Committee of Supply − Head T (Ministry of National Development)

The Chairman: Head T, Ministry of National Development. Mr Alex Yam, please take your two cuts together.

4.15 pm

Housing in a Future-ready City

CPF Housing Grant − Price Pressure

Mr Alex Yam (Marsiling-Yew Tee): Thank 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.

Question proposed.

The Chairman: Assoc Prof Randolph Tan.

CPF Housing Grant

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?

Property Cooling Measures

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?

4.30 pm

The Chairman: Mr Gan Thiam Poh, please take your four cuts together. Mr Gan is not here. Mr Zainal Sapari.

Extending Lease Buyback Scheme

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): Madam, can I take both cuts together?

The Chairman: Yes, please.

Housing Options

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?

Right-sizing of Flats for Elderly

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?

Helping Vulnerable Families − Fresh Start

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.

Improve Housing for Single Parents

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.

Helping Single Unwed Parents Find a Home

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.

Helping Divorcees with a New Home

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.

Housing for Divorcees

Ms Rahayu Mahzam (Jurong): Madam, 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.

4.45 pm

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?

Rental Flats and Non-citizen Spouses

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.

Parenthood Priority Scheme

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?

Shorter Waiting Time for BTO Flats

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?

Parenthood Provisional Housing Scheme

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?

Lease Buyback Scheme

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.

Seniors Co-sharing Rental Flats

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?

Upgrading/BTO Design and Maintenance

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.

Home Improvement Programme

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.

Upgrading of Ageing 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?

Connected City of Opportunities

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.

Building a Future-ready City

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.

5.00 pm

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.

Thereupon Mdm Speaker left the Chair of the Committee and took the Chair of the House.

Mdm Speaker: I 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]

Debate in Committee of Supply resumed.

[Mdm Speaker in the Chair]

Head T (cont) –

The Chairman: Minister Lawrence Wong.

The Minister for National Development (Mr Lawrence Wong): Mdm 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: Yes, 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.

5.30 pm

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.

5.45 pm

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.

6.00 pm

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]

Strengthening Service Delivery of Municipal Services Office (MSO)

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.

MSO

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: Mr Baey Yam Keng.

The Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Culture, Community and Youth (Mr Baey Yam Keng): Chairman, can I take the three cuts together?

The Chairman: Yes, please.

Cross-agency Projects by MSO

Technology in Municipal Service Delivery

Data Analysis for Municipal Issues

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.

6.15 pm

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.

Additional Projects for Contractors

Mr Gan Thiam Poh: Sir, 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?

6.30 pm

Construction Productivity

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.

Estate Privatisation Planning

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.

Design of Lift Shaft

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.

HDB Tree Replacement Guidelines

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.

Handling Fallen Trees

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.

Naming of Public Buildings

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.

Coastal Water Pollution

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?

6.45 pm

Landscape Architecture Industry

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.

Railway Corridor Development

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.

Sembawang Hot Spring

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.

Quota System for Short-term Rentals

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.

Home Owners on Overseas Work Postings

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?

Heavy Vehicle Park

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): Mr Chairman, in the course of my presentation, may I have your permission to show some slides and a video?

The Chairman: Yes, 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.

7.00 pm

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.

7.15 pm

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.

7.30 pm

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.

Food Security and Farming

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?

Food supply and Food Security

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?

Food Security and Local Farms

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?

7.45 pm

Private Estate Upgrading

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.

Real Estate and Real Estate-related Industries

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.

Labelling of "Palm Oil" as an Ingredient

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?

Expansion of the Love Cats Programme

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?

Introducing a Sniffer Dog Programme

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?

Increasing the Number of Inspectors

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.

Engaging Animal Welfare Groups to Help with Enforcement

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: Yes, 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.

8.00 pm

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.

8.15 pm

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: It 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: Please keep your clarifications short.

Mr Alex Yam: — 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: Can 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: Senior 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: Sir, 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.

8.30 pm

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: Mr Zainal Sapari.

Mr Zainal Sapari: My 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: Sir, 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: Dr Er Lee Bee Wah.

Er Dr Lee Bee Wah: I have three clarifications.

The Chairman: Short ones, please.

Er Dr Lee Bee Wah: Yes. 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: Mr Dennis Tan

Mr Dennis Tan Lip Fong: A quick clarification for Senior Minister of State Desmond Lee. The tree inspection records − how long are they kept?

Mr Desmond Lee: The tree inspection records will be kept indefinitely.

The Chairman: Mr Chong Hee Hiong.

Mr Chong Kee Hiong: I 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: Please 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: Mr 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: Mr 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: Sir, 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: Mr 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.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

The sum of $3,346,721,600 for Head T ordered to stand part of the Main Estimates.

The sum of $12,130,669,900 for Head T ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates.