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

Better Homes for All

Mr Alex Yam (Marsiling-Yew Tee): Mdm Chair, I beg to move,

"That the total sum to be allocated for Head T of the Estimates be reduced by $100."

衣食住行 – clothing, food, shelter, transportation – the basic necessities of life. In Singapore, there is one element of these four that has pervaded all aspects of our recent history, politics, policies, lives and perhaps even our future, and that is housing.

Many key policies like the Central Provident Fund (CPF), education, employment, ethnic integration, social mobility are intimately linked with housing. When the People’s Action Party (PAP) was elected as the Government in 1959, it had two key priorities – provide employment and house the people – to feed and to shelter. Fifty-seven years later, we need to look further ahead to uphold the housing priority. I call it the "Up, Down, Left-Right and All around".

First, "Up", supply. While we cleared cemeteries and backfilled mudflats to create living space over the years and build new towns, the question is: how much more and where? Eventually, we will reach a point of saturation. The Selective En bloc Redevelopment Scheme (SERS) we can do selectively, but at greater cost. I, therefore, ask the Ministry to look to the far horizon, identify future sites early – be they greenfield sites, reclaimed sites, SERS sites – inform early, consult early, discuss widely, and plan prudently. What does the next 10 years look like for Build-To-Order (BTO) supply as well as public rental housing? What has previous economic downturns taught us about the housing market?

Second, "Down", keeping prices low and affordable. As blocks go up, concerns about affordability also go up too. We often trot out examples of how families earning about $1,000 can afford a flat. That is true. But for many lower-income Singaporeans facing complex issues, it is still elusive for them. Middle-income families also fear that their incomes are not keeping pace with the rising cost of housing as well as the cost of living. I, therefore, ask and seek the Ministry's reassurance to Singaporeans that public housing prices will be kept stable and affordable for the majority, especially young families starting out.

As the economy slows, there is also the added fear that retrenchments may rise and loans defaulted. The current financial assistance measures by the Housing and Development Board (HDB) may not be sufficient. I, therefore, suggest for the Ministry to work with the Ministry of Manpower (MOM) and CPF on a variant of the Home Protection Scheme for coverage beyond catastrophic loss of income, due not only to physical incapacity or death, but also include an unemployment protection clause in the event of major recessions.

Next, "Left and Right", broadening our overall choices. Mr Lee Kuan Yew once said that "If every family owned its home, the country would be more stable".

The stability that we have today also challenges us to look beyond homes just for the masses. Today, many of our elderly are asset rich. The Enhanced Lease Buyback Scheme, which was introduced in April last year to help them further monetise this, is a step in the right direction.

However, the last available statistics indicate that we only have close to 1,000 applications so far. This seems like a very low take-up rate as 75% of elderly households are eligible. Is it a matter of publicity and awareness?

On my house visits, many older residents whom I speak to are unaware of the scheme. Good schemes like this cannot be hidden away. So, we need to do more to promote it. I, of course, also have a significant number of elderly 5-roomers in my estate. Many of them have asked about the scheme and so I would like to appeal for, over the long term, an eventual Enhanced Enhanced Scheme for them.

Homes are aspirational after all; it gives us stability and grounding. I am glad that the Finance Minister announced the quantum for the Fresh Start Housing Scheme. Before formal announcement of the details, I would like to make a number of recommendations based on families that I have met and interacted with. One, full-fledged employment counselling programme to address job difficulties that these families face; two, community-based childcare or infant care facilities that they have priority for so that we will allow mothers to go back to work with ease of mind; three, minimal 85% school attendance for children to make them future-ready; four, enhance marriage and family stability through social work support; and lastly, five, bigger flats, with shorter leases beyond the 2-room flexi, to provide flexibility especially for those with larger families.

We need to make sure that the Fresh Start Housing Scheme has a good start and not end up with a false start. Let us help rental families move out of rental into home ownership and give them a leg up for their future while keeping costs down for them.

Lastly, "All around", 360° engagement. The next step in the housing landscape is to build communities, rather than just building houses. The kampong spirit of the past is not easily translatable from horizontal kampong to the vertical ones that we have today. Community space must be deliberately planned to create circulation for residents to meet, greet, interact and bond.

To this end, new towns should have this as a basic planning parameter, integrate facilities and different flat types, work early to create opportunities to form communities of support. For older towns, I also urge that the Neighbourhood Renewal Programme (NRP) be expanded and made a staple of the revitalisation of towns with a focus on building communities.

I spoke about my concerns over the Revitalisation of Shop Scheme in the Budget debate which I hope the Ministry will also address. Shops and services make community possible, but a simple paint job does not make town centres come alive again, especially with the competition from malls.

Lastly, the Finance Minister made no mention of relaxing the crimps on the property market, despite having cooled down the bubble significantly. As I mentioned earlier, housing affects all sectors, a slowdown in the housing sector is a slowdown across many sectors. Such a policy would also have impacts across other policies. My hon colleague Mr Christopher de Souza, among others, has called for the lifting of the Additional Buyer's Stamp Duty to stimulate demand. I agree, as the Total Debt Servicing Ratio and loan limits will still go along the way to calibrate the market.

Mdm Chair, five decades have transformed squatters into stakeholders. Let us move into the next five as a community. I reiterate my call to continue a steady supply to meet demand, keep costs affordable, broaden choices for different home owner groups and promote all-round community building to achieve better homes for all.

Question proposed.

Better Homes for Singaporeans

Mr Chong Kee Hiong (Bishan-Toa Payoh): Mdm Chair, I declare my interest as a professional in the real estate industry. We need to work together to build better homes with Singaporeans, for Singaporeans. First and foremost, we must ensure that the housing market is stabilised. When the market was rising, cooling measures were necessary in preventing a housing bubble. But now, with a more subdued market, we have to respond quickly to prevent the market from further decline. Otherwise, there will be negative impact on real estate related industries such as construction, interior design, renovation contractors, furniture and consumer electrical and electronics, which, in turn, affect jobs.

Housing affordability must remain a top priority, especially for our first-timer families. For most young Singaporean couples, they must have their own homes first before they proceed to have children. Hence, with our birth rate hinging on our housing policy, HDB must ensure that we make available plenty of nests to welcome the stork.

We should have a wide range of flats for every budget and need. Wherever possible, public and private housing, even public rental blocks, should be integrated in each estate to facilitate community bonding. For the most vulnerable of our households, I hope the Ministry will be able to accommodate them quickly to reduce the anxiety for the elderly and children in their midst. Does the Ministry have plans to ramp up the supply of public rental flats to cut waiting time?

Our home buyers have benefited from recent enhancements to the income ceiling and housing grants, but individual choices, such as the preference for housing in mature estates and proximity to family members, pose challenges for buyers and HDB. One of the solutions is to build our new estates even better to attract these home buyers and their families.

These new estates must have the full range of facilities, well-designed and well-integrated with the surrounding ecosystem. They have shared public spaces, barrier-free accessibility and better connectivity for pedestrians and cyclists and are visually appealing. How would HDB ensure that with more and better facilities, the flats remain attractively priced and running estate maintenance costs remain affordable and will not escalate significantly over time?

For home buyers purchasing homes in mature estates so as to be nearer to their families, HDB also provides housing grants as the resale prices of these flats are higher than direct purchases from HDB. These flats have shorter remaining leases. As the lease gets shorter, it will eventually lead to declining HDB flat values which will affect retirement planning. Would the Government consider lease top-ups for older flats, in addition to the SERS programme, as not all precincts are suitable for SERS?

To further protect against the declining HDB flat values for older estates, would there be the Home Improvement Programme (HIP) schemes for flats built after 1986 after the completion of the current HIP in 2018?

The Chairman: Mr Gan Thiam Poh, you have four cuts. Please take them together.

Executive Condominium Sale Price

Mr Gan Thiam Poh (Ang Mo Kio): Mdm Chair, the Executive Condominium (EC) is a good scheme and meets the aspirations of Singaporeans for affordable, higher-end flats with the finer finishing and facilities of private condominiums, such as swimming pools and function rooms.

However, there are concerns that the price of ECs may be getting beyond the reach of middle-income Singaporean households. Would the Government consider putting an upper limit on the pricing of each type of EC unit or limiting the type of frills which can be included in the development plot so as to ensure that EC flats will always remain affordable?

Removal of Income Ceiling

I would like to propose the removal of the income ceiling for the purchase of flats directly from HDB for first-time applicants. Increasingly, many couples are getting married later due to the pursuit of higher education and work commitments. By the time they meet their other half and get married, their combined income would have exceeded the income ceiling. I hope we can give every couple a chance to own and live in an HDB flat.

In addition, it may not be a bad idea to have a few more families with higher incomes live within an HDB estate. There should be more opportunities for people of different income groups interacting with one another for better community bonding. Removing the income ceiling could improve social integration and enhance social stability. HDB may consider selling flats to those with higher incomes with reduced subsidies.

Third-time Applicants for HDB Flats

Next, I would like to appeal to the Ministry to consider giving third-timer applicants another opportunity to buy their own flats. Some of these applicants might have run into financial difficulties or have personal problems which result in them having to sell their flats. A number of these applicants could have been co-owners for their parents' flats because their parents could not afford or run into difficulties servicing their mortgages. Later, when these applicants get married, they would be considered second-timers, and by the time they wanted to upgrade or downgrade, they would be considered third-timers. Would the Ministry consider allowing them to do so, subject to the restriction that they can only sell the flat back to HDB?

Helping Low-income Families

Singapore is often credited for its successful housing policy. According to the latest statistics, the home ownership rate of resident households in Singapore is 90.8%. However, we must also consider the other 9.2% who do not own their homes. In particular, we should help the low-income families with young children secure home ownership.

I would like to ask if HDB would consider increasing the number of 2-room flats that it is building. These will be more affordable for the low-income families. Those who are currently living in public rental flats would prefer to own their own flats eventually.

Families with low incomes struggle to secure mortgages. It is especially difficult for second-timer families that are not eligible for the more generous first-timer grants and concessionary loans under HDB. These families should be given a second chance to secure a home. Not only would home ownership motivate them to stay in their jobs and work hard, it would also provide a stable environment for their children.

3.30 pm

Hence, I strongly support the new Fresh Start Housing Scheme which would provide families with children in rental housing a second chance to own a home. Of course, measures should be put in place to prevent people from profiteering off this scheme. For instance, the minimum occupation period for families under this scheme could be longer.

Furthermore, the Government should look into the reasons these families sold their first flats in the first place. For instance, if the family had sold their first flat to pay off the gambling debts of a problem gambler within the family, then this problem gambler should be identified and referred to specialists for help so that history would not repeat itself.

The Chairman: Miss Cheryl Chan, you have two cuts. Please take them together.

Housing Affordability

Miss Cheryl Chan Wei Ling (Fengshan): Mdm Chair, housing affordability is a frequently raised topic. While affordability is a function of supply and demand, but for some families, this is not merely about the price of a flat.

In the Fresh Start Housing Scheme, the Ministry's focus is on young families who are currently living in public rental flats and aspire to become home owners as a second-time buyer. For some, this is a welcome move as it will enable them and their families to start afresh. However, there are others who, though desire to have a place of their own, may have other considerations that deter them from making the purchase. Some of the considerations include flat locations, whether they can purchase their existing rental flats, upfront cash payment, shorter lease period and so on.

Some families have school-going children or preschoolers already enrolled in nearby childcare centres. If they have to move to flats located far from their current rental place, the availability of suitable schools and childcare to transfer their children into will be a key priority for them, without which, they may not be able to continue working and have care support for their children. As such, some may prefer to purchase their existing 2-room rental flat. If there are more such requests, would the Ministry consider? And how will the proportion of rental versus sale flats in such blocks or areas be managed in the long run?

A number of these eligible families may have difficulties having sufficient cash for the downpayment of the flat. Does the scheme allow them to make the downpayment using CPF only, and can the maximum mortgage loan period for the flat be equivalent to the full lease period?

Given that flats of this nature may have a shorter lease period, the possibility of resale for such flats after the minimum occupation period (MOP), assuming MOP is longer than five years, unlike in a BTO or the regular direct sale flats, will become less attractive. This will actually discourage some families to take up the scheme as they would be concerned that their investment in such flats will not ensure they can afford a home during their retirement.

I suggest that the Ministry consider further what more can be done to address the aforementioned points.

In addition, I propose that this scheme be also made available to young married couples who are in the process of family planning or soon to expect their first child. The grants made available could be reduced to match the income level, so as to maintain a fair treatment in financial assistance rendered. This may be helpful for those young families who wish to live closer to their parents and want to have a flat sooner than BTO flats or have been repeatedly unsuccessful in the sale of balance flats exercise. The results would be a win-win solution where they have better extended support from their parents and are also able to start a family earlier at a lower cost.

Creating Sustainable and Connected City

What is the definition of a sustainable and connected town in a developed city? The answer can vary widely depending on who we ask and people's expectations. For a developed city, continuous planning, creation and renewal efforts need to be in place for new towns and mature towns. Let me share some key objectives I think it needs to fulfil.

First, the planning horizon has to take a longer-term perspective for better integration of the old and new towns, to prevent fragmented developments as we move from one town to another.

Second, renewal of old towns must be sustainable. Thus, designs must be practical for maintenance and yet aesthetically lasting.

Third, basic amenities and infrastructures to support new developments have to be built in tandem, rather than as add-ons or an afterthought.

Lastly, connectivity between and within townships has a broader implication beyond just transportation.

Planning of new towns, in some aspects, is easier than in mature towns as requirements can be designed in to meet the needs. For mature towns, direct or simple modifications may not necessarily be possible at times to achieve the same outcome as in a new town. In such instances, master planning for purposes of land use and land sale should have systems in place for early notification and enable integration or adaption of feedback from local communities. Co-development would increase acceptance from the local communities and allow better collaboration.

In fitting amenities for public usage, sometimes, it is easy to forget the pragmatic need for maintenance and ease of upgrading. So, from material selection and design to ergonomics, it is important to fully consider all aspects before the build. This will help to ensure practicality, functionality and better cost management of common amenities in our neighbourhoods. As estates begin to mature and are more built-up with time, it is inconvenient to bear with the modifications that are required to cope with the capacity, but this is understandably acceptable as it is necessary.

