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

The Chairman: Head T. Ministry of National Development. Miss Cheryl Chan.

11.01 am

Assurance of Home Ownership

Miss Cheryl Chan Wei Ling (East Coast): Chairman, I beg to move "That the total sum to be allocated for Head T of the Estimates be reduced by $100".

Sir, the past two years have seen a slew of initiatives announced by the Ministry of National Development (MND) ranging from the introduction of the Prime Location Housing (PLH) model to the reclassification of flats and enhancing singles' access to public housing. These challenges have generally been met with much appreciation as mitigating solutions against the backdrop of escalating rents and housing prices. I am in full support of Minister Desmond Lee's commitment in ensuring better access and affordable public housing for Singaporeans.

Affordable housing is often a debated topic in cities across the world. It impacts people's lives and their long-term family or career planning. For Singapore, it entails a continuous effort to balance the multitude of conflicting needs from ensuring affordable housing with a growing population and limited land availability, exercising inclusivity for different segments in society and evolving our public housing to meet the future aspirations of Singaporeans.

With a record 9,250 private housing units released in 2023, the highest in a decade, and the Housing and Development Board's (HDB's) 2024 target to complete 19,600 Build-To-Order (BTO) flats amongst other initiatives, housing supply has increased significantly, with signs of a property market appearing to abate. I wish to ask the Minister to provide a holistic picture of how MND intends to address the housing demand in the next five years.

Further, I hope to hear how more effort will be placed to support the following three group of people for their housing needs.

First, interim housing for divorcees with special needs children. A divorce and its aftermath are always challenging to deal with, much less for individuals who have to single-handedly care for special needs children in the process of the divorce. The challenges exacerbate when they have no certainty of a place to live in when the matrimonial flat is going to be sold. Without a final Court judgment, they are also unable to rent interim housing from HDB and most have difficulty renting from the open market since the landlords are unwilling to rent any rooms, given their child's condition.

Under the Parenthood Provisional Housing Scheme (PPHS), married couples and family units who have booked an uncompleted unit are able to obtain interim rental from HDB. In Budget 2024, more concessions and expansion have been made to these couples and families via the PPHS Open Market Voucher. While these initiatives align with Singapore's pro-family stance, in which I am also supportive, we cannot overlook and deny the evolving and changing family structure that is happening.

Will MND consider providing interim housing for divorcees with special needs children and are still in the process of finalising their divorce, or provide a scheme that is quite similar to that of a PPHS Open Market voucher?

The second group, seniors who have no family support. With an ageing population in Singapore, much has been discussed on how best to age in place. Many initiatives have been introduced, ranging from the Lease Buyback Scheme (LBS) to the introduction of 3G flats, Married Child Priority Scheme to encourage intergenerational living and even subsidies to enable an elder-friendly home.

More recently, the Community Care Apartments in Bukit Batok, whereby residential units will be integrated with a hawker centre, activity centre and community gardens, have proven to be popular for its refreshed idea in enabling ageing well, while not institutionalising residential living in a nursing home. Indeed, it is heart-warming to see how HDB has evolved in designing housing spaces based on multigenerational assumptions to allow more solitary seniors to mingle. While the hardware and infrastructure are essential for ageing in place, the psychological and emotional aspects of our seniors cannot be neglected. I would like to ask MND for more information on the progress of the Age Well SG scheme?

The third group, families with a foreigner spouse. With Singaporeans being more globalised, there is an increasing trend of cross-national marriages. I have received many anecdotal sharings during the Meet-the-People sessions and interactions with my residents where some revealed that having a foreigner spouse makes them feel disadvantaged living in Singapore, the reason being as they relocate back from overseas work or they married a foreign spouse with plans to set up their family in Singapore, they encounter difficulties in securing affordable home options with their spouse as a family unit.

Family planning is always critical for many of them and access to public housing is an important first step as they enter a different phase in their lives. Today, their access to BTO or Sale of Balance Flats (SBF), grants and housing loan assessment, are impacted if their spouse is not already a Permanent Resident (PR). While I totally understand the rationale of the current rules are meant to protect our public housing supply, which is already heavily subsidised, there is an increasing group of Singaporeans who need homes to raise the next generation. Could we not consider some form of additional rules to be added to existing ones so that we can also enable support to this group of Singaporeans?

Sir, home ownership will always be an emotional topic for every individual and families. After all, it is the roof over our heads that give us peace of mind to focus on work and to raise families and also other aspects of life. While I acknowledge MND has certainly put in tremendous efforts to ensure Singaporeans have access to affordable homes, the work will continue and it needs to continue to evolve as we deal with the changing family unit structures and the future aspiring lifestyles of our population.

Question proposed.

HDB Works and Delays

Mr Pritam Singh (Aljunied): Sir, in August last year, HDB confirmed that it had completed 72% of BTO projects that were delayed due to COVID-19 disruptions. In addition, 28% of the BTO projects delayed by the pandemic remain under construction. For these projects, around 22,000 affected households will progressively receive their keys by the first quarter of 2025 or earlier.

Sir, the pandemic did not just affect the contractors who build our BTO flats. It also affected contractors who are involved in other major HDB works, such as electricity load upgrading projects, car park upgrading projects, amongst others, all of which are multi-year projects. In my constituency of Eunos in Aljunied Group Representation Constituency (GRC), one particular car park upgrading project has been ongoing for a considerable period of time, with the expected completion date of the project extended two times already.

Can the Minister share how many of such HDB improvement projects, including those undertaken on HDB's behalf by Town Councils, have been affected by contractors facing difficulties, as manifested by the number of extensions requested, and how many remain uncompleted?

Contract extensions also come with an increase in costs that were not considered originally for HDB projects that are undertaken by Town Councils. Re-tendering a partly-completed project at current prices means that costs will have to be incurred. Would HDB consider helping contractors and Town Councils with additional support to complete these projects, the disruptions of which could not have been anticipated at the time of tender, if necessary?

Mr Chairman: Mr Henry Kwek, please take your two cuts together.

Housing Affordability for Young Couples

Mr Kwek Hian Chuan Henry (Kebun Baru): Mr Chairperson, I would first like to talk about housing affordability for young couples. I would like to ask MND how it can ensure that Singaporeans, especially young couples who have just entered the workforce, can afford their first BTO flats? In particular, I would like to talk about one specific group. These are the young couples from low-income households who are looking to settle down soon. I think that across the board, the schemes' affordability for most young couples is good. It is this particular group that I am more concerned about, which is, the young couples from low-income households looking to settle down soon.

Sir, some of these people in this category of households, upon graduation, need to contribute immediately to the finances of their immediate families. Even if they are both working, it could take time or years for this group to save up for the downpayment for the BTO, especially if they applied for the BTO during their student days.

Is there more that MND and HDB can do to ease the cash flow burden of this particular group of young Singaporeans so that they can be financially secure to start their family?

Affordability of Plus and Prime Housing

Deputy Prime Minister Lawrence Wong has shared that HDB will roll out its first Plus project later this year. Can MND share more details and examples of the likely level of subsidies, as well as the broad pricing trends of Plus and Prime housing in the coming two to three years so as to ensure that both of these categories of flats will remain within the reach of Singaporeans from different income groups?

And how much additional subsidies will HDB have to allocate for the Plus and Prime housing in the coming years? I understand that HDB can only provide a range of estimates of additional budget, but those estimates will be helpful.

Millennial Apartments Scheme

Mr Leong Mun Wai (Non-Constituency Member): Mr Chairman, the Progress Singapore Party (PSP) welcomes the Government's move to support the urgent housing needs of couples who are waiting for their BTO flats to be completed, with one-year rental vouchers under PPHS.

We are happy to see that the Government has further recognised that rental apartments play an important role in meeting the housing needs of our younger Singaporeans. However, the PPHS voucher scheme is temporary and may drive up rents for some groups of Singaporean tenants, such as single mothers, LGBTs and couples who do not qualify under PPHS.

We urge the Government to go further and consider PSP's Millennial Apartments Scheme as a new policy to develop rental apartments into a viable, alternative housing for younger Singaporeans.

PSP's Millennial Apartments Scheme is a strategy to make up for the inherent long waiting time under the BTO scheme and to address the current acute shortage of alternative housing options for married couples, young families or groups of singles. The long waiting time for BTO flats is widely regarded to have a significant negative effect on our Total Fertility Rate (TFR).

Millennial apartments are smaller in size, so HDB can build more flats on the same plot of land to ease the current housing pressure. The smaller quality rental flats are rented out on a two- to five-year basis for Singaporeans who are waiting for their BTO flats or singles who want to live independently.

This will provide medium-term housing stability for young Singaporeans while they figure out their life plans and longer-term housing needs. The Millennial Apartments Scheme is also a strategy to rejuvenate our Central Business District (CBD) and mature estates by creating a vibrant young community in each of them.

11.15 am

In place of the Prime and Plus Housing schemes, Progress Singapore Party recommends that affordable, high-quality interim rental apartments to be built at these locations to offer a broad range of young Singaporeans a chance to live in a prime area at least once in their lifetime. By concentrating young people together, we can even improve their prospects on dating apps that work by location.

By having our young people living, working and socialising in these locations, our CBD and surrounding areas can become more vibrant like Shibuya and Shinjuku in Tokyo or Tsim Sha Tsui in Hong Kong.

The older mature estates, such as Marine Parade, Bedok and Ang Mo Kio, need rejuvenation too. These estates were developed rapidly within a short period of time and their 99-year leases will consequently come to an end at about the same time. The demographic profile of these estates is also becoming older. We can start redeveloping these estates now, by redeveloping some older blocks of flats into Millennial Apartments.

We hope that the Millennial Apartments Scheme will be a game-changer that will relief the pressure on couples to rush to secure a flat and give young Singaporeans more choice to fulfil their aspirations. I urge all young Singaporeans to consider and decide for yourself whether Progress Singapore Party's Millennial Apartments Scheme is superior to what the People's Action Party Government has to offer today.

Housing for Singles

Mr Xie Yao Quan (Jurong): Chairman, I have said before that the current eligible age of 35 years old for singles to own HDB flats is appropriate. I still think so. That said, I have also called on the Government to consider co‐living facilities in the heartlands to allow young singles to live, work and play together before they move on to different phase in life, essentially short-term, flexible rental for young singles.

And HDB does not have to do this by itself. There is, today, a vibrant market with commercial players so HDB can partner private operators, but set standards, including in pricing and affordability; and take the lead in developing the market. This will further enhance housing options for our singles to meet their diverse needs and aspirations.

Renting Housing for All

Mr Chua Kheng Wee Louis (Sengkang): Chairman, having a roof over one's head is a necessity in a person's life. Even as the Forward Singapore exercise ostensibly shows that the condominium is no longer part of the Singapore dream, having a place to stay, even on a rented basis, provides a sense of stability, security and shelter.

Over a year ago, I asked the Minister whether the Government would consider providing further market subsidies for qualifying applicants for schemes, like the PPHS and the Public Rental Scheme (PRS), in order to support young parents. I have also suggested that we cannot rely on the open market to be a catch-all solution for the people who are unable to avail themselves of such rental schemes.

At the time, the response from the Minister was that providing subsidies or grants for renting flats in the open market is likely to induce demand and drive up market rents, which will compound rather than help solve problems. As such, we have no plans to provide such rental subsidies. I am gratified that MND and HDB have finally changed its policies in response to feedback, even if it includes one brought up by an Opposition Member of Parliament.

I agree with the MND's plans to provide more varied rental options, such as piloting new service apartments and shared facility public rental housing and more importantly, provide subsidies for couples needing help in renting from the open market. These are the first steps on a broader path to meeting varied housing needs, something which I have raised in an adjournment Motion in Parliament in 2021. I would also like to thank the Minister for increasing his tolerance of potential distortionary effects from subsidies. I am sure the couples that stand to benefit from the subsidies are likewise appreciative.

Although the growth in rent has moderated, we cannot rest on our laurels. The need for more widespread rental options to support the wider population beyond specific targeted group remains. From demographic groups like S Pass holders who need a place to stay to individuals who need to move out on their own for varied reasons, the demand in the market for affordable housing, even if on a temporary basis, remains.

Even other Ministries are not blind to this problem. In August last year, the Ministry of Health (MOH) sought operators for a planned series of hostels for the foreign healthcare workforce, recognising that they needed support in finding affordable accommodation. Sir, this intervention is illustrative of how affordable rental housing is still very much a work in progress, despite efforts to the contrary. Seventy-percent of S-Pass holders currently reside in rented HDB flats.

We need to ensure that rental accommodation options are expanded to prevent the crowding out of local demand for HDB flats. To that end, I would like to ask the Minister the following: The Forward Singapore exercise has emphasised that there will be an affordable home for every budget and need; and that the public housing programmes need to be updated. In that regard, can the Minister share whether the rental programmes are also in line for updating and expansion beyond these pilots?

Co-living and Public Rental Housing

Ms Carrie Tan (Nee Soon): Mr Chairman, there is great comfort in having a nice home to rest and recharge in – physically, emotionally and mentally. For some people, a restful home may be an elusive concept if there is frequent conflict, arguments or violence in their families.

The roughly 50,000 households under the PRS today, do not have this luxury of a restful home because of space constraints. Another group is young singles below 35 that I meet often in my Meet-the-People sessions, who are unable to have a restful home because of chronic toxicity or conflicts in their familial relationships. The third group are single parents, who struggle to find resources for care in order to hold down jobs.

Local research has shown that the causes of inequality and poverty in Singapore is more complicated than we assume. More Singaporeans now recognise and have empathy for the physical and mental hazards of public rental living. An informal poll I conducted on my Facebook page, revealed overwhelming support for more to be done for public rental housing.

The Government can provide better options – co-living options for singles, communal living formats and better-designed public rental flats, so that restful, pleasant and supportive homes can be made available to everyone.

As I have shared in my earlier adjournment Motion on this topic, experience in other countries have shown that living environments have the power to increase self-esteem and confidence which in turn motivates individuals, contributing to positive rehabilitative outcomes. Commune-based living formats can foster effective mutual support and resource-sharing for those, who otherwise struggle by themselves, such as single parent families.

For young people, living apart from their families of origin can also help to individuate themselves successfully and healthily. Individuation is the development of a clearer sense of self, separate from our parents and others around them. It is critical in our maturing process and one's mental well-being.

Housing, therefore, can help us achieve social mobility and well-being outcomes, far beyond just serving the physical function of a shelter. We need to make affordable and pleasant housing options accessible for people in all life stages and circumstances.

I recommend MND to offer more co-living rental housing options for singles at all ages, and de-stigmatise public rental housing from the current image that is, "only for the poor". The rent subsidies can be tiered according to each tenant's household and income situation, with lease terms ranging from one to five years, with transition out to home ownership as the eventual goal.

That way, people of diverse backgrounds and circumstances can rent affordably when they need to, as a transition phase. This can bring benefits, such as better social integration and the pulling of diverse social capital that enhances social mobility.

Our public housing projects, such as Pinnacle@Duxton, have won international awards. I dream and I hope that our public rental housing, such as the one just down the road from it at Jalan Kukoh, will one day be no longer known as the slum of Singapore but as a rehabilitative and incubation space for those who eventually emerge from their difficult circumstances, like phoenixes from adversity.

Public Rental Scheme (PRS)

Mr Muhamad Faisal Bin Abdul Manap (Aljunied): Sir, I will touch on four matters related to HDB's public rental scheme, PRS. First, on the Joint Single Scheme (JSS) Operator-Run, which was launched in December 2021. I would like to ask, how many applications HDB received in 2022 and 2023 and what is the success rate?

Second, I have encountered more residents seeking help to appeal for a PRS JSS unit but have faced difficulties finding a suitable co-applicant even after receiving a list of potential co-applicants from HDB. Other than the JSS-OR scheme, what other measures are HDB exploring to assist this segment?

Third, how many 3-room PRS units have been created to date? What is the occupancy rate and what are the eligibility criteria for a family wishing to apply for a 3-room PRS unit?

Sir, my final points relate to the challenges faced by single parents who are either unemployed or low-income earners. I have met many of whom, are anxious about housing for themselves and their children following a divorce. While waiting for their matrimonial flat to be disposed of, they are unable to apply for a PRS unit. But if they apply only after the matrimonial unit is sold, they may be in for a long wait before the application for a PRS is approved and a unit is allocated to them.

During the wait, they have no stable housing. In many cases, the financial proceeds from the sales of matrimonial units are insufficient for them to secure a new flat and they also cannot afford renting from the open market. Sir, would HDB consider granting single parents in such situation in-principle approvals, provided they meet the other criteria for a PRS unit?

Home Ownership

Mr Xie Yao Quan: Sir, the Government has made major moves to help first-timers, especially parents and married couples to secure and afford a HDB flat. I would to ask, what is the Government's outlook on public housing demand in the next five years? I ask, with the cognisance that forecasting demand is far from a precise science and many people have got it wrong before.

Making VERS More or Less Voluntary

Assoc Prof Jamus Jerome Lim (Sengkang): To date, the Government has approached the issue of urban renewal of public housing in two ways. The Selective En bloc Redevelopment Scheme (SERS), identifies projects for urban renewal. Since August 1995, HDB has identified a total of 78 SERS projects with an additional four in the pipeline. But economic viability of SERS is limited by whether a more intensive redevelopment of a given site is even possible.

Now, this then led to the Government's Voluntary Early Redevelopment Scheme (VERS). There is less clarity about how much compensation exactly this would entail. We have been told to stay tuned, since 2019. But HDB stated that the terms will be less generous than those offered under SERS. The main attraction of VERS then, is that it will offer leaseholders at least a vote to remain in their homes; although doing so, could inadvertently, impede more systematic urban renewal efforts as well as long-term town planning.

Now, while SERS offers non-trivial compensation to affected leaseholders, it has also attracted some controversy especially when residents prefer the status quo of remaining in their homes instead of forced relocation. In contrast, VERS is voluntary, but the Government runs into the difficulty of securing buy-in from residents.

While there is no indication to date as to the voting threshold required for selection, it is by definition more than 0%. In 2019, the Workers' Party released a working paper on alternatives to address the issue of lease decay and affordable housing. Our paper offered policy proposals, including a universal sale and lease buyback scheme, a more widespread SERS programme and an expanded public rental scheme. Our expanded SERS proposal will, however, be bound by similar challenges of ensuring economic viability and securing buy-in as the Government's own programme.

If more intensified redevelopment does not yield sufficient economies of scale in and of itself, the taxpayer will have to absorb part of the costs in the name of the public benefits of urban renewal and ensuring that the population, indeed, has a roof over their heads. One potential middle-ground approach between the largely voluntary nature of VERS and the compulsory stipulation of SERS, is to introduce moving voting thresholds for passage of a VERS project.

These thresholds would shift as the lease winds down, making an upvote easier when renewal needs become ever more pressing. For example, a flat with 50 years' lease remaining may require a 75% supermajority; but one with half the time remaining, could perhaps, only need a simple 50%. This allows homeowners to both have a say on whether they choose to move but at the same time, respect the need for systematic urban renewal.

Parenthood Provisional Housing Scheme (PPHS)

Ms Nadia Ahmad Samdin (Ang Mo Kio): Chairman, in an expensive open rental market, the PPHS is often families' only practical option for finding a home ahead of their own, ahead of BTO completion. Many of my PAP colleagues and I have called for more rental housing diversity and support. I am grateful for MND's shifts in this regard. It is heartening that HDB has temporarily set aside the catered flats in Tanglin Halt for interim housing, allowing the number of PPHS flats to increase.

11.30 am

I would like to ask. HDB has committed to doubling its supply of flats under PPHS by 2025 and also announced a rental voucher to be used in the open market. What demand-side factors have led to these announcements and why the period of one year, given some BTO flats may take a longer time to complete? Can expectant parents qualify for both schemes and what is the Government's target average waiting time for families to obtain a flat under this scheme? Will the Government explore any kind of priority scheme?

Housing and TFR

Ms Hazel Poa (Non-Constituency Member): Mr Chairman, the BTO scheme was introduced in 2001 after the Asian Financial Crisis in 1997 resulted in HDB being left with a large stock of unsold flats. One major downside of the BTO scheme is longer waiting times of four years or more.

Young Singaporeans are marrying later and many of them want to have their own homes before marrying or having children. Furthermore, fertility declines with age. This means that the longer waiting time will have an adverse effect on our TFR. Although resale flats and private properties are options for couples to get their homes faster, their prices are much higher and beyond the reach of many. Our TFR has fallen to 0.97 in 2023. This is less than half of the replacement rate of 2.1 and has serious economic and social consequences. How can we adjust our housing policies to arrest the falling TFR and support parenthood?

PSP had proposed the Millennial Apartments Scheme to provide interim rental housing to young people to address this problem. My colleague, Mr Leong Mun Wai, has spoken on this in greater detail earlier.

PSP would also like to propose two other policy changes for consideration which can help young Singaporeans start their families earlier.

One, increase the number of flats with Shorter Waiting Times where flats are built in advance in a departure from the BTO approach to half of the projected annual demand based on marriage and immigration numbers. HDB is currently building about 20,000 units per year on average, but only 2,000 to 3,000 are Shorter Waiting Time flats.

Two, lower the age limit for singles to buy HDB flats to 28 and allow them to buy new 3-room flats. This way, when they find the right partner, they can start their family immediately if they already own a flat.

Low TFR has troubled us for very long. The political will to implement major changes is needed if we really want to turn it around.

Extending PPHS to Single Unwed Parents

Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang (Nee Soon): I am glad that single unwed parents are now allowed to get a public rental flat or buy a BTO flat. However, it is strange that single unwed parents do not qualify for the PPHS. Single parents who are divorced or widowed qualify for PPHS, so why not single unwed parents?

A single unwed parent recently approached me for help. She intends to apply for a BTO flat but like so many Singaporeans, she needs a place to stay while the flat is being built. It is especially difficult for her to rent a room in the open market as many do not want to rent to those with young children. There is also a cost factor. Renting from the open market for more than three years will deplete her savings significantly.

I know we do allow single unwed parents to obtain PPHS but on a case-by-case basis, but this adds stress to someone who is already stressed. Single unwed parents should be treated the same as others when applying for PPHS. We should end the discrimination.

PPHS Support

Mr Murali Pillai (Bukit Batok): I welcome Deputy Prime Minister Lawrence Wong’s announcement that the Government will provide one-year PPHS voucher for eligible families to rent HDB flats in the open market. In my Parliamentary Question (PQ) filed in October 2022, I suggested, given the tight supply of PPHS flats, that these couples be provided with grants to enable them to rent flats from the market directly. This is because I met several couples who were balloted out and they were also unable to afford to pay rent.

MND, in its response, stated that such action will, and I quote, “likely induce demand and may drive up market rentals which would be counterproductive as it makes renting more expensive”. Given the Government’s decision, may I ask what steps are being taken to minimise the concern that MND expressed in response to my PQ? Given that the wait for BTOs is usually more than one year, how is it proposed that we deal with the “cliff” effect after the expiry of one year?

Lift Access for All HDB Flats

Mr Dennis Tan Lip Fong (Hougang): I speak again on the issue of lift upgrading for the six blocks of HDB flats in Hougang SMC, where there are still certain flats which do not have same-floor lift access, as I have done every year since 2021. HDB recently gazetted the Lift Upgrading Programme (LUP) for 10 units of HDB flats at Block 833 Hougang Central. I am glad that HDB has finally agreed to provide LUP to these residents of mine, though I am still none the wiser of why there was a change of mind.

I continue to speak for the remaining five HDB blocks in Hougang. This is a very real issue affecting a number of my residents, especially those with mobility needs requiring assistance to assess the stairs outside their units when they have to go out, not to mention inconveniences or risks when ambulances are dispatched. I have said previously that I would feel the pain when residents told me that their parents or grandparents had to be carried when accessing the stairs next to their unit. Residents also have to pay additional charges for delivery items.

Minister Desmond Lee replied to me at last year's Committee of Supply (COS) that as of January 2023, there were about 140 HDB blocks with units without direct access to lifts on the same floor and that they are due to technical and site constraints or high costs, some of which exceeded $100,000 per unit.

I would like to ask the Government to not just look at the issue of lift access from the angle of cost alone, something that could have been mitigated or avoided if HDB had tendered out lift upgrading projects consisting of the blocks with problematic designs together with other HDB blocks with no design issues for LUP. The Lift Access Housing Grant is not an option for many residents with whom I have spoken to on this issue. It is never easy to ask people to shift to a different address and it is definitely not an empathetic solution. Many residents still cannot accept HDB's explanation of the issue of cost.

I would also like to ask the Government to explain to affected residents of each affected block the true reasons for LUP not being available to that block. Is it due to cost, and if so, how much it would cost and how much would residents have to pay? For residents whose blocks have technical constraints, let the residents know. Please also inform residents of the alternative mechanical options available and the costs involved. And please inform the Town Councils so that they can convey the same explanation when asked.

Next, I would also like to convey some feedback arising from the recent LUP polling exercise at Block 833. One, there are residents in the same block who, while not eligible to vote, may be affected by the LUP construction. For example, their flat may be partially blocked by the new lift shaft, or they have other concerns such as privacy or other disamenity issues. May I ask that in future LUP exercises, views of other affected residents in the same block who may not be eligible to vote should also be sought and taken into consideration in advance during the design stage, before the actual polling and before a design is firmed up.

Two, HDB should have an information centre handling enquiries regarding the LUP at the HDB Hougang office instead of requiring residents to go to one at Serangoon North, since the Hougang office is just a short walk away.

Three, the LUP handbook should be given to residents in the same block much earlier than just one week before the main polling. I also hope that HDB can arrange for a copy of such handbooks to be delivered to the Town Council office at the time of delivery to residents, so that the Town Council and I can refer to it when we attend to residents' feedback on the LUP.

Next, Aljunied-Hougang Town Council was not included in the Working Committee during the design and implementation stage for the LUP. I would like to ask that the Town Council should be included in the Working Committee at the outset, so that it can give its technical input on the design and any considerations based on the Town Council's ground knowledge in managing the common space around the LUP location and certainly well ahead of any straw poll.

Upgrading Older Flats

Mr Lim Biow Chuan (Mountbatten): Sir, I have several blocks of flats in my constituency which are about 55 to 60 years old. This will be at the Old Airport, Jalan Dua and Jalan Batu area. Sir, I get frequent request for assistance regarding the spalling concrete in the ceilings. Some residents complain that they had carried out repairs to the spalling concrete on several occasions, but the defects recur again and again.

There are also occasions when the slabs of concrete peel off from the ceiling and fall onto the ground. You can even see the steel reinforce bars on the ceiling. Sir, this is alarming and can be unsafe for the residents. I had previously invited HDB to consider some of these flats for SERS, but unfortunately, it was turned down.

Considering the age and conditions of these flats, may I appeal to HDB to prioritise older flats for Home Improvement Programme (HIP) too so that a more comprehensive upgrading works can be done for these flats? In this case, may I volunteer to MND for my block of flats to be prioritised for this HIP too? Then, the residents can then have some assurance that the living environment of their flats will continue to be safe and secure, and that their estate will remain vibrant.

Lift Replacement Fund

Mr Gerald Giam Yean Song (Aljunied): Mr Chairman, the Lift Replacement Fund was introduced during the 2017 amendment to the Town Council's Act. It addresses the substantial deferred costs associated with lift renewals in our ageing estates. This provision ensures minimum disruption due to lift breakdowns for our residents, notably the elderly, young children and those with mobility challenges. Nevertheless, the current apportionment of service and conservancy charges and Government grants, which is 26% to the Sinking Fund, 14% to the Lift Replacement Fund (LRF), may be precipitating a skewed emphasis towards the LRF.

Looking at the 17 Town Council's latest annual reports, I noticed that for many of them, their LRF is expanding at a significantly faster pace compared to their Sinking Fund. The stipulated use of the LRF may be unduly restrictive. Currently, expensive lift components like their automatic rescue device, the main controller PCB, the emergency battery-operated power supply and the uninterrupted power supply can only utilise the Routine Fund, despite their considerable capital expense.

Hence, I would like to put forth three proposals to MND: first, rebalance the funding distribution between the Sinking Fund and the LRF, slightly increasing the Sinking Fund's proportion and reducing the LRF's proportion; second, broaden the permissible applications of the LRF to encompass all lift components with a lifespan exceeding 10 years; and third, permit Town Councils to transfer funds between the LRF and Sinking Fund to fund necessary cyclical works without compromising the original intent of setting aside adequate reserves for the two funds.

These recommendations seek a more efficient balance between addressing current exigencies and future preparations, assuring all residents benefit from dependable lift and escalator facilities.

The Chairman: Mr Ang Wei Neng, you can take your two cuts together.

Lift Access for Segmented HDB Units

Mr Ang Wei Neng (West Coast): Chairman, Mdm Er, a resident of Nanyang, recently approached me with a pressing issue regarding her living situation. Mdm Er and her husband purchased a segmented flat about eight years ago, appreciating its privacy and exclusivity despite its lack of direct access to the lift on the same level. However, their circumstances have changed significantly since then. Their seven-year-old son has been diagnosed with myopathy, causing muscle weakness and rendering him unable to walk independently. As he grows heavier, Mdm Er struggles to carry him up and down the stairs to reach the HDB lift.

Mdm Er's block is one of the 140 HDB blocks in Singapore with segmented flats. Many occupants of these flats purchased their homes when they were young and did not anticipate mobility issues. However, as they age, navigating the stairs to reach the lift becomes increasingly challenging.

While Ms. Er has attempted to apply for the Lift Access Housing Grant, she has encountered numerous hurdles. In addition, it is understood that MND has been hesitant to install lifts at these blocks due to technical challenges, although advancements in technology could potentially address these constraints.

Given Singapore's ageing society, I urge the Minister to allocate more resources to install additional lifts at the mentioned 140 blocks, starting with Nanyang perhaps. We can start a pilot. Even if residents are required to contribute more financially to cover the costs of these additional lifts as compared to other usual Lift Upgrading Programmes, many of them will still likely to support as they treasure their mobility and accessibility needs.

11.45 am

MND's Upgrading Projects

The rapid increase in general construction costs, which rose about 30%-40% from 2021 to 2023, with anticipated further appreciation in 2024. This poses significant challenges for various upgrading projects, such as the Neighbourhood Renewal Programme (NRP), Estate Upgrading Programme (EUP) and Revitalisation of Shops (ROS) Programme, including those in Nanyang. These rising costs have led to budget constraints and the need to sacrifice essential features in the approved projects. For example, in one of my EUP, I have to sacrifice building even the playground as well as these sports facilities for those who exercise.

In light of these challenges, I would like to inquire with MND regarding the frequency of budget reviews for these upgrading programmes. Specifically, whether MND is prepared to provide a one-time fund top-up for approved projects in the last two years to address the impact of escalating construction costs.

It is crucial to ensure that these upgrading programmes continue to effectively enhance the quality of living in our neighbourhoods, despite the financial challenges posed by rising construction costs. Therefore, proactive measures to review and potentially adjust budgets are essential to ensure the successful implementation of these projects and the well-being of residents.

Controlling Costs of Coffee Shop Meals

Assoc Prof Jamus Jerome Lim: During last year's Committee of Supply, I shared data that volunteers and I had collected, showing that the difference between coffee shop food in Sengkang versus mature estates amounts to around 50 cents, which is significant for many families. I had suggested then, that the bidding for coffee shop spaces could be altered away from the current price quality method (PQM), to a system where the winning bidder would be awarded the price of the second-highest bid.

This could potentially contain the race to the bottom or race to the top, depending on one's point of view, behaviour of coffee shop operators; and, in turn, short circuit the pass-through of high tender prices to high rents; and, in turn, high rents to high food prices. I am pleased to see that in Sengkang, a new NEA-run hawker centre has opened up in Sengkang Grand Mall in Buangkok and another is slated to open at The Village in Anchorville.

I believe that increased competition among vendors will, at the margin, likewise help control the rapid rate of food price increases seen islandwide since the start of the pandemic. But both of these cannot be the full story. After all, if the Government truly believes that competition alone would be sufficient, it would not have ceased selling coffee shops to private operators since 1998.

It would not need to introduce a substantial weighting in the PQM that includes factors, such as whether budget meals are promised by bidders. Indeed, the Government's own statistics belie this. It was recently revealed to this House that among half of coffee shops owned by HDB, almost all of them did not choose to increase their rentals over the past five years. In contrast, there is no such assurance for private operators. And in our conversations with stall vendors, many have shared that back-breaking rent increases have forced them to either pass-through costs to their meal prices or risk giving up their tenancy altogether.

If we are unconvinced that rental increases may be well-contained by competition alone, it may make sense to return control of our coffee shop to HDB hands with the outright purchasing of existing units if necessary. In addition to being able to exercise greater control over rental price hikes, which it has already demonstrated a willingness to do, this will undoubtedly help Singaporeans who are struggling with expensive meal prices.

But MND can do more. The current strategy is for MND to content itself with working with the budget meal requirement into the PQM matrix and to publicise where one may purchase such cheap meals. But since the framework only requires that vendors offer at least one budget meal, in reality, this translates into each coffee shop offering only a small handful of very plain vanilla options, think fishball noodles or two-vegetables one-meat cai fan or kopi and teh-o. This quickly becomes limited and boring.

One alternative is to incrementally increase the weight placed on the quality of the bid for every additional budget meal the tenderer includes in its bid, or to receive a percentage discount on their final bid price that increases as the number of budget meals offered increases.

Budget Meals at "Sold" Coffee Shops

Mr Murali Pillai: Sir, in May 2023, HDB required all its rental coffee shops to compulsorily offer budget meal and drink options. These options are featured in HDB's BudgetMealGoWhere website. I have received positive feedback on this and would like to convey my appreciation to HDB.

In the older HDB estates, however, the budget meals and drinks options are still limited. This is because most of the coffee shops there are sold in the open market and not rented from HDB. In July 2023, I suggested that HDB impose the budget meal and drink requirement on such privately-owned coffee shops as a condition for the renewal of permission to use Outdoor Refreshment Areas. The Minister mentioned that HDB is studying the matter. To address current food affordability concerns, I suggest that the study be completed sooner. I also seek an update on the status of the matter.

Future Land Usage

Miss Cheryl Chan Wei Ling: Sir, in 2021, Urban Redevelopment Authority (URA) engaged the community extensively with its Long-Term Plan Review. The objective was to reimagine Singapore's future together, shaped by Singaporeans aspirations and visions. I personally participated in some of these engagements. It was gratifying to witness the premium that many Singaporeans placed on sustainability and the consistent emphasis of ensuring Singapore is liveable for the future generations.

Leveraging on these engagements, the URA is designing the Draft Master Plan 2025 that details land use for next 10 to 15 years. Saying Singapore has land scarcity is an understatement. Question is, how can we better utilise, transform and reallocate land parcels, visualise and plan future towns to fulfill the changing needs? There is no doubt that land use or exchange for different designated purpose of land parcels receive much scrutiny by the public today. It is even harder when we have to take into consideration the need to preserve our biodiversity or heritage at specific locations.

With more competing needs for land use, what approach is the Ministry adopting to rethink about land allocation, classification of use and preservation of heritage assets in the Draft Master Plan review?

The traditional way of viewing existing land allocation is through the demarcation of the Core Central Region (CCR), Outside Central Region (OCR) and Rest of Central Region (RCR). However, with the growing acceptance of work-from-home and evolving lifestyle needs, there is no longer a need where prime activities are conducted only in central region. People also wish for shorter commutes between where they work, live and play.

This can be seen in the drive for Jurong's transformation and Punggol Digital District. Blurring lines of work and leisure entails new options of how we define new land demarcation. "Vertical zoning" of used spaces and increased number of mixed-use developments may become more pronounced. So, what will future industrial areas be like? Can we support more economic activities and build industry verticals that are stacked in the same building or clustered in the same zones?

All these require long-term planning and support from the market-led forces. The infrastructures will also not be complete without the greenery, recreational and transportation nodes that provide connectivity between towns. With Singapore being one of the most densely-populated countries in the world, the decision to conserve native green spaces, regrowth of secondary forests and other forms of vegetated sites will have an impact on our environment. Such planning requires expertise from different domains and even tapping on global experts. As part of the Forward SG movement, may I ask the Minister, how is the Government intending to involve citizens and residents in Singapore as we plan for future land use?

Urban Heat and Density

Mr Dennis Tan Lip Fong: Mr Chairman, over the years, this House has raised questions about the urban heat island effect, with studies showing a difference of 7 degrees celsius between urban and less built-up areas of Singapore. Less has been said about the WetBulb Global Temperature (WBGT).

Both the urban heat island (UHI) effect and WBGT, are important indicators of heat-related stress on the human body at work or at play in Singapore. Researching the UHI and the WBGT brings about questions on ensuring liveability and a high quality of life for Singaporeans in the long-term. There are many factors that contribute to liveability but today, I would like to talk about population density as it is a factor that can intensify the UHI.

The overall population density of Singapore is around 8,000 persons per square kilometres. While this may not be near the population density of certain cities, however, given that Singapore is a country and not just a city, once we break it down further to measure the density of actual liveable space, such as by excluding roads, offshore islands or even industrial estates, the reality can be quite different. How do URA and HDB measure the population density of our towns and estates? For example, if and when HDB measures population density of a HDB town, does it use the total land area or the residential area? Taking this distinction from HDB's publication entitled "Key Statistics – HDB Annual Report 2021-2022".

Next, how do URA and HDB take into account population density for the building of our towns, estates and residential homes? URA and HDB should assess the population density of our HDB towns and private estates and consider whether we need to make any adjustment to the density of any of our towns or estates. Measuring density by estate is important because when you have high densities in certain regions over others, what the everyday Singaporean experience is the rush of the crowd where they live when they go about their day-to-day activity.

This is further exacerbated by MND's decentralisation strategy, which is to reduce congestion in Singapore by bringing jobs closer to homes. Higher population density is also a key contributor to a higher urban temperature. And while some of the urban temperature caused by UHI can be mitigated through infrastructure planning, the day-to-day rush observed by Singaporeans in denser locales is harder to control.

Does HDB evaluate and compare the population density of all HDB towns to ensure that each town's population density is at a comparable healthy level; and mitigation measures should, perhaps, be carried out to reduce the density in some of the towns with higher density?

For residents of the denser towns and areas, what is being done to reduce the UHI and the WBGT? Can we ensure that upstream planning norms also take into consideration the population density of estates rather than looking at greenfield or brownfield sites available for public and private housing launches? Ultimately, my question to the Government is this: how do we ensure that Singapore remains liveable for the everyday Singaporean, beyond those that have privilege to live in less-dense areas or estates like Bukit Timah or Sentosa?

Gracious Living Spaces for Safe Delivery Services

Ms See Jinli Jean (Nominated Member): Chairman, they are the 20,000-over freelance riders and drivers on foot, two-wheels or four-wheels, who deliver convenience and everyday comforts to us. Delivery freelancers who I speak with in my capacity with NTUC's National Delivery Champions Association (NDCA), share their pride in delivering on time barring terrible weather or traffic.

In turn, how might we ensure that our living spaces are safe work environments for delivery persons?

For instance, gated residences, such as condominiums, often require visitors to register to enter. They might also have designated visitor parking spaces. Those of us who played hosts during the recent Lunar New Year, would surely have desired for your guests to receive a courteous experience at the security post and a safe and easy-to-navigate passage across the compound to your home.

We would not have wanted our guests to bear with the indignities of having to surrender excessive personal data to the security, traverse slippery and uneven surfaces, or locate specific units without visible signages or reliable mobile reception. We would also not have wanted our guests to risk their lives and property because they were disallowed from entering the compound and had to alight at the road.

Worryingly, these are recurring concerns shared by our delivery freelancers. They share that the feedback is often acknowledged by stakeholders, but seldom acted on.

12.00 pm

NDCA is involved in a Tripartite Workgroup for Last-mile Delivery led by Urban Redevelopment Authority (URA) and Land Transport Authority (LTA) and comprising other delivery ecosystem stakeholders. We are hopeful that the Workgroup will be a longer-term platform to engender delivery-friendly infrastructure and workflow improvements. Nonetheless, safer, gracious and timely deliveries take more than just hardware.

In this regard, I would like to put forth three questions to the Minister. First, with deliveries becoming a mainstay, would the Ministry consider introducing incentives for mature properties that become delivery-friendly? Second, it is inevitable that disputes might arise between delivery persons and condominium representatives. Would the Ministry consider providing mediation support? Graciousness thrives in an ecosystem where care and consideration are mainstays. How might the Ministry foster care and consideration between condominium representatives, residents and external providers, such as delivery freelancers?

Shaping Singapore's Future

Mr Chong Kee Hiong (Bishan-Toa Payoh): Mr Chairman, in 2021, the Ministry invited Singaporeans to join in the Long-Term Plan Review to share their views on their vision for Singapore's development for the next 50 years and beyond. Based on the collected feedback from that exercise, MND is now working on the detailed land use plans for the next 10 to 15 years in the Draft Master Plan (DMP) 2025.

For DMP 2025, the Ministry is also conducting a public engagement exercise to gain a better understanding of the needs and aspirations of our people for their estates and our nation. Would the Ministry share the criteria for incorporating their suggestions and ideas for Singapore's land use plans? How will MND take into account the feedback from the public while drafting DMP 2025? Can MND provide an update on the main developments that we can look forward to? How is DMP 2025 different from previous master plans?

Given Singapore's limited land, with increasingly more competing uses and development priorities, such as for the expanding agri-food sector, housing, commercial buildings, light and heavy industries, greenery and parks, intensification of land use is the only way forward. We need to build up so that we can free up the land for our farms, reservoirs, parks and retain our nature reserves.

The convenience of being able to complete multiple tasks at the same location will allow residents to save on time as well as cost for commuting. Planning more mixed-use zones within our residential communities will allow us to achieve these objectives.

During a previous debate for Committee of Supply MND, I had advocated for "whole-of-precinct" and "whole-of-estate" redevelopment concepts for older estates. This approach would improve the land parcellation and road network for more optimal accessibility and connectivity. Intensification of land use is also achieved, where there is an integration of various public and commercial amenities. Take, for example, Tampines Hub, which hosts multiple Government agencies and a range of amenities, from medical to social, such as community health centre; family medicine clinic; sports facilities, including a gym and swimming pools; library; hawker centre; retail shops; and a community club.

Development of a town has been done mostly in a linear manner in the past. For example, the Bishan estate where I serve has many standalone amenities housed in mainly single-purpose buildings. Junction 8 shopping mall, which opened in 1994, is situated between the Bishan MRT interchange and the 35-year-old bus interchange. Within the vicinity are two old buildings: the Central Provident Fund (CPF) Bishan, completed in 1997; and Bishan National Library, completed in 2006. Bishan Swimming Complex was built in 1991. Bishan estate currently has no wet market or a hawker centre while a polyclinic is planned to be up by 2030.

A few condominiums were completed in Bishan in recent years. In the next two to three years, another 2,000 HDB flats will be added. With more households moving into Bishan, the redevelopment of the central Bishan area into an amenities hub would be highly desirable. As the Bishan estate moves into its fifth decade, it is an opportune time to regenerate Bishan Town Centre with an enlarged modern shopping mall that will incorporate the uniquely Singapore feature of wet market and hawker centre.

Medical, social and sports facilities, such as swimming complex, CPF Building, library and a polyclinic, could be further integrated with a bimodal transport interchanges of the Mass Rapid Transit (MRT) and bus. Such integration would enhance connectivity and accessibility, especially for the ageing cohorts.

Green plots in the vicinity could be included as part of the land intensification and integration project. From an environmental perspective, this considered approach can potentially reduce new construction requirements whilst the reduced commute for residents can also lower the carbon footprint from the use of transport.

Given that the holistic planning of a precinct will likely have impact on existing buildings, the Government can consider the selective application of Selective Enbloc Redevelopment Scheme (SERS) and Voluntary Early Redevelopment Scheme (VERS) where relevant.

VERS is presently reserved for select precincts that are 70 years or older. As the objectives of the redevelopment are intensification of land use and bringing more convenience to residents rather than rejuvenation, is it possible to have more flexibility in terms of the eligibility criteria for the age of the estate?

Other criteria, such as current density of the estate versus the ideal intensity and accessibility and availability of amenities, should be considered more relevant.

Prime Minister Lee had announced VERS in his 2018 National Day Rally speech. In his speech, Prime Minister Lee had mentioned that VERS would allow HDB to redevelop older estates in an orderly way, paced over 20 to 30 years, instead of four or five years at the end of the leases of many old HDB towns. Prime Minister Lee noted that the Government needs to work out the selection of the precincts, the timing of the redevelopments, compensations and how to afford the Scheme. It has been six years since the announcement. Would the Minister provide an update on the progress of the Ministry's deliberations over the details for the criteria and implementation of the VERS Scheme?

Inclusive Housing Policies for PwDs

Mr Ong Hua Han (Nominated Member): Chairman, I urge MND to consider clearer and more direct financial assistance for persons with disabilities (PwDs) to cover improvement works in their HDB flats. I have two suggestions.

First, HDB actually allows PwDs to qualify for Enhancement for Active Citizens (EASE) even if they do not meet the age criteria. This needs to be clearly indicated on the EASE webpage for improved visibility. Second, could MND increase the list of improvement items under EASE, beyond things like slip-resistant floor tiles, grab bars and ramps, to cover more accessibility needs like induction stoves for the safety of the visually impaired?

Financial Help for PwDs' Home Improvement Works

MND must take steps to design housing policies that are inclusive and accommodate PwDs, enabling them to live independently and participate fully in society. We need to ensure that PwDs have access to housing options that are conveniently located near essential amenities. Access to things like MRT stations, healthcare facilities and community services is vital for PwDs to minimise daily friction. To this end, could MND prioritise PwDs for flats near these amenities?

Second, could MND consider implementing enhanced proximity housing grants for PwDs purchasing a flat near their parents or siblings, who provide essential caregiving support? Enhanced Proximity Housing Grant (PHG) would lessen the financial burden that comes with purchasing a home near family members, particularly when they might already be living in a comparatively pricier area.

Age Well SG and Related Infrastructures

Mr Kwek Hian Chuan Henry: Chairperson, Age Well SG is an important initiative that many PAP Senior Group Members of Parliament (MPs), including myself, have been championing. I would like to ask MND to provide more details.

First of all, with regard to EASE, when will HDB start rolling out the EASE 2.0 programme and what criteria will be used to select the precincts? And when does HDB expect to cover most eligible precincts for EASE 2.0? What are the likely features and expected cost to our citizens?

With regard to upgrading the public spaces of matured estates, will HDB partner with Town Council to do improvement works or at least provide a budget for Town Council to implement? What are the key features that will be enhanced and what is the anticipated timeline?

And if Town Council is involved, can HDB communicate the parameters to Town Councils soon so that Town Council can deconflict upcoming upgrading plans? This is because some of the Town Councils, including mine, have already started building many senior-friendly infrastructure. Therefore, if the funding can be used to build other types of senior-friendly features, such as upgrading the surrounding areas of Active Ageing Centres (AACs) and senior gathering points, which are outside the declared areas covered under Age Well SG, that will be much appreciated.

The Chairman: Ms Nadia Samdin.

Inclusive Homes for Seniors

Ms Nadia Ahmad Samdin (Ang Mo Kio): Chairman, as a rapidly ageing society in Singapore, the Government has made concerted efforts over the years to ensure that we can sustainably and compassionately address our seniors' needs. A growing number of seniors are expressing their desire to live out their golden years in familiar neighbourhoods or in spaces where they retain as much independence as their health conditions allow.

As such, efforts to make society more senior and caregiver-friendly start from revamping and reimagining our neighbourhoods and homes. This is not just a matter of barrier-free access or painting murals on blocks, but how can we also co-locate services closer to our seniors and caregivers? How do we build common amenities so that more neighbours can spot warning signs early and we can all be eyes and ears on the ground for seniors who are struggling with dementia, mental health, aggravated health conditions or even caregiver burnout?

I would like to ask: can the Ministry provide an update on the EASE 2.0 programme? Outside of homes, can public spaces be better curated to encourage intergenerational support within the community? Could the Ministry also provide an update on seniors' reception to things, such as community care apartments in Bedok? Are there plans to expand the community care apartments to new locations in the future?

Could the Ministry also provide details on the implementation, scope and eligibility of towns for Age Well SG? Given that several neighbourhoods are old and it would be costly to revamp our estates, what specific upgrades are envisioned to common spaces beyond aesthetic enhancements and how will these lead to an enhancement of our seniors' daily lives?

Essential Services in Our Neighbourhoods

Ms Mariam Jaafar (Sembawang): Sir, my Woodlands residents have spoken to me about the lack of medical clinics that open late at Woodlands North Plaza. This is an issue if they are unable to get time off during working hours or if someone falls sick at night, especially if they are families with young children or elderly residents themselves. As a result, health conditions sometimes go untreated. Moreover, under Healthier SG, these general practitioner (GP) clinics will also offer a wide range of services – from routine check-ups to vaccinations. So, ensuring that GPs are available at convenient locations and at extended hours is not just a matter of convenience. It is a matter of equity, accessibility and public health.

Sir, I understand that GPs have their own considerations of manpower, costs and personal preferences and needs. So, HDB perhaps cannot mandate them to extend their operating hours. But could HDB provide incentives in the form of rental subsidies or experiment with formats, like shared clinic spaces or night relief GPs, until it can be made a tender requirement at the next renewal?

Some may say that this would be too expensive to give out incentives for clinics. But, in reality, this is not an island-wide issue. In many town centres, there is no shortage of such clinics. Rather than a broad policy, the Government could look at localised needs and apply the levers in a targeted way.

The same analysis could be done for other essential services and amenities, such as hawker centres. As the overall population gets more affluent, having lower-cost options on hand becomes particularly important to ensure no one is left behind. What is the Government doing to ensure the provision of such essential services in our neighbourhood commercial centres?

The Chairman: Mr Yip Hon Weng, you can take your two cuts together.

Rejuvenating Our Estates

Mr Yip Hon Weng: Chairman, while the existing tender system for commercial units within HDB estates offers some variety through different categories like supermarkets, eating houses and other shops, it lacks centralised planning. This can result in an oversaturation of certain types of services, leaving residents lacking access to other essential or desired options.

I urge the Government to adopt a more centralised planning approach to ensure a diversity of services within HDB estates. Essential services, like clinics, pharmacies, eldercare and childcare facilities, should be prioritised. This would be followed by ensuring a balanced mix of retail categories, including F&B, grocery stores and shops for daily necessities.

HDB should consider residents’ demographics and conduct outreach activities to ensure offerings are relevant and accessible. A vibrant mix of shops and amenities not only enhances convenience but also fosters a sense of community and belonging.

12.15 pm

Supporting SMEs

Onerous tendering requirements, inconvenient invoicing processes, lengthy payment delays and bundled contracts create financial strain for many SMEs in today's high-cost capital environment. Can we leverage technology to digitalise the end-to-end payment process and expedite settlements? Can the Government also implement regular milestone payments on a quarterly basis, aligned with project progress, rather than paying a lump-sum only upon project completion?

Bundled contracts also raise concerns about limited flexibility and risk absorption, especially during unforeseen circumstances like the recent pandemic. Can the Ministry explore alternative approaches to mitigate these risks? Finally, can the Ministry elaborate on the Tender Lite initiative announced last year? How will it empower local contractors and SMEs, to participate meaningfully in the construction sector?

Better Support for Contractors

Mr Kwek Hian Chuan Henry: The Government has done a lot for the construction industry during COVID-19. However, the industry is facing a fair amount of challenges, with several major main contractors going bankrupt and an ongoing credit crunch in the overall industry. What more can the Government do to support contractors to tide through the current challenging industry conditions right now?

In particular, would MND work with key Government agencies, specifically the Land Transport Authority (LTA), Public Utilities Board (PUB), to consider policy adjustments, such as changing the framework to ensure prompt approval and to allow for partial disbursement of Variation Orders (VOs), especially for the big and prolonged projects that usually have high-value VOs? I believe there are a number of instances where agencies will approve large VOs at the tail end of the project period, due to the complexity of the project, which creates cash flow problems for contractors. As such, a prompt whole-of-Government review of VO process to allow for partial payment of large-ticket VOs would benefit the construction industry at this juncture.

Adjust PQM Framework for Local Construction Companies

Mr Don Wee (Chua Chu Kang): Chairman, in Mandarin.

(In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] The Building and Construction Authority (BCA) has set the Price Quality Method (PQM) for the evaluation of public sector tenders. These are construction tenders under the BCA Construction Workheads, which are estimated at $3 million and above.

This framework assigns a range of weightages and scores price and non-price attributes to evaluate the construction tenders. The tenderer with the highest combined PQM score would be selected for award. Would the Ministry consider a review of the scoring system to include points for local construction companies? This would give them a higher chance to take part in the larger construction projects and this would also support the development of capabilities by our local construction companies. I hope to see more local construction companies to win large infrastructural projects in Malaysia and Indonesia.

Industry Transformation with Innovation

Miss Cheryl Chan Wei Ling: The Industry Transformation Map (ITM) is often keenly watched by industry players for it signals the strategic focus of the Government for the respective industries. In 2022, the built environment ITM was refreshed with a focus on improving the value-chain approach through digitalisation; with the incorporation of the Integrated Digital Delivery (IDD) in projects in the Built Environment sector as a case in point. In recent years, modular construction has been gaining popularity with results demonstrating its promise of improving completion rates over traditional construction methods. Further, this industry remains highly challenged by labour shortage with little signs of improvement in this respect ahead. Can the Government provide an update on the progress of the industry transformation after two years of its implementation?

Indeed, digitalisation has its promise of helping to enhance efficiency with companies such as BHCC Construction and Pan-United Corporation being beneficiaries of these technologies resulting in cost and manpower savings. Some also demonstrated on their production processes and workflow that embracing artificial intelligence and virtual reality enabled more productivity and workers improving their work skills while adopting digital technologies.

Despite advancement in technological developments, industry players have revealed that the Built Environment sector is still very traditional and has been a laggard in adopting technologies. Reasons for such are aplenty, ranging from adopting new technologies hindered by a mindset of “why fix it when nothing is broken” to outright resistance due to unfamiliarity of such technologies or concerns over long lead-time and high cost in embarking on digitalisation. I would like to know what mechanisms the Ministry have in place to monitor how companies have invested in technologies to become more productive and innovative? Should the progress be slow, will more efforts be put in by the Government to encourage technology adoption?

Low-carbon Built Environment

Mr Xie Yao Quan: Singapore has set a target to achieve net zero emissions by 2050. With buildings accounting for over 20% of our carbon emissions, what efforts have we taken to accelerate our transition to a low-carbon Built Environment? The bulk of buildings we have today is the existing stock of older buildings which may be less energy-efficient. Can MND provide further updates on how we are helping owners of such buildings to transit?

The Chairman: Mr Louis Ng. Please take your two cuts together.

Enacting New Environmental Impact Assessment Law

Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang (Nee Soon): A recent report revealed that Singapore has lost 37% of our biodiversity. What we have left is precious and we must protect and treasure it. At the same time, I understand the need for development, the need to provide housing for fellow Singaporeans.

We must find the middle ground. The middle ground must be a strong Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Law to minimise the impact of our development.

This, however, is not just about embedding the EIAs in our planning permissions or issuing guidelines for developers. It is about enshrining the EIA in a specific piece of legislation, standalone, and ensuring that we enforce this strong piece of legislation. I have pushed for this for many years now and I am not sure what is holding us back from ensuring that we protect our remaining green spaces in Singapore. It is time to have a proper, strong and robust EIA Law in Singapore.

Designating More Marine Parks

In our Adjournment Motion last year, together with Ms Nadia Samdin, we spoke about the rich biodiversity in the waters around Singapore. We shared about our passionate youth marine advocates.

At COP15, we committed to conserving 30% of our blue spaces. Our marine ecosystem deserve protection and they are also our protection against climate change. We need all the help we can get in our fight against climate change. It has been 10 years since we designated Sisters’ Islands as a marine park and it has benefited greatly from the protection. It is time to consider expanding this protection to other key areas, such as the waters around Pulau Ubin, Pulau Jong and Lazarus Island, to name a few. Will the Government consider designating more marine sites as Marine Parks?

The Chairman: Ms Nadia Samdin. Your two cuts together.

Wildlife and Our City in Nature

Ms Nadia Ahmad Samdin: Chairman, as our country continues to urbanise and develop, it is more important than ever for Singaporeans to have access to opportunities to connect easily with nature. Whether it is through admiring greenery while exercising on our park connectors or being able to live in harmony with native wildlife, who are equally part of our country too, appreciating a city in nature means understanding the trade-offs and both the upsides and inconveniences.

It would be hard to have trees without nests in them and correspondingly hear the uwu calls, or healthy longgangs without fishes and otters, or beautiful flowers without bees. It has been four years since MND announced its vision to transform Singapore into a city in nature. Can we have an update on the progress? What efforts has the National Parks Board (NParks) made to involve more members of the community in transforming Singapore, including developing an understanding and appreciation for nature and its impact on our lives?

A thriving city in nature necessarily entails more flora and fauna, including an increase in human-wildlife interactions. This is a good sign. It shows that our native biodiversity is growing. However, there have been calls asking for intervention to curb wildlife populations. What more can the Government do to manage human-urban wildlife tensions? Further, threats of animal-related diseases have increased in recent years. What key bio-surveillance efforts is the Ministry currently undertaking?

Blue Spaces

A thoughtful approach to preserving Singapore's blue spaces is essential. This offers not only new opportunities for Singaporeans to connect with our oceans, but also contribute to national goals such as coastal protection and flood resilience.

I would like to ask, following up from URA's plans last November to reclaim Long Island off East Coast Park, what steps will URA take to prioritise and comprehensively consider nature-based solutions in the reclamation and development process? And how does the Government expect this development to affect marine life in the Singapore Straits?

Enhancement works to Sisters Island are slated to complete this year. Could the Minister provide an update on when the park will be opened, how the public can access Big Sisters Island, and any visitor caps that will be imposed to manage the carrying capacity? Is the Government considering a second marine park in Singapore?

Finally, Tiny Away Escape was launched on Lazarus Islands in 2023. Has the Government assessed any impact on nature and wildlife on and around the islands? And what other pilot ecotourism concepts are being considered for the southern islands?

Action against Pigeon Feeders

Mr Lim Biow Chuan: As Chairman of a Town Council, I spend quite a bit of time dealing with complaints about pigeon feeders. Residents complain about the feeding of pigeons and how the pigeon faeces makes a mess of their clothes, windows; how pigeons would fly or walk into the food centre and attack the food while residents are having their meals. We spend an inordinate amount of time dealing with the mess caused by pigeons due to the actions of a few inconsiderate pigeon feeders. The law on feeding of pigeons is clear. It is illegal, and pigeon faeces are a health hazard. All these issues could be mitigated if we have greater enforcement against pigeon feeders, and this was also reflected in a Straits Times article on 11 December last year.

Some of the residents who could tell me exactly which of their neighbour is throwing rice or bread onto the grass patch and to feed the pigeons regularly. But yet, when we pass the information to NParks, the usual answer is that they are unable to get evidence of the pigeon feeder. Sir, I am pleading with the Government authorities – let us get tough on the pigeon feeders. Fine them, jail them or even send them for mental health treatment if they are found to have compulsive behaviour and cannot stop feeding pigeons. Let us make the living environment better for all our residents instead of being held hostage by a few irresponsible pigeon feeders.

The Chairman: Mr Louis Ng. You can take your three cuts.

Statutory Presumption for Bird Feeding

Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang: Science tells us that reducing food sources is the best way to bring down the bird population. NParks’ own survey in 2021 found that the reduction in food sources due to COVID-19 reduced the numbers of rock pigeons.

I know that gathering evidence of bird feeding is not easy. We can do more to help our enforcement officers. To tackle high-rise littering which similarly relies on enforcement through surveillance, we introduced a presumption clause. Where it is proved that littering acts have been committed from a flat, the owners or tenants will be presumed to have committed the offence unless they prove otherwise. Will the Ministry consider introducing a similar statutory presumption for the offence of wildlife feeding under the Wildlife Act? This will help our enforcement officers significantly, reduce the amount of bird feeding and address public concerns on this issue. It is a win-win solution.

Increasing Penalties for Animal Abuse

In 2023, Singapore witnessed a staggering 79% surge in cases of animal abuse under investigation, the highest number in 11 years. This is not merely a statistic, it is a depressing reality that speaks volumes about our society’s graciousness and regard for life. This is a call to review our animal welfare and protection laws.

First, we need to address the inadequacy of penalties for acts of animal abuse. The current punishment for animal abuse is a maximum fine of up to $15,000 and/or an 18 months jail term for first-time offenders. In comparison, vandalism carries a penalty of $2,000 fine, imprisonment of up to three years and caning of between three to eight strokes for certain first-time offenders. Will the Government consider increasing the jail term for animal abuse so that we protect our animals as strongly as we protect our property?

Mandating Sterilisation of Pet Cats

Finally, this cat and mouse game is over. As promised by Senior Minister of State Tan Kiat How last year, we are not pussyfooting around the issue of keeping cats in HDB flats. As much as the agencies are tired of me asking repeated questions on this, I am also tired of asking this every year for the past few years. But this change in policy must make sense.

One of the reasons we banned the keeping of cats in HDB is because of caterwauling. I have experienced this firsthand when I used to live in Jurong West and I agree these cats make loud mating calls in the middle of the night. The solution is simple, sterilise the cats. Sterlised cats do not caterwaul. However, we are now proposing to allow the keeping of cats in HDB but not mandate the sterilisation of pet cats. We are setting ourselves up for future problems. In reversing the ban, we need to make sure we resolve the reasons for the ban in the first place.

Mandating sterilisation also ensures people do not end up with too many cats as the cats will start breeding. I hope the Government will hear the calls from animal welfare groups and ensure we mandate the sterilisation of pet cats as a prerequisite for the keeping of cats in HDB flats.

The Chairman: Ms Tin Pei Ling.

Ageing Well in Singapore

Ms Tin Pei Ling (MacPherson): Thank you, Mr Chairman. In Singapore, we have a large population of seniors and as an ageing population, this phenomenon will only increase. It is important for us to prevent loneliness as well as isolation, because all these, if allowed to continue, can lead to a serious deterioration for our seniors physically and mentally.

12.30 pm

Therefore, it is important that in our living built environment, we design this with our seniors in mind so that as much as possible, they are able to live independently and gracefully. Even amongst our seniors, there are those who are more vulnerable but there are also those who are fitter. Regardless, as we all age, there will come a time where we need to be able to care for ourselves, even with caregivers, and to be able to move around independently, and lead meaningful life.

Therefore, I would like to ask the Ministry, how are they going to design new estates as well as old mature estates such that socialisation is enabled?

And two, for new estates, it is easy to design from scratch, but for the more mature estates where a lot of things are already built up. So, how are we going to refine, repair and enhance them so that they are safe for use and at the same time, encourage social gatherings of our seniors – from the void decks to the covered walkways to pavements and so on? Can we also pick up pace in enhancing these areas?

May I also ask for an update on Age Well Singapore?

The Chairman: Miss Cheryl Chan.

Progress and New Engagement of Municipal Services Office

Miss Cheryl Chan Wei Ling: Chairman, 2024 marks the 10th year since the Municipal Services Office (MSO) was set up. MSO was established to improve the Government's overall coordination and delivery of municipal services. In my past speeches, I noted that residents have been using OneService App actively and commended on its ease of use and good response by the agencies. Back in 2021, it also saw the introduction of the Love Our Hood initiative in partnership with Mountbatten, Pioneer and Bukit Gombak Constituency Offices that seeks to provide residents and community stakeholders to co-develop community-based solutions to manage municipal issues and foster neighbourliness.

Can I ask the Minister provide an update on the progress of this initiative and any intention to further scale up the initiative for effective resolution of community issues? What were the nature of some issues that have been resolved in the past from such co-creation and are there any areas that could further be improved in order to allow more communities to benefit from them through best practice sharing?

Of course, communal living brings along with it some inherent challenges and a need for much tolerance and civic mindedness of the general public. Can we leverage the learnings from the Love Our Hood initiative?

I would like to suggest that MSO assist to look at a few perennial topics that have been consistently raised in this House. These include noise between units, second-hand smoking and the pigeon feeding.

I know my Pioneer Group Constituency (GPC) colleagues and I have been repeating this in this House several times, including what you have just heard from the earlier cuts.

MND and the Ministry of Sustainability and the Environment (MSE) have repeatedly responded about the past effort and how regulations alone have limitations in tackling the issues resolutely. Beyond imploring for residents to just exercise more consideration, should we not take the opportunity to have users or those possibly affected to co-create community solutions to address these municipal issues?

The Chairman: Minister Desmond Lee.

The Minister for National Development (Mr Desmond Lee): Chairman, I thank Members for their cuts.

I will speak on housing and our efforts to transform the built environment sector. My colleague, Minister Indranee Rajah, will cover our long-term planning, sustainable development, and our support for our construction firms. Senior Minister of State Sim Ann will touch on how we are working alongside residents and our community partners to improve our living environment. Senior Minister of State Tan Kiat How will share about our efforts to transform Singapore into a City in Nature. And my colleague, Minister of State Faishal Ibrahim will speak on what we are doing for low-income households and our seniors.

Sir, let us start with housing. We are firmly committed to supporting Singaporeans' aspirations to own their homes and determined that we shall remain a nation of homeowners.

HDB started selling subsidised flats to Singaporeans in 1964 under the Home Ownership Scheme. Today, 80% of our people live in HDB homes, of whom 90% own their homes.

During our Forward Singapore engagements, Singaporeans told us clearly that homeownership remains a key aspiration. So, we will honour this commitment and ensure that there are housing options for every budget and need.

Members will recall the significant impact that COVID-19 had on our construction sector as well as on our housing market. There were unprecedented supply disruptions and labour shortages, causing widespread delays.

We also saw very strong housing demand. This resulted in an imbalance in demand and supply, pushing up housing prices and rents. Application rates for new HDB flats rose to a peak.

To address this imbalance, we committed in 2021 to launching 100,000 new flats by 2025. As of February this year, we have launched more than 67,000 flats, or two-thirds of our commitment. We are well on track to meeting our 2025 target.

We have also ramped up private housing supply. In 2023 alone, we launched 9,250 units under the Government Land Sales, or GLS, scheme. This was the highest annual supply in the last 10 years. And for the first half of this year, 2024, we released land for 5,450 private homes on the Confirmed List. This is the highest supply on the Confirmed List in a single GLS Programme in over 10 years.

We are watching the market carefully and are prepared to inject even more housing supply if necessary to meet demand.

Across the public and private housing markets, a significant number of new homes have been completed. Last year, around 43,000 homes were completed. This is the largest number in a single year since 2018.

In parallel, we implemented three rounds of cooling measures since December 2021 to moderate housing demand, and to encourage greater financial prudence among homebuyers.

Our property market is stabilising. HDB resale prices rose 4.9% last year, less than half of the 10.4% increase the year before, in 2022. Price growth in the private residential market has also moderated, from 8.6% in 2022 down to 6.8% in 2023. BTO application rates went down, from a high of 5.8 applications per flat in 2020 to 2.9 applications per flat last year. Transaction volume in the private property market in 2023 declined by 13% compared to 2022 and is at its lowest since 2016.

Rents are also stabilising. The quarterly increase in public housing rents moderated to 0.4% in the fourth quarter of last year, down from 1.9% in the third quarter of last year. Private housing rents fell by 2.1% quarter-over-quarter in the fourth quarter of 2023. This was the first quarterly decline in over three years.

We expect the housing market to continue to stabilise this year. We will continue to launch a steady supply of new homes in various locations, so that there is a home for every budget and need. Amidst persisting economic uncertainties, geopolitical tensions and higher interest rates, we encourage buyers to be prudent in their home purchases to avoid over-extending themselves.

Let me now touch on how we will meet housing demand in the years ahead.

Miss Cheryl Chan asked how we will plan to address growing near-term needs. We are developing greenfield sites and brownfield areas, some of which have potential heritage significance. In doing so, we take great care to retain our identity and collective social memories. If we foresee major impact on sites with significant heritage, we will carry out studies in consultation with key stakeholders. We also pay attention to the environmental impact of these developments and carry out studies to minimise such impact.

So far, we have announced our plans to build new housing in various locations, including in more central parts of Singapore, such as Pearl's Hill, Mount Pleasant, Bukit Timah Turf City and the former Keppel Golf course.

Today, I would like to share our plans for another two areas.

The first is Chencharu in Yishun. With its development as a new housing area, we will provide more new homes and amenities in Yishun. We will build a variety of recreational, community and commercial facilities to bring greater convenience to residents, while adding vibrancy to Yishun Town. These will complement existing facilities at Khatib Central and HomeTeam NS Khatib. Future residents in Chencharu will be served by Khatib MRT and other connectivity initiatives.

We will launch the first BTO project of around 1,200 flats in June this year. Over time, we plan to build around 10,000 homes in Chencharu, at least 80% of which will be public housing. This will provide a sizeable supply of new homes, particularly for those who wish to live near their parents in the area.

The second area we are developing plans for is Gillman Barracks in Telok Blangah. Gillman Barracks has a storied history and is home to former colonial military buildings. Many of the former barracks are currently tenanted out for interim uses, with tenancies expiring progressively by 2030.

We are studying the possibility of redeveloping the site for a mix of public and private housing. Besides providing more opportunities for Singaporeans to live closer to the city centre, the new residential neighbourhood can build on the character and charm of the former colonial buildings. Residents will also have easy access to green and recreational spaces such as the Southern Ridges and Labrador Nature Park Network.

We will start environmental and heritage studies in the second quarter of this year. These will help us better understand the ecological and heritage significance of the site and to plan sensitively for its development. More details will be shared when ready.

As always, we will share our plans with Singaporeans, and hear your feedback and suggestions. My colleague, Minister Indranee, will elaborate on our efforts later.

We have been announcing new housing sites at a steady clip. This is underpinned by our long-term approach towards land use and infrastructure planning. In doing so, we adopt various long-term strategies to optimise and steward our limited land.

For example, we are studying major moves like the development of Long Island to tackle rising sea levels while creating new land and opportunities.

We are also freeing up land for redevelopment, such as through the relocation of Paya Lebar Airbase.

At the heart of these plans is the Government's commitment that public housing remains affordable, inclusive and fair for all Singaporeans and that Singapore remains a vibrant city, an endearing community and a cherished home for all of us.

Beyond developing a steady supply of homes, we have also made major changes to our public housing system to ensure that it remains affordable and accessible for Singaporeans. These improvements were made after consulting thousands of Singaporeans as part of Forward Singapore. Let me recap them.

First, as we build more flats in more central locations, we want to ensure that public housing remains affordable for more Singaporeans. We also want our estates to maintain a good social mix and that the distribution of subsidies to be fair. We have therefore introduced the new national housing framework of Standard, Plus and Prime flats, which will take effect later this year.

Mr Henry Kwek asked how we will ensure that Plus and Prime housing remain affordable and inclusive. We will provide additional discounts and subsidies for these flats, as well as grants such as the means-tested Enhanced CPF Housing Grant (EHG).

12.45 pm

Mr Xie Yao Quan asked about how we will enhance housing options for singles. With the launch of the new HDB framework, singles will be able to buy new 2-room Flexi flats islandwide, Plus, Prime and Standard. This will take effect later this year.

We received many other ideas during our Housing Conversations too. We will continue to review our housing policies to support the aspirations of singles and other groups of Singaporeans.

For parents and married couples who are trying to secure their very first home to settle down, we implemented the First-Timer (Parents and Married Couples) priority category, in October of last year. This increases the chances of success for eligible married couples and parents in securing their first home from HDB, as they seek to start their families.

Mr Xie Yao Quan asked about the projected demand from this group. We are still monitoring the application and success rates since it only came into effect late last year. But so far, I am glad to see that many families have benefited.

Across our BTO launches in October and December last year, about nine in 10 First-Timer (Parents and Married Couples) applicants were issued a queue number within the flat supply available. For home buyers in the resale market, we increased the quantum of the CPF Housing Grant last year, to support First-Timers. Together with the EHG, as well as the Proximity Housing Grant, eligible First-Timer families can receive up to $190,000 in grants when they purchase a resale flat. We will continue to review our grants, paying particular attention to supporting our low-income households.

This year, we will make two further moves to support Singaporeans’ housing needs. First, we want to help young couples to settle down earlier, if they are ready to do so as a couple. In our Forward Singapore Housing Conversations, many young couples appreciated the support to help them buy their homes. This includes the EHG, as well as our efforts to ramp up Shorter Waiting Time flats, and of course, the First-Timer (Parents and Married Couples) priority scheme.

But some still face financial difficulties in booking a flat, particularly those who are still studying or in National Service (NS). As Mr Henry Kwek mentioned, there are also some young homebuyers who need to support their parents when they start work and find it hard to build up their savings. These young couples do not qualify for the EHG, which requires 12 months of continuous employment, as they have not yet started working or have only just started working. Furthermore, these couples are likely to face difficulties in qualifying for a sizeable housing loan at the point in time of application.

Today, we have various measures to help these young couples, who are full-time students or full-time national servicemen (NSFs), or who have completed their full-time studies or NS in just the past year. With your permission, Chairman, may I ask the Clerks to distribute a handout on our assistance for this group.

The Chairman: Please proceed. [A handout was distributed to hon Members.]

Mr Desmond Lee: Thank you, Sir. As they are circulating the handouts, let me just share that first, we allow such couples to book a new flat, while they defer their income assessment for the EHG and an HDB housing loan to shortly before they collect their keys. At this later date, they are more likely to be eligible for the EHG as well as a larger HDB loan.

We also extend the Staggered Downpayment Scheme (SDS) to these couples. They only need to pay half of the initial downpayment required for their new HDB flat, with the balance paid at the point of key collection. For those taking an HDB housing loan, they pay 5% of the flat price, instead of 10%. While those taking a loan from financial institutions pay 10% of the flat price, instead of 20%.

I am glad that many young couples have benefited from these measures. In fact, since 2018, more than 3,700 couples have tapped on the deferred income assessment, with support from the SDS, to ease their upfront costs and start their home ownership journey early.

We want to do more to help lighten the initial financial burden for such young couples. Since they have deferred their income assessment, they will only receive their EHG closer to key collection, and must rely on their own savings or support from family for initial costs of booking a flat. For some of them, the reduced 5% initial downpayment under the SDS is still a significant financial barrier.

To provide further support to these young couples who tap on the deferred income assessment, we will enhance the Staggered Downpayment Scheme. We will do this by reducing their initial downpayment to 2.5% of their flat price. This will apply whether they take an HDB housing loan or a loan from a financial institution. So, this means that those who take an HDB loans, from 5%, now 2.5%. For those taking loans from banks, from 10% to 2.5%. These couples will pay the balance downpayment at key collection, when they are in a better position to do so. This will take effect from the next sales launch in June this year.

To illustrate, let us look at the pamphlet in front of you. A young couple who is taking an HDB loan to buy a 4-room BTO flat in Bedok, a Mature Estate. They are tapping on the deferred income assessment as one of them is a full-time student and the other is a full-time NSman. Suppose the flat is priced at $480,000 before grants. Today, should they tap on the SDS, the 5% initial downpayment is $24,000. With our enhancement to the SDS, this will be further reduced to $12,000, which is more affordable for them. For couples who are ready to purchase a flat and have been saving up to afford the downpayment, we hope that this enhancement will help you to settle down and start your families earlier.

Ms Hazel Poa had suggested other ways to support our families and to tackle our nation’s declining TFR. I thank her for her suggestions. We have addressed them previously in this House. Let me explain again.

First, on BTO waiting times. Ms Hazel Poa suggested increasing the number of Shorter Waiting Time Flats launched in our BTO exercises. In fact, we are already doing so. As we have mentioned before, we had started planning for more flats with shorter waiting times of three years or less before the COVID-19 pandemic. These are flats that are built a year or more before they are launched. But we had to bring forward their launch dates to meet the immediate demand during the pandemic, to tide through the challenging period.

We are now ramping up on Shorter Waiting Time flats again. In February last year, we had shared that we would launch 2000 to 3,000 of such flats per year by 2025. But because of the hard work of my colleagues at HDB, we are now able to do this one year ahead of our target, to launch about 2,800 Shorter Waiting Time flats in 2024. As I said earlier, we launched our very first Shorter Waiting Time flat back in 2018. This was affected by COVID-19, and now we are getting back on track. We will continue to recalibrate our building programme over time so that Shorter Waiting Time flats make up a larger proportion of new flat supply.

In fact, waiting times of recent launches have generally come down too. The median waiting time for projects launched in 2023 was three years and 10 months. At the recent BTO sales exercise in February, more than 80% of the BTO flats launched have a waiting time of three and a half years or less.

Next, on expanding singles’ access to public housing. The PSP is proposing to allow singles to access public housing from 28 years old, and to buy 3-room flats. Many other Members of Parliament from both sides of the House have made similar suggestions, one time or the other. As I have mentioned earlier, we will be allowing singles to purchase 2-room Flexi BTO flats islandwide, Prime, Plus and Standard, from the second half of this year. We are working hard to ramp up our flat supply in order to meet the anticipated increase in demand from this move.

In fact, as I have explained previously in this house, if we had all the land and resources at this point in time to further expand singles’ access even further, or for that matter, expand access to other groups of Singaporeans, we would already have done so. But we also have to meet growing demand from married couples, from families, from seniors and many other groups of Singaporeans. If we were to adopt Ms Poa's suggestions now without being able to increase our flat supply correspondingly, BTO application rates will spike and resale prices will soar. Many people who want flats will not be able to get them, including the singles whom she is trying to help. This would be counter-productive to the PSP’s objective of supporting TFR. When young couples and families cannot get flats, it would make it even harder for them to settle down.

Our approach has instead been to design our public housing policies carefully to address the needs of every segment, while ensuring the stability and sustainability of our system. We are living, after all, in a small island city-state. For Singaporeans who plan to get married, please rest assured that we have a slew of support measures to help you settle down quickly, including priority access to BTO flats as an First-Timer (Parents and Married Couples) applicant. The enhanced SDS that we have just announced is another measure that will help you book a flat and settle down earlier.

Let me now turn to another group whom we would like to further support. These are families who have booked a flat, but need temporary accommodation while awaiting the completion of their flat. Today, we provide subsidised temporary housing for these families under the PPHS. Mr Louis Ng and Ms Nadia Samdin have asked for updates on the PPHS.

Since 2021, we have more than doubled our supply of PPHS flats to 2,000 units. We have also refined the PPHS eligibility conditions and allocation process to prioritise families in greater need. As a result, we have been able to better meet demand from eligible families. Application rates have dropped from over 20 times in 2021 in the peak of the COVID-19 pandemic, to 2.3 times in February this year. In recent exercises, all married applicants with children, including expectant parents, were invited to select a flat. We will press on with our supply ramp up to 4,000 units by next year.

Meanwhile, as Deputy Prime Minister Wong has announced in the Budget speech, we will introduce a PPHS (Open Market) Voucher for one year until our PPHS supply is ramped up to 4,000 units next year, to support eligible families who need to rent HDB flats or bedrooms on the open market.

Mr Murali Pillai noted the need to minimise distortion of the rental market. That is why we have scoped the parameters of the voucher carefully, to support these families while minimising the potential impact on the broader rental market. This voucher will be available to families who meet the PPHS eligibility criteria. Broadly, these are Singaporean families with a household income of $7,000 or less, who are waiting for their HDB flats to be completed. This allows us to target the PPHS Voucher at those with less income at their disposal, to defray their costs of renting. Each eligible family will receive $300 per month, regardless of whether they rent an HDB flat or an HDB bedroom. Payment will be made on a reimbursement basis.

Some may ask, why not a higher amount? The $300 quantum was carefully calibrated to provide some relief to eligible families, while mitigating the potential inflationary impact on the rental market for others. At $300 per month, eligible families will receive up to $3,600 if they qualify for the full year of support. The PPHS Voucher will be in place for a year starting from July 2024, and we will monitor the impact of the voucher on the rental market closely.

Mr Louis Chua has proposed to expand HDB’s rental programme, and Mr Leong Mun Wai too. Just last year, the PSP introduced the Millennial Apartments Scheme and shared that it was a way to build small, rental flats in prime locations near the central business district for younger Singaporeans to rent for a period of time. Today, they expand this scheme, I understand, to mature estates as well as to replace future Prime and Plus flats with Millennial Apartments instead.

This means taking back Mature Estate land and land in more central parts of Singapore with currently owner-occupied flats, and instead of building Prime and Plus flats with the concomitant restrictions to support owner-occupation, for people to buy. This means, under their scheme, replacing them with large numbers of rental flats for young millennials to rent out for a few years.

This, of course, in an island city state with limited land, will mean very significant trade-offs, and fewer supply for many other groups of Singaporeans, including those that will have to be displaced as a result of the redevelopment plans of the PSP.

In fact, today we already have a range of rental and co-living options in both the HDB market, as well as in the private market, as well as HDB programmes such as the Public Rental Flat Scheme, Interim Rental Housing, PPHS.

1.00 pm

As I have said earlier, we will continue to study ideas shared with us during the Forward Singapore Housing Conversations, including the ideas that Members of this House have raised and continue to study how to enhance further the housing option diversity in Singapore. But as I have shared earlier, the vast majority of Singaporeans still aspire to own a home, if not now, then eventually. This was reaffirmed at our Forward Singapore engagements with over 21,000 Singaporeans.

And so, we are prioritising our resources to help Singaporeans achieve homeownership. This has always been our position, even as we seek to provide more diversity and choice in our market and a safety net for those who are not yet ready to buy their own homes. This is a continuous work in progress and I thank Members from both sides of the House for your good ideas. In fact, this will continue to be our commitment to Singaporeans.

Let me touch on how we are addressing the housing needs of our seniors. As our society ages, it is important that we transform our homes and estates to better support our seniors. To do so, we will spend $600 million on Age Well SG initiatives, to help our seniors age actively and independently in their communities.

At the estate level, we will upgrade our precincts to make them safer and easier for our seniors to move around in. We will also provide more precinct amenities, where our seniors can stay active and bond with other residents. At the flat level, we will introduce more enhancements through EASE 2.0, so that they feel safe and comfortable at home. My HDB colleagues have been working hard on the implementation details for these plans and some of these details are now ready. Senior Minister of State Sim Ann and Minister of State Faishal Ibrahim will touch on them later.

Mr Chairman, Mr Chong Kee Hiong and Assoc Prof Jamus Lim have also asked about VERS. Assoc Prof Lim focused on the mechanics of the scheme and the impact on home owners, specifically making a suggestion for lower voting thresholds for older flats. We will take note of his suggestion. While Mr Chong Kee Hiong also spoke about the wider context of urban rejuvenation and redevelopment.

Indeed, VERS should be seen as part of a bigger strategy for us to comprehensively plan for the redevelopment of our public housing, improve the environment and quality of life in our heartlands, create towns that further embrace “live-work-play” strategies, and bring jobs and amenities closer to our people. It is a big, complex, long-term task. It involves re-imagining all over again, the concept of public housing and reinvigorating our ageing HDB towns. In doing so, we have to take care of the current generation’s housing needs even as we cater for the needs of future generations.

We will need to carefully stage redevelopment in the older parts of the towns, while minimising disamenities to the residents in the newer parts. Some Singaporeans will need to relocate as a result of this, so we will need to work through the detailed mechanics and processes and the package for VERS. We will also need to ensure that there are sufficient homes available at the right time for them.

We are developing these details and plans and will announce more information and details in due course. This is the Government’s commitment to you. We have taken care of Singaporeans’ housing needs for the past 60 years. It is a work in progress. We will continue to do so for the next 60 years and beyond.

I thank all Members for your questions and suggestions on how we can continue to support Singaporeans' housing needs, be it singles, young families, seniors, families with persons with disability, our transnational families and more, as raised by Miss Cheryl Chan and other Members.

I will now turn to our built environment sector. Through our refreshed Industry Transformation Map (ITM), we have been helping our construction firms to digitalise, raise their productivity, and build more sustainably. Miss Cheryl Chan asked for an update. So far, we have made good progress in digitalising the sector by encouraging the adoption of Integrated Digital Delivery (IDD).

IDD connects different stakeholders in a building project via a “digital spine”. It enables greater collaboration throughout the project. Examples include the adoption of virtual environments to simulate real-world construction. The IDD adoption rate for new developments by gross floor area (GFA) has increased from about 45% in 2022, to 58% in 2023 and we are on track to meeting our target of 70% IDD adoption by 2025.

We have also shifted towards more productive ways of building, by raising the adoption of Design for Manufacturing and Assembly (DfMA) technologies. This enables the off-site prefabrication of building components in a safer, more productive, factory-like setting before they are shipped to the worksite and assembled.

Over the years, we have made moves to push for DfMA as the default method of construction in Singapore. For instance, it is a requirement for all developments on land sold under the GLS programme. We also enhanced the Buildability Framework in 2022 so that all large building projects of at least 25,000 square metres must adopt DfMA.

Our efforts are bearing fruit. The DfMA adoption rate for all new developments by GFA increased from 51% in 2022 to 61% in 2023. We are similarly on track to meet our target of 70% DfMA adoption by 2025. Minister Indranee Rajah will share more about our progress towards a more sustainable built environment sector.

We must continue to push the envelope, to ensure that our construction industry is well-poised for further transformation. To do this, we will enhance the Building and Construction Authority's (BCA’s) Contractors Registration System (CRS). Currently, firms that are bidding for public sector construction tenders need to be registered under the CRS. The CRS is also one of three gateways for firms to access foreign construction workers. The other two gateways are: BCA’s Builders Licensing Scheme (BLS), and the Singapore List of Trade Sub-contractors (SLOTS), which is managed by the Singapore Contractors Association Ltd (SCAL).

Today, the entry requirements to CRS, BLS and SLOTS are uneven. This means that some firms may find it easier to access foreign construction workers under certain gateways. While we recognise the need for foreign construction workers in the sector, the firms that are allowed to hire them should meet the same minimum standards. This should apply equally to firms, regardless of whether they undertake public or private sector projects.

As such, we will make this move. We will now require all firms hiring foreign construction workers to be registered under the CRS. CRS will become the sole gateway for firms to access these workers. This means that CRS will expand its reach. It will shift from being a public sector registry, to a nation-wide registry of construction firms. With this nation-wide registry in place, we can raise and harmonise quality, manpower and productivity, and innovation standards more effectively, across the entire construction industry.

We will do so progressively, to mitigate the impact to firms as well as to construction projects. So, for a start, the CRS entry requirements will be adjusted to keep pace with current tender prices and construction costs. So, to be registered, we will require a firm to have a minimum paid-up capital of $50,000 and a track record of $300,000 in total over the past three years, or about $100,000 per year on average. This is to ensure that firms that hire foreign construction workers have the minimum financial capability and experience to sustain their operations and deliver projects. We will give our firms time to meet these new requirements.

BCA will announce further details of the changes, including the implementation timeline, later this year. BCA has engaged key industry stakeholders, and they understand the impetus for these changes. Minister Indranee will share more details on other upcoming initiatives to support firms in their transformation journey. Chairman, in Mandarin, please.

(In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] This year marks the 60th anniversary of HDB's Home Ownership Scheme. Over the past 60 years, the Government has been committed to providing public housing for Singaporeans and supporting their dream of home ownership. We understand that Singaporeans have been concerned about the housing market in recent years. Some parents worry that their children may not be able to afford housing and some young couples are eager to receive their keys to start a family.

Through various Government measures, the housing market has recently began to stabilise. The rate of increase of housing prices and rent is easing and the application rate for BTO flats has also decreased. I believe that in the coming year, the situation will become more stable.

As the housing needs of Singaporeans evolve, our housing policies must also evolve in tandem, to allow Singaporeans to afford and own their own homes.

It was earlier announced that starting from the second half of this year, we will implement a new public housing classification framework to ensure that public housing remains affordable. Singles will have more housing options. They will be able to purchase new 2-room flats in any area. We have also introduced a new First-Time (Parents and Married Couples) BTO applicant category to help eligible families secure a HDB flat as soon as possible.

This year, we will provide more assistance to help young couples own their own homes. We know that for young Singaporeans who are still studying or serving NS, or those who have just graduated and finished NS, having to pay the downpayment of their flat when they have not entered the workforce can be financially challenging. Currently, they can pay for the flat downpayment in phases. They will first pay one portion when they sign the Agreement for Lease. The remaining will only have to be paid when they collect their keys.

To further alleviate their burden, we will reduce the initial downpayment to 2.5% of the flat price.

Starting from July this year, the Government will implement a one-year voucher to assist families who are waiting for their BTO flat to be completed and have to rent a flat in the open market. Eligible families can receive a monthly voucher of $300 to defray their rental expenses. Of course, we have also not forgotten the seniors. The Government will continue to rejuvenate HDB estates and neighbourhoods to provide a safer and more liveable living environment for the elderly, helping them to age in place and to enjoy their golden years.

We are also working hard on the preparations for VERS. Through VERS, we can redevelop the land comprehensively, better integrate elements of "live, work and play" into our towns and bring more employment opportunities and amenities to HDB estates. However, redeveloping HDB estates is a very complex task. As we redevelop ageing towns, we need to carefully balance the housing needs of future generations as well as consider those of the current generation.

We will generally need to redevelop the older parts of a town in stages and minimise the inconvenience to other residents. This also means that some people will need to relocate and we need to ensure that there will be enough housing units for them to move to. Due to its large scale and complexity, VERS will be an important project that will span several decades. We will ensure that every aspect of VERS is properly planned and will announce more details at an appropriate time.

(In English): Mr Chairman, providing good homes, planning for our land use and transforming our built environment sector – these are important areas that we must continue to forge ahead. The collective efforts of Singaporeans and our stakeholders: planners, construction firms, community groups and so on, have helped to shape our nation and make Singapore a distinctive city. We will continue to work with Singaporeans to build an inclusive, sustainable, and vibrant home for generations to come.

1.15 pm

Mr Speaker: Second Minister Indranee Rajah.

The Second Minister for National Development (Ms Indranee Rajah): Mr Chairman, a small island-state, that is our nation, has thrived against all odds. With 734 square kilometres of land, we have been able to build homes for a nation and a globally vibrant economy, with a world-class airport and seaport, while protecting our greenery and our built heritage.

Through careful stewardship and deliberate long-term planning, we have been able to make the most of our limited land and continue to provide a quality living environment for Singaporeans. We have benefited from the foresight of our pioneer planners, who envisioned what we could become.

Careful stewardship and deliberate, long-term planning will continue to guide how we plan our land use to balance current needs and those of future generations. We are working closely with Singaporeans to shape our urban and built environment.

First, having engaged Singaporeans on our Long-Term Plan Review, we will now engage Singaporeans on our Draft Master Plan; second, we will develop sustainably and sensitively; and third, we will support our built environment firms in their transformation journey.

From 2021 to 2022, we engaged over 15,000 Singaporeans on the Long-Term Plan Review to map out strategies to guide Singapore's development for the next 50 years and beyond. We are now embarking on the Master Plan Review which translates these long-term strategies into implementable plans over the next 10 to 15 years.

Miss Cheryl Chan and Mr Chong Kee Hiong asked how the Government intends to involve Singaporeans in the Master Plan review. As announced by Minister Desmond Lee in October 2023 last year, we will be engaging a wide range of Singaporeans on the Draft Master Plan 2025. The four broad themes for the Draft Master Plan are: shaping a happy, healthy city; strengthening urban resilience; enabling sustainable growth; and stewarding nature and heritage.

Through our engagements, we will hear about Singaporeans' hopes and dreams for our city and see how we can make them a reality while working within our constraints. We will be engaging the public on significant plans for parts of Singapore. An example is the "Long Island" project, our plan to reclaim about 800 hectares of land off East Coast.

"Long Island" will be an opportunity to meet multiple needs for our existing and future generations. This includes protecting the low-lying East Coast area from sea level rise, strengthening our flood resilience and water supply, building new homes and creating new coastal and reservoir parks.

Ms Nadia Ahmad Samdin asked about the impact of "Long Island" on marine life. Today, agencies are already required to conduct detailed environmental studies for developments that may cause significant environmental impact and develop appropriate mitigating measures. "Long Island" will be no different. The studies for "Long Island" will consider surrounding marine habitats, such as intertidal flats and coral communities. We will work closely with the nature community, academics and researchers to explore nature-based solutions to minimise the environmental impact of the reclamation of "Long Island".

Senior Minister of State Tan will cover other aspects of how we conserve and plan our marine spaces. We have commenced discussions with some stakeholders and will progressively do so with others, including recreational interest groups, businesses, the local community and the general public.

These conversations, together with findings from technical studies, will guide the development of a shared vision for "Long Island". We will also be engaging the public on our islandwide planning strategies. For example, "Play" was one of the themes of the Long-Term Plan Review where many Singaporeans shared their desire for more recreational opportunities. To follow up, URA and agencies are developing a Recreation Master Plan.

As part of the Recreation Master Plan, we are working to activate and curate networks of recreational spaces across the island, incorporating sports, arts, nature, heritage and wellness.

These spaces will help keep Singapore liveable, amidst our densely built-up environment, something Mr Dennis Tan spoke about. These recreation spaces will be both indoor and outdoor, close to homes and well-connected via footpaths, cycling paths and park connectors.

Between the second quarter and third quarter this year, URA will hold a series of roving exhibitions across the island to seek the public's views on the planning of recreation spaces. The feedback received here will then feed into the Draft Master Plan. Through our engagements, we will reach out to a wide spectrum of stakeholders, including youths, interest groups, local communities, academics and industry partners.

Our engagements will encompass roadshows, focus group discussions, collaborations with professional bodies and competitions where people can submit their ideas. These engagements will culminate in the Draft Master Plan 2025 exhibition which will be held in the second half of 2025 at the URA Centre and selected locations around the island. Plans will be showcased at the exhibition for public feedback, before it is gazetted as the next Master Plan.

Our engagements will not end there. Beyond our Draft Master Plan engagements, we are continually committed to work with Singaporeans in the planning and designing of our spaces. This includes ways to facilitate safe and efficient deliveries, as shared by Ms Jean See, which we will study further.

We hope that through these conversations, we can all have a better understanding of the diverse needs and aspirations among Singaporeans and how to meet these, given our land limitations and emerging challenges, like climate change.

This leads to my second point. Even as we develop for the future, we aim to do so sensitively and sustainably. This is a key concern that many Singaporeans had raised in our past engagements.

Let me first touch on our strategies on the climate adaptation front. We continue to adopt creative solutions and new technologies to protect our island against the impact of climate change. Mr Dennis Tan asked how we are keeping Singapore liveable amidst rising temperatures and whether population density is considered in our planning norms.

Key factors that drive the urban heat island, or UHI effect, are building density and the types of human activity, rather than population density. For example, while Central Business District (CBD) and industrial areas have lower population density, they are temperature hotspots. To minimise the UHI effect, we have implemented a wide suite of cooling strategies, at various scales across the landscape. At the national level, greening Singapore remains a key strategy that brings many benefits, including providing shade, cooling our surroundings and enhancing our living environment. Senior Minister of State Tan will share more about our City in Nature efforts.

At the development and district level, we configure new towns and districts to optimise wind flow and ventilation, as well as to reduce heat gain from the sun. At the building-level, we are trialling cool coatings which reflect heat-generating radiation back to the atmosphere.

On climate mitigation, Mr Xie Yao Quan asked what efforts we have taken to accelerate our transformation to a low-carbon built environment. In 2021 and 2022, we raised minimum energy performance standards. This is so that new buildings are designed to be sustainable and existing buildings upgraded to meet higher sustainability standards.

We also launched the S$63 million Green Mark Incentive Scheme for Existing Buildings 2.0 in 2022, which provides support to building owners for energy efficiency retrofits. These efforts have enabled us to green about 58% of our buildings by GFA to date. To help meet our target of greening 80% of our buildings by 2030, we will be introducing the Mandatory Energy Improvement, or MEI, regime by the end of this year, as announced by Senior Minister of State Tan last year. The MEI regime is targeted at energy-intensive buildings. Building owners of such buildings will be required to conduct an energy audit and implement measures to reduce energy consumption. More details will be announced later.

We are also doing more to green the construction process. As mentioned in the Deputy Prime Minister's Budget speech and Senior Minister of State Low Yen Ling's Ministry of Trade and Industry (MTI) COS speech, we will be expanding the Energy Efficiency Grant, or EEG, to new sectors, including construction. This is a new grant for the construction industry and will support the cost of energy-efficient construction equipment. The grant is tiered as follows. Under the Base Tier, eligible local construction firms can receive up to 70% of funding support for pre-approved energy-efficient construction equipment, with a cap of S$30,000.

Under the Advanced Tier, firms that wish to do even more to reduce their emissions can receive funding support of up to S$350,000, inclusive of the support under the Base Tier. This advanced tier will allow firms to adopt energy-efficient equipment that is not pre-approved. The grant amount for this will be based on expected energy savings or up to 70% of the equipment cost, whichever is lower. We target to introduce the EEG for the construction industry by the end of this year. More details will follow.

Beyond driving greater sustainability, we must continue to transform the built environment sector in other ways. Miss Cheryl Chan asked about our efforts to encourage the adoption of productive and innovative technologies in the built environment. We have developed a system of incentives and grants to support investments in different types of technologies.

For example, the Productivity Solutions Grant has helped over 900 construction and facilities management SMEs adopt pre-approved digital solutions to date. We will also extend the Productivity Innovation Project, or PIP, scheme until March 2025. The scheme provides our builders and prefabricators with co-funding support of up to 70% of the costs of technologies, such as robotics and automation, capped at S$10 million.

Over the last six years, the PIP scheme has supported 78 firms with S$37.4 million worth of funding in investments. For example, Great Resources M&E Contractor Pte Ltd will be deploying automated drilling and anchoring robots onsite. This will enable the firm to increase productivity by at least 30%, with one-third less workers required. With less manual work and fewer workers onsite, they can also carry out this work more safely. I encourage firms to make use of the PIP extension to transform their processes.

The system of incentives I have just mentioned is targeted at helping individual firms transform their work. However, building projects involve many different parties across the broader built environment value chain. To encourage collaboration, we introduced the Growth and Transformation Scheme, or GTS, which supports alliances of developers, builders, consultants and other stakeholders to pursue best-in-class transformation outcomes together.

As of January 2024, both the CapitaLand Development-led and City Developments Limited-led alliances have started to implement their initiatives. For example, CapitaLand Development's upcoming Common Data Environment platform will facilitate upfront coordination and structured information exchange throughout the project. It will be the single reference point for key project information. The data collected can also be analysed to improve processes for future projects.

This initiative is expected to increase productivity by up to 50% over existing project workflows and reduce downstream abortive works. I commend CapitaLand Development and its alliance partners, including Woh Hup, Surbana Jurong and Threesixty Consultants, for their efforts and look forward to hearing more about their progress.

I also thank Mr Henry Kwek, Mr Don Wee and Mr Yip Hon Weng for their suggestions on how to better support our construction firms. Firms can tap on many existing incentives to grow their capabilities.

1.30 pm

These include the sector-specific initiatives I spoke about and other broader schemes. For instance, Workforce Singapore's (WSG's) Capability Transfer Programme facilitates the transfer of capabilities from foreign specialists to locals. Companies can benefit from salary support, attachment-related costs and funding for equipment and venue costs for industry-wide projects.

The Government also does our part as a major buyer of construction services. For example, agencies are required to abide by strict timeframes so that firms receive payments on time. This includes regular milestone payments and partial payments when Variation Orders are progressively completed. Last year, more than 80% of public sector construction contracts were awarded to small- and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs). The Government will continue to conduct regular reviews to ensure that our procurement processes remain fair and cost-effective.

In conclusion, our plans for the future are a reflection of our collective ideas, hopes and dreams. Every stakeholder is critical in this journey, from our residents and nature and heritage groups, to our professional bodies and built environment firms. I urge each of you to actively participate in our stakeholder engagements, share your insights and contribute to the conversation that will shape Singapore.

The Chairman: Senior Minister of State Sim Ann.

The Senior Minister of State for National Development (Ms Sim Ann): Mr Chairman, I thank Members for their cuts. Building a quality living environment continues to be a priority for MND. We proactively upgrade and revitalise our neighbourhoods, housing estates and flats, in line with the evolving needs, lifestyles and aspirations of Singaporeans,

We will do more, together with our public and private sector partners, in three areas. First, physically upgrading our towns and flats. Second, ensuring that neighbourhoods have a range of affordable and accessible amenities and shops. Third, improving municipal service delivery and outcomes.

First, let me share how we are upgrading our towns and flats.

To better support ageing-in place, MND, MOH and Ministry of Transport announced a set of initiatives under Age Well SG last November. These include physical upgrading to enhance our neighbourhoods and flats to be more senior-friendly.

A key component involves extending the upcoming fifth phase of the Neighbourhood Renewal Programme, or NRP, to HDB blocks built up to 1999. This will benefit more than 100,000 additional flats, as previously, only blocks built up to 1995 were eligible. Under this new phase, we will build more senior-friendly amenities, such as therapeutic gardens with wheelchair-friendly planter boxes, fitness trails connecting senior-centric amenities and wayfinding features. These amenities enhance the safety and connectivity of our neighbourhoods while helping seniors stay active and navigate confidently around their neighbourhoods.

The first batch of precincts to be upgraded under the fifth phase of NRP will be selected by the end of this year.

Some older precincts have already undergone upgrading and do not qualify for NRP. We announced last November that HDB will roll out similar senior-friendly enhancements to more than 20 of such precincts in the towns of Ang Mo Kio, Bukit Merah, Queenstown and Toa Payoh over the next five years. The roll-out of these silver upgrading works will be progressive, starting with a pilot in Ang Mo Kio. To Mr Henry Kwek's question, HDB will engage Town Councils, the grassroots and residents on the implementation of these works. HDB will share more with Town Councils when ready.

Newer estates will also have senior-friendly amenities. In fact, they are designed from the start to be age-inclusive to encourage inter-generational bonding, a topic brought up by Ms Nadia Samdin. For example, HDB has introduced 3-Generation or 3G recreation spaces, with fitness corners and playgrounds placed side by side. Such playgrounds enable residents of different age groups to interact with one another. We also co-locate childcare and elderly facilities where possible.

To Mr Lim Biow Chuan's question, I would like to assure Members that there are inspection regimes in place today to detect and rectify building deterioration in a timely manner. The Building Control Act requires regular building inspections by professionals. These include checks for spalling concrete and structural cracks, for both common areas and within the flat. As for spalling concrete within the flat, if reported by residents, HDB will let the flat owner know about the Goodwill Repair Assistance Scheme, under which HDB will subsidise 50% of the repair costs.

In the longer term, every flat will be upgraded twice, the first when they are about 30 years old, through the Home Improvement Programme, or HIP; and the second, through HIP II, when they are about 60 to 70 years old. When undergoing HIP, flats will undergo repairs for spalling concrete and structural cracks, which HDB fully subsidises. HIP II will be offered when the first batch of flats reach their 60- to 70-year mark. HDB is currently working out the prioritisation and implementation details.

To Mr Pritam Singh's question on the challenges and delays in implementing upgrading works, various factors may contribute to delays, including unforeseen site conditions, manpower availability, cashflow issues and disruptions in supply of materials. For projects managed by HDB, HDB will work with the relevant contractor to understand the causes for the delays and render the appropriate assistance to get the project back on track. If the contractor can no longer fulfil its obligations, it may novate the contract to another firm, subject to HDB's approval. As a last resort, HDB can also exercise its right to terminate the contract and appoint another firm to complete the project.

Another challenge that we face is rising costs.

To Mr Ang Wei Neng’s question, we have been reviewing and adjusting programme budgets, taking into consideration prevailing macroeconomic conditions and changes in tender price indices. For example, in 2022, we increased the NRP budget by $850 per flat for then-ongoing NRP projects, in response to the impact of COVID-19. With the continued increase in costs, we are prepared to further increase the NRP budget. We will inform Town Councils of details when ready. We have also been flexible, acceding to ad-hoc appeals for additional budget due to increases in material and manpower costs.

Next, Members have also raised lift-related concerns.

First, on Mr Dennis Tan and Mr Ang Wei Neng's questions on the Lift Upgrading Programme, or the LUP. LUP has brought direct lift access to around 5,000 blocks and today, around 99% of all HDB blocks were either built with direct lift access or have benefitted from LUP. Members will recall that many of these blocks were built when our population was a lot younger and when physical mobility was not an issue. Because same floor lift access was not required as a condition of design, there were some blocks that were designed in such a way that the retrospective adding of lift shafts and lifts is technically very difficult or even unfeasible.

What HDB has been doing is to trial new technology and to apply new methods wherever possible. So, this has included, in the past, using machine-room-less lifts as well as the use of smaller home lifts to bring lift upgrading to blocks that previously were very difficult for us to add lifts to.

However, although we have worked hard to shrink the pool of blocks that cannot undergo LUP over the years, there remain some blocks where LUP is currently not feasible due to cost or technical constraints. In some of these cases, the cost can be more than $200,000 per benefiting household. Therefore, we have measures for households that urgently need direct lift access or those who live in blocks that cannot undergo LUP. We offer a Lift Access Housing Grant of up to $30,000 to help these homeowners buy a flat with direct lift access.

Mr Dennis Tan has made points on consulting ground feedback for LUP. I wish to clarify that HDB values the inputs of Town Councils when it comes to LUP works because HDB recognises that it is the Town Councils that will have to maintain the lifts when built. In the case of Aljunied-Hougang Town Council, it was involved in the LUP Working Committee formed for block 833, Hougang Central which I believe is in the Mr Dennis Tan's ward. In addition, HDB does take into account ground concerns from residents who might not be part of the benefiting units but feel affected by lift upgrading solutions or from the MPs whom they might approach. Usually, these concerns can be resolved, for example, by the addition of privacy fins.

Let me turn to Mr Gerald Giam’s suggestions relating to the Lift Replacement Fund, or LRF. The current minimum contribution rates for Town Councils' LRF and Sinking Funds help Town Councils set aside sufficient funds for various cyclical replacement works. The restricted use of these funds serves as a form of fiscal discipline. In particular, the LRF was introduced in 2017 because Town Councils had been significantly under-saving for lift replacements. Lift replacements are very infrequent but involve heavy draw-down of funds when they are due, as lifts built in the same period will need to be replaced around the same time. Hence, the LRF allows Town Councils to pay for any capital expenditure relating to lift replacements in HDB estates, including those raised by Mr Gerald Giam. We will continue to review the framework periodically to ensure that they keep pace with changes to the operating context.

Let me now turn to ensuring vibrancy of our neighbourhoods. I thank Mr Yip Hon Weng, Ms Mariam Jaafar and Mr Chong Kee Hiong for the suggestions they have raised.

HDB towns are designed to give all residents convenient access to amenities and shops, often within 400 metres of their homes. At the heart of every HDB town is a Town Centre, a key commercial hub providing a wide range of goods and services. We also have Neighbourhood Centres and precinct shops distributed across the town.

HDB also imposes trade mix controls to ensure that residents' basic needs are met. For town and neighbourhood centres, HDB allows for greater market flexibility as the larger number of shops provides sufficient opportunity for market forces to determine a good trade mix. HDB adopts the Price-Quality Method (PQM) tender mechanism to attract quality retailers whereby HDB considers factors other than tender bid prices, such as affordability, business concepts and community-centric initiatives.

To further enhance the vibrancy of our commercial precincts, we will be trialling the refreshment of commercial clusters through placemaking and trade curation at three pilot sites – Ang Mo Kio Town Centre, Bukit Gombak and Tampines West Neighbourhood Centres. As shared by my co-chair in the Heartland Digitalisation and Revitalisation Committee, Minister of State Low Yen Ling, this will be done in collaboration with MTI and Enterprise Singapore (ESG).

Our HDB and Town Council colleagues, alongside local stakeholders, will also be supporting MTI and ESG's Heartland Enterprise Placemaking Grant for heartland enterprises keen to champion ground-up placemaking events. HDB is also working on developing trade mix plans for these pilot sites together with residents, merchants and other stakeholders.

Finally, Singaporeans want more affordable cooked food options in their estates. Last year, I shared about our budget meals initiative in HDB-owned coffee shops. We have made good progress and I thank Mr Murali Pillai for tracking this initiative and giving his views on how we can improve it.

More than 130 coffee shops rented from HDB are already offering budget meals and drinks. More will come onboard as their tenancies are progressively renewed. By 2026, all 374 coffee shops rented from HDB will offer budget meals.

1.45 pm

To the point that Assoc Prof Jamus Lim has made, I wish to clarify that for HDB coffee shops let out via PQM tender, we require at least six stalls to provide one budget meal each alongside two budget drinks. And for renewals of HDB-owned coffee shops that are rented out, we require four budget meals and two budget drinks. This ensures a range of food and drink options at affordable prices. I thank Assoc Prof Jamus Lim for his support of the PQM tender framework as well as the suggestions that he has made and we will refine the framework further if necessary.

In a related move, we launched BudgetMealGoWhere last year, an online platform that helps the public find coffee shops offering budget meals and drinks. With the help of GovTech, we also launched the Great Budget Meal Hunt in January this year, where the public can share their recommendations of affordable meals. The response has been enthusiastic. Since its soft launch in October last year, we have added over 290 user-submitted budget meals and drinks to the platform. We have received more than 1,900 recommendations and 2,800 verifications of budget meals from the public, which will be progressively added to the BudgetMealGoWhere portal.

As for the 402 HDB coffee shops that were sold and hence now privately-owned, we have been engaging them to join the Budget Meal initiative and are studying other measures, including Mr Murali’s suggestion to make budget meal provisions compulsory for privately-owned coffee shops who want to renew their Outdoor Refreshment Area (ORA) applications. HDB has started requiring new buyers of privately-owned coffee shops to offer budget meals when they take over the premises. We will study whether to extend these conditions further.

Next, l will share how we intend to work with the community to co-create solutions to deal with municipal issues in our estates.

More than 200,000 Singaporeans participated in the Forward Singapore exercise. When I sat in for some of these conversations, I was encouraged that many Singaporeans care about forging pro-social norms in the community and have concrete ideas on how to go about it.

At the same time, as Miss Cheryl Chan has pointed out, the Municipal Services Office (MSO) is celebrating its 10th anniversary this year. MSO has come a long way from our early days, focused on improving coordination of service delivery among the now 10 Government agencies and 17 Town Councils. Going forward, we will do more to deepen engagement with residents and community partners. We strongly encourage community partners to share their ideas and work with us to create norms which help us keep our living environment harmonious and well-maintained.

Through our various pilots, we are also developing new operating models that we can adopt to improve our response to municipal issues. I will share more on this later.

We will deepen engagement in two ways.

First, we will continue to leverage technology for convenient municipal feedback reporting by observant residents. Feedback providers can now use a range of digital channels, including the OneService app and LifeSG; or interact with Kaki, the OneService Chatbot, on familiar platforms like WhatsApp, Telegram and Instagram. Later this year, residents can look forward to giving feedback by providing only photos and location of the issue to Kaki, making it even more convenient to provide feedback on-the-go.

Second, we want to empower residents by lowering barriers for residents to initiate community action. MSO will continue to avail resources, advice and small-scale funding for residents to start their own projects that encourage pro-social norms.

For example, through our Love Our 'Hood co-creation projects, residents can develop and refine their ideas in workshops and subsequently implement them in their neighbourhoods. Residents can also seek funding by tapping onto MSO's Love Our 'Hood Fund. To date, 13 projects have received such support and we encourage residents with good ideas to apply.

Alongside such community engagements, MSO will continue to pioneer new operating models that improve the Government's response to municipal issues.

First, we have taken decisive steps to address a persistent pain point for feedback providers. Today, agencies occasionally close straightforward feedback cases ahead of the works being completed as their KPIs are weighted towards the speed of reply.

As part of our Resolution 360 (R360) initiative, we are addressing this disconnect. We now require more categories of straightforward cases to be closed not when agencies have instructed their contractors to take action, but only when the work has actually been completed with photo evidence where practicable. Such cases include requests for cleaning, local infrastructure maintenance and vector control. We applied this requirement to a small subset of agency-owned OneService cases in 2020 and by the end of the year, this will be required of all straightforward agency-owned OneService cases.

Second, we have reorganised the delivery of 10 common municipal services in Tampines. These common municipal services are now delivered by a single operator instead of individual agency contractors. It no longer matters "which agency's issue" it is, as service delivery will be seamless to residents. This is complemented by worker cross-training, empowering a combined team with operations technology and rewarding efforts to address municipal issues thoroughly, address root causes of recurrent issues and undertake preventive maintenance and repair.

The initial pilot has been encouraging. The speed of feedback resolution has doubled, while resident satisfaction has improved by 20 percentage-points, all while using less manpower. In our next phase of experimentation, we have expanded this to Pasir Ris-Punggol to see if we can achieve similar efficiencies over a larger area. If it continues to produce good results, we will scale this to more estates.

Finally, let me provide an update on our efforts on tackling neighbour noise disputes.

Last year, MCCY, MinLaw and MSO shared our multi-pronged, community-led approach to tackling neighbour noise disputes. Complementing this, MSO has set up an initial team of dedicated personnel, on a pilot basis, who will leverage stronger laws and technology to investigate and enforce against the small number of severe neighbour noise disputes.

As Members may have heard in Second Minister Edwin Tong's MinLaw Committee of Supply speech, we will also be enhancing the mediation framework and the Community Disputes Resolution Tribunals (CDRT) process. For example, the mediation framework will be adjusted to resolve more neighbourhood disputes at an earlier stage, including through mandatory mediation. The public expressed broad support for stronger Government intervention in these severe cases during consultations in 2023.

To Mr Derrick Goh's question, the initial pilot team is working closely with grassroots volunteers, HDB and other agencies to familiarise itself with case handling. It will be able to do more when we have legislated the requisite powers, alongside enhancements to the mediation framework and the CDRT process. We hope to complete this by the end of 2024 and I look forward to support from Members of this House when we do so. Chairman, in Mandarin please.

(In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] Starting from last year, the Government has gradually introduced a budget meal plan in the coffee shops owned by HDB. As for the 402 sold public housing estate coffee shops, we have invited operators to join the budget meal plan and are studying other proposals, including the requirement for private coffee shops applying to renew their Outdoor Refreshment Area applications to provide budget meals.

HDB has begun to require new buyers of private coffee shops to provide budget meals upon taking over the coffee shop. We will explore ways to encourage more operators to sell budget meals.

MSO launched the "OneService" App in 2015. Many residents who have used the app find it convenient and easy to use. However, some users occasionally observe that although the relevant authorities have responded saying they will address their feedback, the issues have not been thoroughly resolved.

MSO has gradually worked with the relevant Government agencies to raise the requirements, for them to treat residents' feedback more rigorously. As long as the issues reported by users are straightforward, Government agencies cannot simply instruct contractors to address the issues and then respond to users. They must confirm that the work has been successfully completed before closing the case and providing a response; and if possible, include photos to demonstrate that the issue has been properly resolved.

(In English): Chairman, back to English.

I have shared on our efforts to ensure our neighbourhoods and flats continue to meet residents' evolving needs and remain vibrant, even as they age. Concurrently, we will also deepen partnerships with the community to co-create and co-deliver solutions, as well as adopt new operating models for municipal services delivery.

Together, we strive to achieve improvements in Singaporeans' living environment.

The Chairman: Senior Minister of State Tan Kiat How.

The Senior Minister of State for National Development (Mr Tan Kiat How): Mr Chairman, greening has been a national priority since Independence in 1965. In our next bound of greening, we aim to make Singapore a City in Nature.

Ms Nadia Ahmad Samdin asked for updates on our progress.

First, we are establishing more green spaces and enhancing existing ones. Last year, we completed Lakeside Garden within Jurong Lake Gardens. This year, we will open the revamped Chinese and Japanese Gardens, thereby completing Jurong Lake Gardens. We also opened a new section of Pasir Panjang Park. This is one of the 13 parks along the Southern Ridges and West Coast that we will rejuvenate and link up with curated trails.

We are also making our green spaces more accessible and inclusive. Last year, we launched five therapeutic gardens in our parks. These gardens are more natural in design, bringing about greater sensory experiences that improve the well-being of visitors. We now have a total of 14 therapeutic gardens and are on track to achieve our goal of 30 such gardens by 2030.

Second, we are strengthening the connectivity between our green spaces. To date, we have established around 210 kilometres of Nature Ways and over 380 kilometres of park connectors, including the first phase of the Round Island Route. These efforts bring us closer to nature and strengthen our ecological resilience, by facilitating the movement of native fauna between habitats.

We are also curating other island-wide recreation routes, such as the Rail Corridor, Central Corridor and Coast-to-Coast trails. Just last month, we completed the Eastern Corridor. Singaporeans can now enjoy 18 kilometres of scenic land and waterscapes, as you walk, jog or cycle from Pasir Ris Park to East Coast Park.

Third, we are restoring nature into our urban fabric and safeguarding our rich biodiversity. Last year alone, Singapore added almost 40 hectares of skyrise greenery. This brings us to 190 hectares across the island – the equivalent of over 270 football fields. We are close to achieving our target of 200 hectares by 2030, and we have restored and enhanced over 40 hectares of forest, coastal and marine habitats since 2020. With this, we are halfway to meet our enhanced target of 80 hectares by 2030.

We have also been enhancing the Sisters' Islands Marine Park and we look forward to reopening Big Sister's Island to the public this year. Highlights will include a new coastal forest trail, tidal lagoon and specially designed subtidal biodiversity panels along the floating boardwalk. These will allow visitors to observe marine life up-close with minimal impact on the ecosystem.

Mr Louis Ng mentioned a target, adopted at the 15th Conference of Parties to the UN Convention on Biological Diversity, to conserve 30% of coastal and marine areas by 2030. Like the other targets under the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework, this is a global rather than a national target. Countries are expected to contribute according to their national circumstances, priorities and capabilities. Singapore is contributing through our efforts under our National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan, taking into account our unique circumstances as a small, densely populated city-state.

To Mr Ng and Ms Nadia Ahmad Samdin's question on additional marine parks, we will continue to carefully balance the different needs in planning for our sea spaces, such as recreation, shipping and aquaculture – with conservation, under the Draft Master Plan 2025.

Mr Ng has also asked if we will consider enacting a new EIA law. Today, environmental considerations are already taken into account upstream in the land-use planning process. Environmental studies are required for developments, which may cause significant environmental impact, and appropriate mitigation measures will be put in place and closely monitored.

We have been strengthening the EIA process over the years. For example, we have published detailed guidelines for biodiversity impact assessments and we are piloting the centralised management of EIA consultancy services under NParks. Let us monitor the effect of these changes, before we decide whether we need to take any further steps to enhance our EIA framework.

2.00 pm

Ms Nadia Ahmad Samdin has also asked how we will involve even more members of the community in our efforts. The community's support is crucial to realise our City in Nature vision. As part of the OneMillionTrees movement, more than 100,000 members of the community have joined us in planting over 640,000 trees. Under the Nature Kakis Network, 140 passionate grassroots volunteers across 16 chapters and counting have been driving ground-up initiatives. We have also nurtured around 350 youth stewards through the Youth Stewards for Nature programme since 2021. Through such efforts, NParks aims to grow its volunteer base from 48,000 to 70,000 by 2030.

Sir, now, allow me to respond to Ms Nadia Ahmad Samdin on our wildlife management efforts. Public safety is our priority. As a densely populated city-state, we are very mindful that we need to carefully manage human-wildlife encounters to ensure that Singaporeans feel safe in and around our green spaces. That is why we take a proactive, comprehensive and science-based approach in managing wildlife populations. We partner the nature community to engage the public on how to responsibly interact with and appreciate nature through platforms, such as school assemblies, HDB's MyNiceHome roadshows and the Nature Kakis Network.

NParks adopts a range of targeted measures to manage different wildlife species, from pest birds, long-tailed macaques, otters, wild boars to crocodiles, as each species has its unique characteristics. There is no one-size-fits-all silver bullet. The range of measures includes habitat modification to reduce food sources, the translocation of animals away from urban areas and direct population control where necessary to protect public safety and/or reduce disamenities. We continually refine our approach based on ongoing research and international best practices.

NParks also conducts surveillance and enforcement against the illegal feeding of wildlife, such as pest birds, which Mr Lim Biow Chuan has asked about. For example, NParks deploys CCTV cameras and enforcement personnel at known feeding hotspots. With evidence, NParks will take enforcement action against the feeder. In each of the past three years, NParks has taken action against more than 170 cases of bird feeding, with actions ranging from warnings to prosecution, depending on the severity of the case.

Mr Louis Ng has asked if we will introduce a statutory presumption provision for wildlife feeding, similar to that for high-rise littering. Under NEA's presumption provision for high-rise littering, if there is clear evidence that an act of littering has been committed from a particular residential flat, the registered owners or tenants of the flat will be presumed to have committed the offence. Today, this provision can already be exercised where bird feeders throw food from high-rise windows, as such acts are considered high-rise littering. However, this provision is contingent on the ability to pinpoint the wrongdoing to a specific unit, that is registered to a specific individual or individuals.

As a large majority of illegal wildlife feeding cases take place in outdoor public areas, such a provision would not be applicable. Instead, as the main challenge in such cases is obtaining clear evidence that pinpoints the wrongdoer, evidence gathering remains key. To this end, NParks will step up surveillance at identified feeding hotspots.

We understand the disamenities to residents from pigeons, such as the soiling of public spaces and laundry. Tackling this issue requires a multi-pronged, multi-stakeholder effort. NParks, the Singapore Food Agency (SFA) and National Environment Agency (NEA) have been consistently supporting Town Councils on their pigeon management efforts. For example, NParks has been advising Town Councils on best practices for pigeon removal operations and has leaned forward to conduct live demonstrations. That said, we need to tackle the issue at its root, by reducing human-generated food sources in our estates.

In addition to discouraging and enforcing against illegal bird feeding, agencies have been working with Town Councils to improve food waste management, such as by encouraging the prompt clearance of leftover food from food centre tables and the proper closure of bins. In the coming months, we will step up our effort for Town Councils to better manage the pigeon population, especially in certain hotspots. Some ideas we are looking at include detailed guidelines on effective pigeon removal operations and conducting site-specific assessments and interventions to reduce food sources. We will share more details when ready.

We are also keenly aware of the interlinkages between human and animal health. Animals can carry diseases that can be transmitted to humans and vice versa. Bio-surveillance is a crucial line of defence against zoonotic disease outbreaks. NParks has been partnering fellow One Health agencies – MOH, NEA, SFA and PUB – on a range of efforts.

This includes the monitoring and analysis of animal health data and environmental indicators so that we can swiftly detect and respond to diseases, avert potential outbreaks, and safeguard both public and animal health.

We are also integrating our training and capacity building efforts and work closely together to investigate and manage disease outbreaks.

We will be stepping up research through a new $15-million Biosurveillance Research Programme. The programme will harness expertise and emerging technologies across multiple disciplines, such as genomics, disease modelling and vector biology, to improve our understanding of the key drivers of zoonotic disease transmission in Singapore.

This will help us to develop more effective upstream mitigation strategies, including a more effective system to monitor and detect animal diseases.

The research findings will also provide industry stakeholders and the wider public, including pet owners, with valuable insights on best practices for preventing zoonotic diseases. Researchers can look forward to grant calls later this year.

Sir, we are also raising standards for animal health and welfare. As announced last October, we will be establishing a Veterinary Council to regulate professional standards and practices in the local vet sector.

Mr Louis Ng has asked about our approach to tackling animal cruelty. We take a serious view of all acts of animal cruelty. The Animal and Veterinary Service (AVS) investigates all feedback and will take appropriate enforcement action. We are looking at the possibility of enhancing penalties for animal cruelty. as part of our ongoing review of the Animals and Birds Act. The review spans a range of areas, from enhancing protections for animal health and welfare, to strengthening safeguards on public health and safety. As such, we will need time to formulate the proposals, and to consult the public and relevant stakeholders. We will share more details when ready.

Importantly, we must start upstream. We will continue to work closely with animal welfare groups to promote responsible interactions with animals, through platforms such as Pets' Day Out events, school plays and webinars.

Last December, I shared our proposed cat management framework. A key proposal was to license and microchip pet cats and to allow up to two cats per HDB household. We closed our public survey on the proposed framework last month. We received a broad spectrum of views. For example, some called for mandatory pet cat sterilisation, while others did not support this. We are studying the responses carefully and will share more details when ready. Sir, let me say a few words in Mandarin.

(In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] We have made good progress towards our goal of transforming Singapore into a City in Nature. Last year, we completed Lakeside Garden within Jurong Lake Gardens. This year, we will open the revamped Chinese Garden and Japanese Garden.

Last year, we launched five therapeutic gardens, bringing the total to 14. We have also established over 380 kilometres of park connectors. These efforts bring us closer to nature and strengthen our ecological resilience. At the same time, to ensure that Singaporeans can safely enjoy our green spaces, we take a proactive, comprehensive and science-based approach to managing wildlife populations. We work closely with stakeholders to promote safe and responsible human-wildlife encounters.

We also recognise the interconnectedness of human and animal health. Diseases can be transmitted between animals and humans. Biosurveillance is a critical line of defence against zoonotic disease outbreaks. Through a new $15 million Biosurveillance Research Programme, we will step up research in this field. This programme will enhance our understanding of the key drivers of zoonotic disease transmission in Singapore and help us to develop more effective upstream mitigation strategies for our urban context.

(In English): In conclusion, in transforming Singapore into a City in Nature, partnerships are key. This will help us to better manage human-wildlife interactions and strengthen safeguards on public and animal health. We have made good progress, but there is more to be done. As we press on with our efforts, we will continue to collaborate with stakeholders and the wider community. Together, we can shape a green, vibrant and resilient Singapore that we are all proud to call home.

The Chairman: Minister of State Faishal Ibrahim.

The Minister of State for National Development (Assoc Prof Dr Muhammad Faishal Ibrahim): Chairman, I thank Members for their views on supporting the housing needs of seniors, lower-income and vulnerable households.

As Singapore matures and grows, we must do so inclusively and take care of the diverse and changing needs of our population.

Today, I will focus on two key areas: first, on uplifting our lower-income households and preserving social mobility; and second, on ensuring that Singapore remains a safe and comfortable home for our ageing population.

For lower-income households with no other housing options, public rental housing is a key social safety net. We recognise that shelter alone is not enough. For many of these families, complex and overlapping challenges, such as illness or unemployment, often get in the way. To address these challenges early, we pair rental housing with social support.

Since November 2022, all families with children enter public rental housing through the ComLink Rental Scheme. As of end January 2024, we have around 700 families on this scheme. These families are paired with a ComLink+ family coach soon after entry into public rental housing. Through early and sustained engagement with the families, ComLink+ family coaches can tailor their support to what each family needs, fostering stability, self-reliance and, ultimately, social mobility.

When these rental households are ready, we support them in their transition towards home ownership. Over the past decade, about 8,300 public rental households have progressed to home ownership. In 2023 alone, close to 950 households transitioned to home ownership, the highest in the last five years.

We have a range of measures in place to support both first-timer and second-timer rental households in making this transition. Like other first-timer Singaporean families, first-timer families in public rental can tap on the Enhanced CPF Housing Grant to receive up to $80,000 to support them in their purchase of their first home from HDB.

2.15 pm

For second-timer rental families, the Fresh Start Housing Scheme boosts their housing budget and supports them in regaining and sustaining home ownership. The Fresh Start Housing Scheme has been enhanced in the past two years to help more families. We increased the grant amount from $35,000 to $50,000 and gave Fresh Start families who may need a larger flat the option to purchase more affordable 3-room flats on shorter leases. As of end January 2024, we have 101 families who have tapped on the Fresh Start Housing Scheme to book a new flat.

Besides the various housing schemes and grants available, HDB also has the Home Ownership Support Team, or HST in short, to provide one-to-one guidance to help rental households navigate the flat buying process.

One family that has benefited from HST's support and the Fresh Start Housing Scheme is Mdm Hazlinda Binte Tahar and her three children. Mdm Hazlinda has been living with her children in a 2-room public rental flat for a few years. Keen to regain home ownership, Mdm Hazlinda reached out to HST for help in understanding her family's housing budget and options. In December 2023, with HST's support and help from the Tenants' Priority Scheme, Mdm Hazlinda successfully booked a 3-room Sale of Balance flat, with a shorter lease of 50 years. With her CPF savings and the Fresh Start Housing Grant, she was able to complete the flat purchase without a loan. Mdm Hazlinda and her children are now looking forward to moving into their new flat, which will be ready by end 2024.

As of end 2023, HST has engaged close to 1,600 households. Of these, over 120 have moved into their new homes and another close to 100 families have booked their flats and are waiting to collect their keys.

We have also been looking into new ways to better support singles in public rental housing.

Today, under the Joint Singles Scheme, or JSS, singles must apply for a rental flat with a flat mate. While most JSS tenants can find a flat mate and live together without issues, we recognise that this may be difficult for some. This is why we have been exploring new typologies to improve the living experience of singles living in public rental housing.

Ms Carrie Tan, Mr Faisal Manap and Mr Louis Chua have asked for updates on these new typologies.

The JSS Operator-Run model, or JSS-OR for short, is an ongoing pilot from December 2021. Under JSS-OR, singles can apply for a rental flat without a flat mate. A social service agency appointed by HDB operates each site, including managing the flat sharing arrangements and mediating between tenants when disagreements arise.

Last year, we expanded the pilot to three new sites in Bukit Panjang, Bidadari and Sengkang. With these additional sites, HDB has assisted about 600 JSS-OR tenants as of end-2023 and can accommodate up to 1,000 tenants in total.

One tenant that has benefited from JSS-OR is Mr Lee, who is in his 70s. After the friend he was living with passed away, Mr Lee had to turn to public rental housing. At his age and with his medical needs, Mr Lee had trouble finding a flat mate to apply with under the JSS. With the help of a social worker, Mr Lee applied for the JSS-OR instead. After he was accepted to the Bukit Panjang site, the JSS-OR operator helped to pair him with a compatible flat mate and Mr Lee moved in in October 2023. Since then, Mr Lee and his flat mate have been getting along well. As demonstrated through Mr Lee’s experience, I am happy to share that the pilot has been progressing well. Mr Lee and many other tenants have shared their appreciation for the on-site social service agency whom they can approach for assistance when needed.

The model has also been effective in mitigating co-tenant conflicts. Over 95% of such conflicts were resolved through the on-site operators' early mediation and adjustment of flat sharing arrangements where necessary. Some operators have also gone the extra mile, for example, by organising activities to encourage interaction and bonding amongst tenants. We will further evaluate the pilot outcomes, before adjusting and expanding the model to meet the needs of the tenants and operators.

Another pilot typology is the Single Room Shared Facilities model, or SRSF. Through SRSF, we aim to give singles in public rental more privacy while making good use of limited space and preventing social isolation. HDB will open applications for the SRSF pilot in the second quarter 2024. Thereafter, we look forward to housing the first batch of successful applicants from around the third quarter 2024.

Let me now explain our efforts to adapt our homes to be more senior-friendly. This will support our seniors who wish to age in place, in their communities.

Miss Cheryl Chan, Ms Tin Pei Ling, Mr Henry Kwek and Ms Nadia Samdin have asked about Age Well SG, including on our efforts to support seniors with little or no family support. Let me share further details on our initiatives.

First, under Age Well SG, we had announced the expansion of the wireless Alert Alarm System, or AAS, to all seniors aged 60 and above living in public rental housing.

The wireless AAS is an emergency button that is linked to nearby Active Ageing Centres and CareLine, a 24/7 hotline that provides response to callers in distress. The feedback from seniors in rental blocks that currently have the wireless AAS installed has been positive. Seniors found the alert system particularly helpful during emergencies.

Last month, I visited Mr Abdul Rahim and Mdm Ernowati, an elderly couple staying in a 1-room rental flat in Jalan Besar. Mr Abdul Rahim suffers from heart disease. In the past year, the couple has activated the wireless AAS three times to call for help after Mr Abdul Rahim experienced breathlessness and collapsed at home. After activating the alert button, they were connected to CareLine staff who promptly alerted the Singapore Civil Defence Force (SCDF) to send him to the hospital. During my visit, both Mr Abdul Rahim and Mdm Ernowati shared that they felt more assured with the wireless AAS in their home. Its round-the-clock emergency response service allowed them to receive medical help promptly, especially when Mr Abdul Rahim collapsed late at night. Like Mr Abdul Rahim, about 800 seniors have received emergency medical assistance through the wireless AAS from end-2019 to mid-2023.

The wireless AAS expansion is estimated to benefit around 26,800 more seniors living in around 170 rental blocks. I am pleased to share that we will start to roll out the wireless AAS expansion from January 2025 and will cover three rental blocks per month. We will start with rental blocks with a higher number of seniors, such as in Bukit Merah and Kallang-Whampoa. We hope that, as a result of this effort, our seniors in public rental will feel safer when living independently at home.

Further, under Age Well SG, we had also announced the expansion of senior-friendly features offered under the Enhancement for Active Seniors, or EASE programme, to enhance the safety and well-being of seniors in their homes. The earlier announced features include rocker switches, home fire alarm devices, the widening of bathroom entrances and handrails at main entrances with steps.

In addition to the above, we will be introducing additional features targeted at improving bathroom safety and fall prevention for seniors under EASE 2.0. These include lowered bathroom entrance curbs, foldable U-profile grab bars and bidet sprays. Bathrooms carry a significant fall risk for seniors and we hope these features will help keep our seniors safe.

Mr Henry Kwek had asked when the EASE 2.0 roll-out would commence. I am pleased to share that households may apply for the new improvement items under the EASE programme from 1 April 2024. Households that have tapped on EASE in the past may apply again for the new items.

The EASE programme is heavily subsidised by the Government. Today, under EASE, a Singaporean household living in a 3-room flat only pays 5% of the costs of the upgrades, with the rest covered by the Government. The new features under EASE 2.0 will adopt this same subsidy structure.

A 3-room flat owner tapping on the full EASE programme, which includes a wheelchair lifter and the new EASE 2.0 features, can expect to pay only around $570, with the remaining cost of around $10,000 borne by the Government. Fuller details on the costs will be provided on HDB InfoWEB from 1 April this year.

Mr Ong Hua Han had asked if we would provide financial support to persons with disabilities, or PwDs, to improve the accessibility of their HDB flats. As with EASE, non-elderly families with extenuating circumstances, such as households with PwDs, can apply for the new EASE 2.0 features on a case-by-case basis.

With these new features under the EASE programme, we hope to assure our seniors and your loved ones that your homes will continue to be enhanced to meet your changing needs. Sir, allow me now to speak in Malay.

(In Malay): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] In his speech, Minister Desmond Lee shared the new measures that we will undertake to address the housing needs of young couples and families.

In our interactions with young couples, we have heard that many are very keen to book a flat and settle down earlier. This includes those who are still studying full-time, undergoing National Service or those who have just completed their studies or National Service last year.

Such couples do not qualify for the Enhanced CPF Housing Grant (EHG), which requires 12 months of continuous employment. We would like to continue supporting this group of young couples who are currently eligible for deferred income assessment and Staggered Downpayment Scheme (SDS). From June 2024, we will enhance the SDS to further reduce the initial downpayment to 2.5% of the flat price, with the balance to be paid when they collect their keys. We hope this will help more young couples to move forward with their marriage and parenthood plans earlier.

The second group of couples that we heard from through our engagements are those who have booked their BTO flat but need temporary accommodation while awaiting the completion of their new flat. Today, we provide subsidised temporary housing for these families who are waiting for their flat to be completed, under the Parenthood Provisional Housing Scheme (PPHS).

To meet the high demand for PPHS, we will double the supply of PPHS to 4,000 units by 2025. Meanwhile, to support more families that qualify for PPHS, we will introduce the PPHS (Open Market) Voucher to help those renting HDB flats or bedrooms in the open market. The vouchers will be in place for one year, from July 2024.

Each eligible family will receive $300 a month and the payment is on a reimbursement basis. This PPHS voucher will provide some financial assistance for young families who rent a home while waiting for their BTO flat.

For low-income families who are not ready to own a home and have no other housing options, we provide public rental housing to ensure that they have a safe and stable home. Over the past decade, about 8,300 public rental households have progressed to home ownership. From this group, nearly 950 have done so in 2023, the highest in the last five years. We hope that more public rental households will progress to home ownership in the coming year. We encourage these households to contact HDB if they need any help in the course of their home ownership journey.

As our population ages, one of our key priorities is to ensure that seniors continue to live safely in their homes and age healthily within the community. We will do so through key initiatives under Age Well SG.

First, we will expand the provision of the wireless Alert Alarm System (AAS) to all seniors aged 60 and above living in public rental flats. The wireless AAS is linked to nearby Active Ageing Centres and also CareLine, a 24/7 helpline that provides response to callers in distress. We will start implementing the wireless AAS expansion from January 2025. The expansion of AAS provision is expected to benefit around 26,800 seniors living in 170 rental blocks.

Next, we will expand the range of senior-friendly features offered under the Enhancement for Active Seniors programme (EASE), for all seniors. From 1 April 2024, seniors can choose to have lowered bathroom entrance kerbs, foldable grab bars and bidet sprays under EASE 2.0. This is on top of the features announced earlier such as the widening of bathroom entrances and folding shower chairs. The cost of these features will be heavily subsidised by the Government, at the same rate as it is now.

In addition, I am pleased to share that households that have tapped on EASE in the past can reapply for the new features.

Finally, we will rejuvenate our neighbourhoods to become more elderly-friendly through the upcoming fifth phase of the NRP. This will benefit more than 100,000 additional flats, comprising older flats built up to 1999. Residents can look forward to therapeutic gardens with wheelchair-friendly planter boxes and barrier-free walkways that link to senior-centric facilities.

With the expansion of wireless AAS for public rental flats as well as the launch of EASE 2.0 and the fifth phase of the NRP, we hope that seniors will feel safer living at home and ageing within the community.

2.30 pm

(In English): To conclude, let me reaffirm our commitment to building an inclusive home for all Singaporeans. We will continue to build a home that responds to the diverse and evolving needs of our population, a home that integrates housing with social support to empower and uplift our lower-income households and a home that allows our seniors to age gracefully and safely within the community, in our neighbourhoods and homes.

The Chairman: We have time for clarifications. Miss Cheryl Chan.

Miss Cheryl Chan Wei Ling: Thank you, Chairman. I have two clarifications. The first is for Minister Desmond Lee. I am actually happy to hear that the Government will be providing support through the enhanced Staggered Downpayment Scheme, or SDS, to help young couples pay for the downpayment of flats. However, if you want to bring assurance to the young couples, I think it needs to go beyond just financial support. So, if they needed more comprehensive support, can Minister share with us what are some ways that this can be done so that we can also address the problem around the falling TFR?

The second clarification I have is for Senior Minister of State Sim Ann. In my cut, I asked about the MSO's Love Our 'Hood initiatives and also the fund that has been in place. I think the Senior Minister of State was probably tight on time just now, so you did not mention very much about some of the initiatives that have resulted in tangible impact in other neighbourhoods in your reply. I think having some insights to this will help others see how we can tap upon it and expand it across the island.

Mr Desmond Lee: I thank Miss Cheryl Chan for her question. Indeed the enhancement to the Staggered Downpayment Scheme is one mechanism by which we help young couples who are ready and prepared to settle down and set up family to get their flat faster. But we have to see the enhanced Staggered Downpayment Scheme in light of a whole range of measures that we have put in place to help young families, specifically, but also Singaporeans generally, get access to their first home.

The first, of course, is the ramp-up in housing supply. We make more flats available so that young couples who are looking for a flat in a location, not just in a Non-Mature Estate, but also in a Mature Estate, because they are looking to live nearer to their parents, nearer to their families, can find options. So, you are starting to see more BTO launches in more Mature Estates or in more central locations. That is one.

The second, of course, is to bring down waiting times. COVID-19 was exceptional. There were disruptions across the board but we have brought it under control and brought down overall construction time, firstly by catch up, and secondly by working with our contractors, with our suppliers in order to build more effectively and build more quickly.

We also, as I mentioned earlier, started in 2018 to launch Shorter Waiting Time flats. That means you meet this year's demand through your launches, but you start building some to be launched the next year. So, when next year comes, there will be a number of flats which have waiting time of below three years, two years plus. And actually, a lot of young couples say that is about right for them. We were ramping that up, but COVID-19 hit; and we are going back on track. And the overall mix of new housing supply will be a combination of BTO flats, Shorter Waiting Time flats, Sale of Balance Flats and open selection flats, and, of course, the resale market with grants.

We also help young couples through the First-Timer (Parents and Married Couples) scheme to support them amidst all the first-timers who are applying and this would be young couples who have gotten married and are trying to buy their very first home. That voice came out very strongly and there was a lot of agreement in all our Forward Singapore Housing Conversations that we should really support this group. Then, in addition to the priority, we even allocate priority to new flats under the Family and Parenthood Priority Scheme (FPPS). You will recall last year when we introduced the First-Timer (Parents and Married Couples), we also rejigged the Parenthood Priority Scheme to a Family and Parenthood Priority Scheme, so those first timers buying their very first home will be given first priority if applying for flats in Non-Mature Estates.

And grants. Last year we increased the CPF Housing Grants to help lower- and middle-income households trying to buy resale flats. Some young couples want to buy resale flats near to their parents. And, of course, temporary housing through the PPHS supply to help the lower- and lower-middle income young couples who are trying to set up family, waiting for their flats, a place to stay in the meantime.

So, we have to see the enhanced Staggered Downpayment Scheme in light of all these changes we have made, to continue to support young Singaporeans who want to settle down, buy their first home and start a family.

Ms Sim Ann: In response to Miss Cheryl Chan's clarification, indeed the MSO has been adopting a variety of methods to undertake community education. The Love Our 'Hood initiative has one example that Members might recall, and it is us working with the volunteers and grassroots leaders from Mountbatten. They call themselves The Mountbatten Parking Heroes and what our funding did was to assist this group of volunteers in designing and installing creative signages to deter illegal parking in specific spots in Mountbatten. This has gotten quite good results, because from 2021 to 2022, the feedback volume on illegal parking at specific intervention sites fell by some 26%. And when the initiative was reported in the media, it also got some attention from other communities that were inspired and wanted to do similar activities.

What the MSO has done is to share this playbook with other neighbourhoods that have similar illegal parking issues such as Bukit Gombak and Nee Soon South, and those that are interested can then take a leaf from this experience.

We also do community education in other ways. One was through the noise experiential lab that we set up last year and ran for a few months. Close to 900 persons visited it. It was set up in an HDB setting which allows visitors to explore how noise that is created through everyday activities can travel inter-floor and also to role-play the different interventions that residents could do, for instance by interacting with neighbours, asking them to keep their noise down, testing out the effects of, for instance, using mats or furniture, socks, and seeing the reduction in the noise experience by someone in another neighbouring unit.

So, this has also been helpful because the visitors have given us very useful feedback and they thought that this hands-on method is very good for internalising pro-social norms. In fact, we had very good feedback from young people and children.

Another way in which we support public education and community education is through working with AfAs. We have had a very positive experience on the AfAction on joss paper burning norms. We have included a wide variety of stakeholders. This includes cultural experts, includes representatives from religious organisations, from the media, from community volunteers, as well as even supermarkets that sell joss paper and related offerings. I think this method of leveraging cultural awareness and knowledge, and getting the information to the people who are making decisions that could have downstream implications on their neighbours, I think that has also given us insights which we can apply to other areas and other municipal issues.

The Chairman: Guillotine time is 3.05 pm. I counted, on hand, at least 12 Members who want to ask clarifications. So, it is impossible to meet everyone's request. So, again, my request, the same one: clarification short, and likewise, responses short. Ms Hazel Poa.

Ms Hazel Poa: Thank you, Speaker. I would like to thank Minister Lee for responding to my various suggestions. On the matter of the Shorter Waiting Time flats, I have acknowledged that the Government is building about 2,000 to 3,000 a year in my speech. I think my question is, because that forms only about 10% to 15% of the annual supply, why can it not be increased further to maybe about 50% of the supply?

Secondly, on the singles age limit, the Minister mentioned that if we do that without increasing the supply, it would result in a longer waiting time. Agreed. But I think the question here is, why do we say if there is no increase in supply? Actually, PSP did ask for ramping up the supply at the public housing debate in February of last year. So, can the Minister clarify why is it that there cannot be a further ramping up of supply?

2.45 pm

Mr Desmond Lee: It is a very broad question, so I take heed Chairman's request to keep it short.

Shorter waiting time flats, 2,800 or thereabouts this year. So, one year ahead of our commitment, which was to start ramping up shorter waiting time from next year. Shorter waiting time flats work this way. You launch in a given year, you want to make sure that you are able to meet demand. We have been able to bring BTO application rates down from a peak during COVID-19, to somewhere around pre-COVID-19 levels.

But you do that and then also start building some in the year X to be launched in year X+1, that means, the next year, and you would have constructed a year or a year plus. That allows applicants who book a flat to be able to collect keys in two years-plus; in under three years or three years or less. Why can we not have 50% shorter waiting time flats this year? I think the answer is quite simple. We have still to meet existing demand in addition to doing the catch-up for all the delayed flats as a result of COVID-19. I think that really is the rate-limiting factor and, as we have explained previously in this House and to the media, when you want to launch a BTO project, it can take up to 10 to 15 years of lead time, of land preparation, of allowing the prior user to complete the use of the land; and for the land to be taken back, and so on and so forth.

When the sites get more infilled as you take more difficult sites, a lot more preparatory work has to come in; not to mention actual construction time: if you build on slopes, if the land is odd shape, if the geology requires extra piling and so on.

The other question that the Member asked is why can we not ramp up supply and that was what PSP has called, that is, ramp up supply generally, build a lot more than 100,000, build a lot more Millennial Apartments. In fact, do not build Prime and Plus flats. Take all the Mature Estates, central estates, central location, just build rental flats for millennials for three to five years. And why not lower the age ceiling for singles? Why not you ramp up the 3-room, and I am quite sure there will be many other requests that she will make in the course of the coming years to basically provide supply for every constituency of Singaporeans that feel that they want more support.

And as I have said many times, if land and resource were no constraint, we would certainly, as a responsible Government, want to meet genuine needs and there are needs on the ground, needs that Mr Louis Ng talked about, single parents and so on. And we meet most on those fronts, too.

Every group is subject to some form of cap, whether it is an age ceiling, whether it is an income cap, whether it is a nationality requirement, household requirement; first timer, second timer versus Nth timer. All these ensure that, with limited land and resources, you are able to cater to the broad masses of Singaporeans and different categories. And over the years, we have been able to make some adjustments over time to allow more access. And that is for BTO flats which are a supply of flats in addition to the overall resale market supply that is available out there.

And we are an island city-state, as Minister Indranee has said, with 730+ square kilometres, one of the most densely populated sovereign city-states in the world, the only island city-state in the world, and that means, unlike other cities, we do not just have to cater to housing and other amenities that city dwellers need; everything that the fully functioning sovereign state needs has to be within the city.

And if you go to other cities that are like Singapore, you will find that actually the airport is far, far away; its port is far away; the crematorium is far away; the recycling plants are far away. All the undesirable necessities of city life, sometimes, in bigger countries can be parked outside the city. But we have no such luck. Ours is the karma of an island city-state, and I hope that all Members here will be able to take this back to your constituencies to share as part of the building of our knowledge and DNA of Singaporeans, to know that, for us, it will always be the need to balance severe trade-offs and make the best of our limited land and resources. And for a city-state like ours to have 80% living in national housing and 90% of them owning their homes and you compare that to larger countries with severe housing shortages, even coming to Singapore to study what we do, and we share, I think we must accept that we have, as a result of years of discipline, done well.

If you want to find land to build, we have ample land. But land of the past, large green field sites, those are scarcer. We will have to make do with infill sites, we have to recycle the land, we have to rejuvenate, we have to work on brownfield sites, some of which have historical value. All these mean that land will become available to us in time and space. Do Members know what I mean? So, there may be a site that you have zoned for housing. Someone else is using that land in the meantime. The uses of the land will run out, whether it is for recreation, business, industry, horse racing so on and so forth, all these we will have to plan for it in the long term.

And as we say, you want to prepare for a launch, take 10 to 15 years, you also have to model as best as you can what your projected household formation is. And we are already starting to see for a number of years now smaller families, more singles living alone, more reconstituted families and so on, and we want to be able to make sure we meet not just the needs of the singles but the needs of many other groups as well.

So, all in, I make a call to Members from both sides of the House to recognise that, in Singapore, we are able to achieve public housing for the masses despite these tremendous limitations and it requires long-term planning, discipline, give-and-take and also a sense that we all have our needs, but we all also need to think of other groups of Singaporeans, especially the vulnerable ones.

The Chairman: Mr Chong Kee Hiong.

Mr Chong Kee Hiong: Thank you, Chairman. I have three short clarifications. For Minister Desmond Lee, can I have your views on intensification of land use and the Integrated Hub for Bishan to free up more land and also to improve connectivity and accessibility?

The second clarification is that there have been several announcements on the redevelopment of brownfield, which the Minister mentioned again, such as Kranji Turf Club and Bukit Timah Turf City in the past year. So, why is the Government redeveloping Gillman Barracks, which is another brownfield site?

My final clarification is for Minister Indranee. What new recreational options can Singaporeans expect under the recreation master plan? Are recreational options limited to activities that do not take up large tracks of land?

The Chairman: Minister Desmond Lee.

Mr Desmond Lee: The Member is right. Intensification is one of the strategies that allows us to fit all the needs and some of the aspirations of Singaporeans today and tomorrow into this one and only island city-state. And intensification is a strategy within the broader strategy of disciplined long-term planning, and Minister Indranee talked about the long-term plan review, plan every 10 years for a 50-year horizon. And then, every five years, plan for a 10- to 15-year horizon and look at the little coloured dots on the master plan and look at the numbers that go with it. Those are your plot ratios.

And so, intensification allows us, within limits of liveability, to make better use of our land. That is one.

The second strategy, of course, is mixed use. And the Member talked about the potential for more projects, like he mentioned Bishan, there is also Tampines Hub, there is also Heartbeat@Bedok, and many others, where land uses are stacked vertically instead of horizontally by giving each one parcel of land.

And, in fact, there is even a three-plus-one depot for three MRT lines converging and one bus depot all in, saving you lots and lots of land for other uses. So, intensification, multi-user. We also better exploit the underground, so the underground master plan has been around for a number of years. And for those of you who have been to the Jurong Rock Cavern, you know that it is a feat of engineering which allows us to free up valuable land on the surface for more important economic uses and use the underground caverns for storage of condensates.

So, all in, those are some strategies. Over and on top of that, we have the big moves, for example, the mention of "Long Island", which is many decades down the road. We have to start working on it now to provide a buffer against rising sea levels, more freshwater capacity, but also to create a lot of new land for future generations to exploit opportunities.

And, of course, Paya Lebar Air Base and the greater Southern Waterfront through moving out our ports. All these also create space and room for Singaporeans to live out our dreams.

In terms of brownfield sites, why are we planning for the redevelopment or the use of a brownfield site like Gillman Barracks when we are taking back Kranji Turf Club, as well as starting to develop Bukit Timah Turf City? As I said earlier, our aspirations are growing, our needs are also growing. With a fast-ageing population, there are both specific housing needs as well as amenities relating to ageing. And as our families' aspirations grow, you start to see fewer 3-Gen families, more nuclear households, more reconstituted households, more singles living on their own and a desire for greater space both within their homes, but also around the estate.

And the greater desire for higher order needs of life. And so, we will need to open up sites, including in Gillman Barracks, because these allow us to build homes for Singaporeans, closer to their parents, closer to their workplaces and closer to desirable parks and other amenities for Singaporeans.

The Chairman: Mr Pritam Singh. Sorry, I saw you raising your hand earlier. Mr Henry Kwek. Sorry Mr Kwek, I forgot to ask Second Minister Indranee for the second part of the reply. I was eager to get as many supplementary questions put in.

Ms Indranee Rajah: I will try to keep it as brief as possible. I thank Mr Chong for his clarification. It follows on actually to what Minister Desmond Lee said because the previous clarifications were all asking Minister Desmond Lee how can we have more and more buildings on this 734 hectare. [Please refer to "Clarification by Second Minister for National Development", Official Report, 5 March 2024, Vol 95, Issue 130, Correction By Written Statement section.]

But at the same time, in our conversations and as highlighted by Mr Chong, Singaporeans are also asking for more and more space, more recreational spaces, play spaces, places to breathe, places to walk. So, that is where the recreational master plan comes in. And that is where our agencies have actually been very creative.

URA and its partner agencies have been working very hard to devise different ways to carve out recreation out of this limited space and there are different ways in which they do it. So, one example will be to bring different activities into the same space, such as at Bukit Canberra and Heartbeat@Bedok. There are recreational facilities there. It is a one-stop community hub and residents can access lifestyle and recreational amenities, such as eateries, shops, outdoor facilities and so on. But another is PUB's collaboration with URA and NParks to have the PUB Active, Beautiful, Clean Waters (ABC Waters). That strings out the spaces, so that you do not concentrate it in one. It is a slightly different strategy.

So, going forward, the recreation master plan will focus on a variety of ways. They will look at curating a variety of recreational nodes and trails island-wide. They will also look at weaving play into our everyday spaces as well as involving the community in shaping recreational spaces. So, I encourage everybody to participate with their ideas and feedback.

The Chairman: Mr Henry Kwek.

Mr Kwek Hian Chuan Henry: Chairperson, I would like to ask Minister of State Faishal Ibrahim a clarification about EASE. First of all, I want to thank the Minister of State for sharing the good news on EASE 2.0, especially the fact that previous applicants can reapply. So, can MND share how many seniors have benefited from EASE 1.0 in the past? This number will help us understand potentially how many people would need 2.0 and then we can track the pace in which it rolls out to see whether any further push to get as many people to benefit this scheme is needed.

The Chairman: Minister of State Faishal Ibrahim.

Assoc Prof Dr Muhammad Faishal Ibrahim: Sir, I thank the Member for the supplementary question. As of 31 January 2024, I am happy to share that more than 309,300 households have benefited from the EASE programme and they did it in conjunction with the Home Improvement Programme, as well as direct application.

Mr Gerald Giam Yean Song: Thank you, Chairman. Sir, to Minister Desmond Lee, regarding the changes to the staggered downpayment scheme, with the changes, home buyers will still need to make the same total downpayment before key collection, albeit with a smaller 2.5% initial downpayment.

So, these enhancements do not actually reduce the price of the flat for young couples. So, has the Minister considered that these changes might actually result in more couples being unable to make the larger ballooned payments before key collection and then they will incur the penalties like losing the initial downpayment and being debarred for the one year before they can reapply for subsidised housing?

[Next, Take 19]

3.00 pm

To Senior Minister of State Sim Ann, can I confirm that the Senior Minister of State said that the replacement of the lift components I mentioned in my cut, the ARG, the main controller PCB, EBOPs and UPS can be expensed from the Lift Replacement Fund for existing lifts? Can MND publish an exhaustive list of lift components which can be paid for using the Lift Replacement Fund so that it is clear to all Town Councils?

The Chairman: Minister Lee.

Mr Desmond Lee: Currently, if a young couple has been working, say, for more than a year, when they apply for HFE, they will have a sense of (a) how much EHG they will get; and (b) how much HDB loan they can get. Then, with that, they book a flat and pay between 5% and 10% of the downpayment, that is, 5% if they take the Staggered Downpayment Scheme HDB loan; 10% if you take a financial institution (FI) loan. That is already reduced, compared to other people who would pay 10% and 20% respectively.

For a group of young people, when we do a housing conversation, they approach us, they tell us their situation. These are young people who are ready to settle down and they say, "Well, flats take a few years, but we are ready to settle down. We are getting older and we want to start a family." When they apply while they are studying, let us, say, in tertiary, for example, in polytechnic, ITE, university and they are about to graduate in a year or two and maybe one of their partners is doing NS or they have already both completed their studies or completed NS, they have not yet chalked up enough of a track record to assess their eligibility for grant and loan. They say, "Yes, we can book but it is difficult, even with the Staggered Downpayment Scheme, to stump up the 5% or 10% respectively because we are not eligible for a grant or loan at that point in time."

So, we say, for them, "Well, we will give you a deferred income assessment, that means, for your grant, it is not that you will get zero, you will get the grant, but we will assess it when you collect your keys." That has been helpful. We assess your loan eligibility when you collect your key. That is helpful because, by that time, they would have started working, maybe worked for one, two, three years, collect keys. But they want to book earlier and they are committed to settling down because they have known each other for a while. So, what we have done is do those things that I have responded to Miss Cheryl Chan on, priorities and all that. But when it comes to this particular kind of a micro issue that they face, but to them it is a big issue, we say, "Well, we will reduce the downpayment even further because we know your grant eligibility will come later."

But to the Member's point that they will then have to pay up the rest anyway, it is true. But at that point in time, they would have worked, they would have accrued savings and CPF. They would have gotten the EHG if they are eligible as well as an HDB loan.

The Chairman: Senior Minister of State Sim Ann.

Ms Sim Ann: Under the Town Council's Act, section 47(5), Town Councils are already allowed to use LRF for any capital expenditure related to the replacement of lifts in residential or commercial property, including items that are replaced at less than 10 years' intervals and lift upgrading works under HDB's LUP in residential property or commercial property.

Examples of uses would include the replacement of lift position display panels, replacement of lift inverters, replacement of hoisting ropes and the sheaves of lifts and so forth. And the LRF can also be used for capital items, such as automatic rescue device and the main controller PCB, which Mr Gerald Giam has mentioned, which are not listed in the cyclical maintenance work schedule. And if the Town Councils would like to clarify or if they are in doubt, they can always check with us.

The Chairman: I will allow one last clarification. Mr Murali Pillai. Short one, please.

Mr Murali Pillai: Sir, I have a question for the hon Senior Minister of State Ms Sim Ann, in relation to eating houses that are stubbornly vacant, despite the best efforts of HDB to market them, what strategies may HDB have? I have two short suggestions. One is to bundle these vacant eating houses with others, so there is economy of scale, or for HDB to rent out stalls to, for example, home-based businesses.

The Chairman: Senior Minister of State Sim, short reply as well.

Ms Sim Ann: There may be some HDB-owned coffee shops that do not do well, perhaps due to low footfall. In such cases, where the stalls are concerned, generally, we leave it to the operators to decide how to attract new tenants. But if the entire coffee shop is not doing well, then, at the point of rent renewal, HDB is prepared to reduce rent if it is warranted. And if the operator returns the coffee shop to HDB, then, we will re-tender on the basis of PQM. Because we do not have a guide rent, therefore, if all the bids that we receive are lower than the rents we have gotten in the past, then, it is possible for the rents to go even lower.

The Chairman: We have reached our guillotine time. Can I invite Miss Cheryl Chan if you would like to withdraw your amendment?

Miss Cheryl Chan Wei Ling: Chairman, I will be brief, but I think this is the ninth year I have spoken on the MND COS and every year, we run out of time to clarify all the clarifications at the tail end. But I guess this is also a reflection of the uphill task and the challenge that we have in maintaining all the competing needs of usage in this very scarce land that we have in Singapore.

With that, I still want to thank all the Government Parliamentary Committee (GPC) colleagues who have spoken on this and also all the other Members in the House who supported and also gave a lot of suggestions on what else can be considered in MND. I would like to thank Minister Desmond Lee, Minister Indranee Rajah, Senior Minister of State Sim Ann, Senior Minister of State Tan Kiat How and Minister of State Assoc Prof Faishal Ibrahim and the entire staff team in the MND family. With that, Chairman, I beg leave to withdraw my amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

The sum of $7,713,567,200 for Head T ordered to stand part of the Main Estimates.

The sum of $11,610,741,000 for Head T ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates.

The Chairman: Order. I propose to take a break now.

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

Mr Speaker: I suspend the Sitting and will take the Chair at 3.25 pm.

Sitting accordingly suspended

at 3.07 pm until 3.25 pm.

Sitting resumed at 3.25 pm.

[Deputy Speaker (Ms Jessica Tan Soon Neo) in the Chair]

Debate in Committee of Supply resumed.

[Deputy Speaker (Ms Jessica Tan Soon Neo) in the Chair]