up to 10 batches. So, once we start with Batch Nine, we will then come up with a decent time for starting on Batch 10. But if there are any estate areas that need urgent repairs because of wear and tear, then this is where I said that you can ask for ad hoc repairs at the moment.
The Chairman:\tMr Louis Ng.
Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang: Sir, firstly, can the Minister confirm whether exceptions have been made for the ASSIST programme where the divorcees can start their application when they get the Interim Judgement of divorce?
Second, similarly, will HDB specifically consider whether a single unwed parent can form a family nucleus with his or her child? Has this been done before?
Third, for the short-term rental, I raised this during the debate on the Bill, when will we see the draft guidelines, when will it be available to the public for public consultation?
Fourth, on the Love Cats programme, I understand that a review is going on, but this has already been done for two years. Is there a timeframe where we will finally make a decision?
Fifth, will AVA be considering the Wildlife Save a Dog programme? Previously, it was a no. Are they considering now and keeping it open?
Lastly, will we be increasing the number of wildlife inspectors? I do not think the Minister has addressed that point.
Dr Koh Poh Koon: With regard to Interim Judgment for divorce cases − before the Final Judgment has been imposed, it will be hard to decide at that point in time who gets full care and control of the child. Therefore, it is very hard at that point in time to allow application for a flat. Also, sometimes the judge also determines who gets the matrimonial home, or the two parties may decide the way they want to split the assets. Therefore, until the judgment is finalised and assets are well split, it is very hard to then allow the applicants to apply for a flat.
As for whether we want to consider a single unwed parent with a child as a family nucleus, as I said in my reply, HDB does take a very flexible approach to assess each case on a case-by-case basis and to apply flexibility.
For the Love Cats project, once the agencies, after engagement with stakeholders, have an interim review to engage the animal welfare groups further, we will release the outcome.
For wildlife inspectors, today, in this day and age where technology is available, we should not just talk about more body counts, more people on the ground. We should consider how we can leverage technologies to multiply the effects of people and perhaps also work closely with the animal welfare groups to be our eyes and ears on the ground as well to help in nabbing offenders. So, I think we should take a broader approach rather than just look at employing more wildlife inspectors.
The Chairman:\tMr Ong Teng Koon, not more than two clarifications, please.
Mr Ong Teng Koon: Some clarifications for the Minister. Could I have the response on property transactions undertaken by the Special Purpose Vehicles (SPVs)? Will he also look into the ABSD implications of such transactions?
Mr Lawrence Wong:\tSir, as I had said, the answer is yes. The intent of what we are trying to do is to treat significant owners of residential holding property entities, who transfer shares in these entities, in the same way as if they were to buy and sell property directly. So, to the extent that ABSD, and buyer's stamp duty apply on the buy side, and seller's stamp duty apply on the sell side, then potentially they would also apply in the case when such shares are being transferred.
The Chairman:\tMr Alex Yam, would you like to withdraw the amendment without a lengthy preamble?
Mr Alex Yam: I will keep it short. Sir, please allow me to first thank our fellow Members for filing 52 very wide-ranging cuts − the largest number of cuts for this year. My gratitude to Minister Lawrence Wong, Minister Grace Fu, Senior Minister of State Desmond Lee and Minister of State Koh Poh Koon for their enlightening answers and commitment to a future-ready city for all. Therefore, it remains for me to beg leave to withdraw my amendment.
[(proc text) Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. (proc text)]
[(proc text) The sum of $3,346,721,600 for Head T ordered to stand part of the Main Estimates. (proc text)]
[(proc text) The sum of $12,130,669,900 for Head T ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates. (proc text)]
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Committee of Supply Reporting Progress","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OS","content":"The Minister for National Development (Mr Lawrence Wong): Sir, may I seek your consent to move that progress be reported now and leave be asked to sit again tomorrow?
[(proc text) Resolved, \"That progress be reported now and leave be asked to sit again tomorrow.\" − [Mr Lawrence Wong.] (proc text)]
[(proc text) Thereupon Mr Deputy Speaker left the Chair of the Committee and took the Chair of the House. (proc text)]
Mr Lawrence Wong:\tMr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I beg to report that the Committee of Supply has made further progress on the Estimates of Expenditure for the financial year 2017/2018 and ask leave to sit again tomorrow.
Mr Deputy Speaker:\tSo be it.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Adjournment","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OS","content":"[(proc text) Resolved, \"That Parliament do now adjourn.\" – [Ms Grace Fu Hai Yien.] (proc text)]
Adjourned accordingly at \t8.40 pm.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null}],"writtenAnswersVOList":[],"writtenAnsNAVOList":[],"annexureList":[],"vernacularList":[{"vernacularID":1404,"sittingDate":null,"vernacularTitle":"Vernacular Speech by Er Dr Lee Bee Wah","filePath":"d:/apps/reports/solr_files/20170307/vernacular-Lee Bee Wah(6).pdf","fileName":"Lee Bee Wah(6).pdf"},{"vernacularID":1405,"sittingDate":null,"vernacularTitle":"Vernacular Speech by Er Dr Lee Bee Wah","filePath":"d:/apps/reports/solr_files/20170307/vernacular-Lee Bee Wah(7).pdf","fileName":"Lee Bee Wah(7).pdf"},{"vernacularID":886,"sittingDate":null,"vernacularTitle":"Vernacular Speech by Mr Ng Chee Meng","filePath":"d:/apps/reports/solr_files/20170307/vernacular-Ng Chee Meng(1).pdf","fileName":"Ng Chee Meng(1).pdf"},{"vernacularID":887,"sittingDate":null,"vernacularTitle":"Vernacular Speech by Mr Thomas Chua Kee Seng","filePath":"d:/apps/reports/solr_files/20170307/vernacular-Thomas Chua Kee Seng(2).pdf","fileName":"Thomas Chua Kee Seng(2).pdf"},{"vernacularID":888,"sittingDate":null,"vernacularTitle":"Vernacular Speech by Mr Ang Wei Neng","filePath":"d:/apps/reports/solr_files/20170307/vernacular-Ang Wei Neng(3).pdf","fileName":"Ang Wei Neng(3).pdf"},{"vernacularID":889,"sittingDate":null,"vernacularTitle":"Vernacular Speech by Assoc Prof Dr Muhammad Faishal Ibrahim","filePath":"d:/apps/reports/solr_files/20170307/vernacular-Muhammad Faishal Ibrahim(4).pdf","fileName":"Muhammad Faishal Ibrahim(4).pdf"},{"vernacularID":890,"sittingDate":null,"vernacularTitle":"Vernacular Speech by Ms Low Yen Ling","filePath":"d:/apps/reports/solr_files/20170307/vernacular-Low Yen Ling(5).pdf","fileName":"Low Yen Ling(5).pdf"}],"onlinePDFFileName":""}