However, moving forward, I hope that the need for integrated planning, design and executing solutions ahead to manage potential practical challenges of a developed living community is an area that the inter-agencies can consider and improve upon.

In our efforts to improve connectivity, much of the focus has been put on connecting and moving people through transportation. We emphasise on the availability of hardware and timeliness of putting them in place, but very often, lacking is a fundamental thought around how users could actually be integrated into the process as infrastructures are being made available over time.

An example would be cycling as we strive to be car-lite. I think cyclists and pedestrians both have a right of way on shared pavements. Unfortunately, the lack of thoughtfulness in shared spaces have resulted in one accident too many. Instead of pleasant, shared spaces, over time, what is sighted are increasing measures and enforcements that may not actually be enforceable over time, because we cannot counter these reckless behaviours.

What I hope the Ministry could look into are: the basic awareness and education which should be the primary tasks before infrastructures are being put in place, can the Government prioritise this, and if so, step up on all these measures?

The Chairman: Mr Zainal Sapari; not here. Mr Faisal Manap, please take your two cuts together.

Mitigating Homelessness

Mr Muhamad Faisal Bin Abdul Manap (Aljunied): Thank you, Madam. Madam, one case of homelessness in Singapore is one too many for our collective comfort. Deprived of a permanent shelter and essential human needs, it has a direct negative impact on the well-being of the affected individual, as well as our society at large.

To date, I have on several occasions, raised the problem of homelessness in our midst. The Ministry of Social and Family Development (MSF), on its part, has stated in the previous reply to my Parliamentary Question that it has, on average, rendered assistance to 300 homeless cases each year.

I, like many Members in this House, have also personally attended to a number of cases and it is certainly a heartbreaking process to see our fellow Singaporeans being left without a place where they can call home. I understand that this issue of homelessness is a multifaceted and complex one, a problem that requires the assistance of several stakeholders, including the affected individual and his family.

As a Member of this House, I would like to share my observations and put forward proposals to better mitigate this issue and bring some comfort to our fellow Singaporeans.

In a previous reply by MSF to my Parliamentary Question, the House was informed that in 2014, a study on families in transitional housing was conducted and it was found that these families often experienced occurrences, such as divorce and financial difficulties. In fact, many had sold their flats and spent their monies to clear existing debts or for other purposes, prior to becoming homeless.

Madam, under existing policies, a home owner who has sold his flat, regardless of the circumstances behind the sale, is not allowed to rent a flat under the Public Rental Scheme within 13 months of the sale of their last flat. It is argued that home owners will benefit from the sales proceeds, but as many Members of this House would concur, some home owners are left without much cash proceeds after clearing their personal debts and arrears, arising from personal circumstances or legal rulings.

As such, we need to have a more strategic and systemic manner in which we can capture the most vulnerable in our midst, especially those who potentially face a higher risk of being homeless after the sale of a flat, such as the elderly and families with young children.

As such, I would like to urge the Ministry of National Development (MND) to consider a more flexible and accommodative approach to the implementation of the 13-month rule, with scope for greater deliberations and discussions with affected families. A proactive and flexible approach to the implementation of the 13-month rule would certainly be comforting to many, akin to the spirit as expressed in the Chinese proverb "sending warm coal in the midst of a harsh winter".

Elderly Subletting Facility

Madam, retirement adequacy is a major issue for many low- and middle-income Singaporean families. As the family nucleus in Singapore shrinks in size, help should be given to elderly owners to use their flats to supplement their retirement income, without requiring them to move out.

Currently, there are two options. One is the Lease Buyback Scheme (LBS), a monetisation scheme to help elderly households in 3-room or smaller flats unlock their housing equity. The other, often suggested by the Ministry, is the sub-letting of a bedroom in the existing household. There are many issues involved in the execution of the latter option. It could range from the infringement of personal space to elderly owners facing difficulties obtaining tenants without the engagement of a real estate agent.

Engaging a real estate agent could constitute an added financial burden on our elderly when, in the first place, they already do not have much for retirement to begin with. As such, I would like to propose an Elderly Subletting Facilitation (ESF) Scheme where HDB connects elderly flat owners who would like to sublet rooms with potential tenants.

This could encourage up to two-fifths of elderly owners to sublet their flats to support their retirement. Furthermore, ESF could be combined synergistically with the Public Rental Scheme so that there is no need to turn away over 10,000 applicants to the Public Rental Scheme yearly. We can and must do so much more for our elderly Singaporeans who have toiled to transform Singapore to what it is today.

Lease Buyback

Mr Chen Show Mao (Aljunied): Madam, I believe the Lease Buyback Scheme (LBS) has an important role to play in providing for the retirement adequacy of our seniors. Since last year, the Ministry has enhanced the scheme in various ways to improve the take-up rate. I welcome these efforts.

Today, I wish to reiterate an earlier call for LBS to be enhanced to give the children of the deceased the option to buy back the portion of the lease that has been sold, provided, of course, that they qualify to own an HDB flat. And significantly, to allow them to buy this back at the price of the unit, valued at the time the LBS was executed by their parents.

I believe this will help address the concern on the part of elderly parents that their children will not be able to inherit the flat from them and hence, would not enjoy that financial benefit to help them cope with the higher property prices in the future.

These seniors worry that property in the future may be unaffordable to their children, especially those who do not currently own flats. They wish to pass on to their children, as much as possible, the value that has accrued to their flats over the years, less, of course, the amount of financial support that the seniors expect to receive from the lease buy out.

This could well result in their children acquiring their property at below market rates in the future, but this is no different from parents passing on their property to their children – an accepted principle.

All that changes here is that those seniors who are in need will get another option to monetise their flats now, while their children may be unable or even unwilling to provide for them in full. But still, as parents, they wish to offer better protection to their children from future property price inflation, a concern that may now be holding them back from taking up the LBS.

Helping Low-income and Vulnerable

Er Dr Lee Bee Wah (Nee Soon): Madam, all of us want to have a roof over our heads. I am sure our Government remains committed to aiding low-income and vulnerable households to achieve this.

Some families cannot afford to own their flat due to some difficulties. So, they have to take a public rental flat. I would like to ask for faster allocation of rental flats for those with young children or aged parents. Some families may have previously owned a flat, but due to some difficulties, they sold it and ended up in public rental housing.

3.45 pm

I think for those who pick themselves up, work hard and are determined to give security to themselves and their family, the Fresh Start Housing Scheme, which provides another housing grant, will certainly make their dream of owning their home a reality.

I sympathise a lot with divorcees with children. Having to go through divorce is already very painful. What more, if they have to shift out of their matrimonial home? Without a roof over their head, they will have difficulty deciding which school to send their children to. Single parents are particularly stressed in such situations because they are often the sole breadwinner and caregiver of their children.

Can special priority be given to those divorcees with children or those in the process of going through a divorce to get a flat? Administrative red tape only contributes further to their predicament. Are we able to expedite the approval process?

Last but not least, it is those who applied for new BTO flats under the singles scheme. I have heard quite a lot of feedback from my residents. They told me that they had applied many times. However, every application ended up in disappointment.

So, can the Ministry build more 2-room flats for singles so that they can get their flats faster? What is the current building plan for this category? Mdm Chair, in Chinese, please.

(In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] Ten years ago when I first came to Nee Soon South, residents would always ask me when I was walking around in the constituency, "MP, when are you going to help renovate my lift?" Now, 10 years later, as I walk around in the constituency, residents will always say to me: "Aiyo, I am getting old. My house is run-down and the toilet is falling apart. When are you going to help me renovate my toilet?"

What they are referring to is the Home Improvement Programme (HIP). Every day, my residents hope that HIP can be accelerated to benefit them as well. Hence, I hope that the authorities can do more and do faster.

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

Housing for Low-income Families

Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang (Nee Soon): Madam, keeping our HDB flats affordable is important to maintain the cost of living for Singaporeans. While home ownership rates have been traditionally high compared to other countries, there are still some Singaporeans who are unable to afford flats and count on HDB to provide rental housing.

Most Singaporeans who need this rental housing have no other immediate alternatives and, as such, need the housing urgently. Some may be able to rent rooms in the open market in the short term but, with high rental rates, these further cripple their already dire financial situation.

What are the Ministry's plans to ramp up the supply of HDB rental flats and therefore reduce the waiting time for low-income families who are in urgent need of these flats? Also, with the launch of the Fresh Start Housing Scheme, how many families are expected to benefit from this scheme and be able to own their own flats finally?

Moving Singapore towards a Car-lite City

Next, Madam, as a small country with limited land, the Government is rightly continuing our expansion of affordable and reliable public transportation. For example, by 2030, Singapore's Mass Rapid Transit (MRT) network will increase from 178 kilometres to 360 kilometres.

However, beyond public transportation, I hope we can also focus on expanding our cycling track network in our efforts of becoming a car-lite city.

In addition, how can we better support the use of bicycles for transportation between homes and MRT stations or bus interchanges, and between MRT stations or bus interchanges to workplaces? Will the Ministry consider the setting up of more bicycle rental stations near homes, MRT stations or bus interchanges and at various workplaces?

The Chairman: Mr Saktiandi Supaat, please take your two cuts together.

Helping Vulnerable Households

Mr Saktiandi Supaat (Bishan-Toa Payoh): Thank you, Madam. Low-income, vulnerable households and young families waiting for their BTO flats require more help in securing temporary housing. There should be greater empathy for single parents, and second- and third-time HDB loan applicants who may be compelled by circumstances to move, such as having to downsize their homes for financial reasons.

Whether it is to start afresh or to start a new family, stability and insecurity are important influencing factors. That usually means being able to settle down in a place to call their own. Can the Minister share with the House if there are plans to ramp up the supply of interim rental flats and reduce waiting times?

The Fresh Start Housing Scheme is a thoughtful scheme that gives low-income households hope to progress into home ownership. Unemployment is a common problem in vulnerable households and probably one of the main reasons a family would have to rely on this scheme. Some single parents are in transition, for example, and I have residents who are newly divorced homemakers who would require some time to get their children settled in and then find a job, which would be another hurdle.

May I ask the Minister how stringent are the conditions and whether suitable applicants could move into the flat and be given a window or buffer time to meet the requirements? Will some priority assistance be provided to help genuine applicants seek employment?

Developing a Connected and Car-lite City

In our pursuit of a car-lite city, travel efficiency and connectivity must also be improved so that citizens do not find the need to rely on their own transport to get around. New towns must be designed with better connectivity, while mature estates should have their infrastructure enhanced.

The Masterplan for HealthCity Novena is highly inspiring in this respect, for it will physically link Tan Tock Seng Hospital, the medical school and all public and volunteer healthcare facilities. This mirrors my expectations of a well-connected estate, which not only facilitates greater ease of travel and convenient access of amenities, but also brings neighbours physically closer together.

It would be ideal if agencies could work together and come up with a design master plan that fully integrates the residential areas with amenities and public transport through a network of linkways. Does the Ministry have such collaborative projects with other agencies in the pipeline?

Developing a Sustainable Car-lite City

Mr Darryl David (Ang Mo Kio): Madam, the Urban Redevelopment Authority (URA) is committed towards developing Singapore as a car-lite city and making cycling a more attractive transportation option, as my two Parliamentary colleagues Mr Louis Ng and Mr Saktiandi Supaat have already mentioned.

Mr Louis Ng talks about the need for more bike rental options, possibly in town and residential areas as well. But I think more needs to be done to support the overall cycling infrastructure, as dedicated cycling routes that have been designed with cyclists in mind should be considered to better connect our towns to the city.

Mr Saktiandi Supaat talks about the design of HDB towns, and I agree that URA should work with HDB and other agencies to build a car-free, pro-cycling and also pro-pedestrian network. The ideal scenario for such new towns would be entire vehicle-free zones where residents can walk, cycle and scoot as they go about their activities.

While mature towns would provide a different challenge, I would like to ask the Ministry if they could share what its plans are for enhancing mature towns to ensure better car-lite connectivity.

Electric Vehicle Charge Points

Mr Ong Teng Koon (Marsiling-Yew Tee): Mdm Chair, interest in electric vehicles (EVs) has been growing, with coverage of the case of the imported Tesla and the launch of pre-orders for the Tesla 3 gaining widespread attention.

In many ways, Singapore is an ideal market for EVs, with low driving distances and high petrol taxes. By some estimates, it is already economical to own an EV, relative to more traditional internal combustion engine vehicles, and, with battery costs falling, this will increase in the future.

Singapore is uniquely positioned to avoid the biggest obstacle to kick-starting EV adoption, which is the need to build a dense public charging network, as home charging would be sufficient for the majority of users.

However, more than 90% of Singaporeans live in high-rise homes and hence, currently do not have the right to install the required charge points in their common carparks, be they HDB or condominiums. Hence, they could not get an EV even if they wanted to.

On this point, I would like to ask the Minister what role EVs play in the Ministry's plans for a more sustainable living environment and whether the Ministry plans to facilitate access to EV charge points in existing HDB estates, as well as condominiums.

Linkways for Orchard Road Malls

Mr Ang Wei Neng (Jurong): Mdm Chair, on a rare occasion when I accompanied my wife to shop at the Orchard Road shopping malls last month, it was raining cats and dogs. Many shoppers, local and international, had to brave the rain to walk from Paragon to 313 Orchard to catch the MRT train. This is not quite acceptable if we want to make Orchard Road a world-class premier shopping belt. Neither does it gel well with the Ministry of Transport's (MOT) big push for the walk-and-ride scheme.

In response to my Parliamentary Question last month, the Minister for National Development replied that URA only requires building owners to build linkways on new developments or when existing developments undergo major upgrading. As there were only a few developments or redevelopments along Orchard Road in the past 10 years, the progress of building underground linkways has been quite slow.

I hope that MND can re-look the existing policy and take the lead in building overhead and underground pedestrian linkways along Orchard Road, so that shoppers can shop in comfort and be shielded from the elements along the stretch of Orchard Road from Ion Orchard right up to Plaza Singapura.

Better Use of Car Parks

Mr Lim Biow Chuan (Mountbatten): Mdm Chair, during my house visits to residents living in the landed properties, I receive many complaints about vehicles that do not belong to the residents but are parked along the road just outside their homes. The residents tell me that these vehicles include large pickups, lorries and vans belonging to non-residents. The drivers of these vehicles would park along the road because parking is free. In the morning, the drivers would collect their vehicles and then go about their business.

The parking of such vehicles has caused disamenities to the residents as they are unable to find places for their own cars at night. Although the vehicles are not classified as heavy vehicles which require a heavy vehicle parking certificate, many of these vehicles are large commercial vehicles. Often, these vehicles are parked in an indiscriminate manner, obstructing other road users. Residents are also concerned that there are total strangers parking just outside their homes.

In contrast, I do notice that there are places like URA car parks and sports stadiums which are heavily used during the day or during sporting events but are relatively less occupied in the late evenings or at night, depending on where these car parks are located.

We can find a win-win solution for the residents if we can persuade such vehicle owners that they can park their commercial vehicles at an URA car park or at a sports stadium, either free or with minimal charge.

May I appeal to the Minister to study which car park lots are underutilised in the late evenings or at night which can be converted to free parking. The key objective is to try to ease the woes of residents who have total strangers parking their vehicles, including large commercial vehicles, just outside their own homes. We need to think out of the box to better utilise scarce resources like parking lots which are not well used during off-peak hours.

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

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

Mdm Speaker: I suspend the Sitting and will take the Chair again at 4.20 pm.

Sitting accordingly suspended

at 4.00 pm until 4.20 pm.

Sitting resumed at 4.20 pm

[Mdm Speaker in the Chair]

Debate in Committee of Supply resumed.

[Mdm Speaker in the Chair]

Head T (cont) ─

The Minister for National Development (Mr Lawrence Wong): Mdm Chair, I thank Members for their many comments and suggestions on MND issues.

When I came to MND last year, many people told me I was going to a hot seat and wished me good luck. Indeed, housing has always been a hot-button issue, and as I was preparing for this Committee of Supply (COS) debate, which is my first COS for MND, I went back to the Hansard to look at the records of previous years' debates. So, I did some extra homework. Indeed, from the start of our housing programme, going back to the 1960s, there have been lively debates on the MND Budget and on housing issues. It is no different this year, if you look at the number of cuts we received.

But in fact, sentiments on housing have improved considerably after 2011. We ramped up the BTO supply and cleared the first-timer backlog. We made new flats more affordable, and we have managed a soft landing in the property market and HDB resale prices.

Here, I would like to acknowledge the work of the MND team, especially the HDB officials who have worked very hard to ramp up our building programme over the past few years. And I also want to recognise all who have partnered us in this effort – our consultants, contractors, construction workers, as well as the many members of public who participated in our focus groups to give us feedback and help shape our policies.

I think this demonstrates the importance of partnerships in the work we do. It applies not just to public housing and HDB, but also to the rest of our MND work, including our other Statutory Boards – the Agri-Food and Veterinary Authority (AVA), Building and Construction Authority (BCA), Council of Estate Agencies (CEA), National Parks Board (NParks) and URA.

There is a common thread across all that we do in MND, about building a better home in partnership with Singaporeans and for all Singaporeans. As Mr Alex Yam said, it ultimately is about building communities, and it is our people who shape our sense of community and our sense of home. That is why over the past years, we have stepped up our engagement with Singaporeans to "inform early, consult early, discuss widely", as suggested by Mr Yam. We did this with "Our Singapore Conversation" in 2013, continued with engagements on public housing over the past two years. We started our SGFuture dialogues this year to shape our next phase of development.

Today, I will share some of the key priorities we have identified for MND based on these engagements. First, we will strengthen our home ownership programme to meet the needs of Singaporeans, especially the more vulnerable groups. Second, we will transform our urban landscape to invest in new infrastructure for our future economy and to build a future city that we can be proud of. Third, we will create a quality living environment for all to enjoy and make Singapore a more car-lite and people-friendly city. Let me elaborate on each of these in turn.

Firstly, in terms of strengthening our home ownership programme. This has always been the hallmark of our public housing system and we must and will continue to strengthen this key pillar of our social compact. Our focus is to help young couples own their first flat. Our pledge to young Singaporean couples is that we will always keep new BTO prices stable and affordable for them. That is why we enhanced our housing grants last year, and since then, many more homebuyers have benefited. One such couple is Mr See Cheng Long and his fiancée Miss Felicia Poh. They booked a 3-room flat in Bukit Batok in the BTO exercise last November. They were eligible for $60,000 in housing grants. So, they were able to buy the flat for less than $140,000.

This meant that the mortgage loan was completely paid for or will be completely paid for using their CPF. There is no need for any cash outlay and so they end up having more savings. I hope this gives them confidence to plan for the next step – to get married and hopefully start a family soon.

Our housing subsidies are rightly focused on the lower and middle-income households, but we have not neglected those in the higher income groups as well. Last year, we increased the income ceiling to enable more households at the higher end to buy a subsidised flat.

Mr Gan Thiam Poh suggested that we do away with the income ceiling altogether. I appreciate his intent to allow all Singaporeans to buy an HDB flat. That is something we would like to do as well. We want to move in this direction and that is why the income ceiling has been progressively moved up over time. But we have to calibrate these moves. Firstly, there are fiscal constraints to manage and, secondly, having just made a move last year, we will need time for the increased new demand to flow through the system without adversely affecting the interest of the rest who are already in the queue.

At the same time, I want to assure Mr Gan that we will continue to take steps to ensure that Executive Condominiums (ECs) remain affordable. We already do so through various measures and that is why ECs today, are more affordable than comparable private properties. Indeed, if you look back over the past few quarters, EC prices have remained relatively stable. We will continue to monitor and take necessary action if needed.

Besides housing grants, we have also shortened the queues considerably for first-timers. One measure of this is the application rate of first-timer families for new BTO flats in non-mature estates. It is an indicator which we monitor very carefully. This has remained stable at about 1.6 last year.

In practice, it means that most will be able to select their new BTO flat within their first or second application, and definitely on their third try. I understand Members have shared concerns about newlywed couples who have repeatedly applied for an HDB flat without success. I have heard similar experiences during my Meet-the-People Sessions (MPS). In fact, one couple told me at MPS that they had applied more than five times! So, I asked for their details. I went back to HDB and asked for a check. I found out that they were, in fact, interested in flats near the city centre and so all their applications were for flats in mature estates around the city centre, for example, in Ang Mo Kio and Toa Payoh.

I have already announced that HDB will offer more flats in mature estates this year. For example, we have new projects in Bidadari and Tampines North. But there is a physical limit to how much more we can build in these already developed areas.

I would encourage first-timer couples to consider applying for flats in non-mature estates. As I have mentioned earlier, if you look at the application rate, there is a very high chance of them getting it within their first and second try, and definitely within their third try. And the flats, in these estates are also more affordable. While waiting for the flats to be completed, they can consider renting a flat under the Parenthood Provisional Housing Scheme (PPHS).

I recognise that some want a flat more urgently or would prefer specific locations for good and practical reasons, for example, to live near their parents. In the current market, they can consider buying a resale flat. Resale prices have moderated and are more affordable now. For example, we can compare HDB resale prices against household income.

At one time, prices were rising faster than income. But this is no longer the case. Between the last property market troughs in 2009 and 2015, HDB resale prices increased by 35% but median household income increased by a higher 44%. So, housing affordability has improved and there are many attractive options available in the resale market.

In addition, we introduced the Proximity Housing Grant (PHG) which helps families who wish to live near or with their parents or married child to buy a resale flat. This means that a young couple can enjoy up to $90,000 in housing grants to buy their first home from the resale market – $30,000 in the CPF Housing Grant, up to $40,000 in Additional CPF Housing Grant, and $20,000 in the Proximity Housing Grant.

Miss Cheryl Chan asked if we can do more to help young married couples to get their flats early and live nearer to parents. I share her desire to do so and we will continue to study ways to help them further.

We have also managed to reduce the queue for second-timer families and they, too, can benefit from the Proximity Grant. Here, I would like to share the experience of one couple, Mdm Nur Liza binte Roslan and Mr Yulandi bin Abu Bakar. They bought their first flat which was a 4-room flat at Taman Jurong from HDB. As their family grew, Mdm Nur Liza wanted to move out and move closer to her parents who are living in Bukit Batok so that they can help look after the children. They looked at several housing options and, eventually, they managed to find a 4-room resale flat in Bukit Batok on the same floor, just down the corridor from her parents' place. So, with the Proximity Grant, they were able to buy the resale flat for about $324,000. This is, in fact, comparable to what they would have had to pay for a new 4-room flat from HDB as second-timers. In fact, they are better off by going to the resale market. The amount they pay is about the same as a BTO after the grant. They get a flat closer to their parents and get to move in earlier as well.

So, for both first timers and second timers, the softening of the property market and the introduction of the new Proximity Grant and enhancements of all the various grant that we have had mean that there are many more attractive options to consider for purchasing a home.

4.30 pm

Likewise, there are also more housing options for singles. In 2013, we made a significant policy shift to allow first-timer singles to buy a new 2-room flat from HDB. Er Dr Lee Bee Wah asked about this and I would like to assure her that we have launched more 2-room flats to meet this new demand from singles. We also increased the quota for singles from 30% to 50% last year. As a result, the BTO application rate among singles has been steadily improving. It started out very high, over 30 when we made the move in 2013. It came down to 8.5 last year, and it was 7.7 in the most recent BTO exercise.

I intend to bring down this application rate further. It will take time, but we will make it happen. The move to open new flats to singles is a significant one and has met with a strong demand surge. We will need some time to clear the bulk of this demand, but we will bring down the application rate.

In considering their home options, home buyers will have to do their homework, and they should evaluate carefully the different factors before making the purchase. Mr Chong Kee Hiong mentioned one concern about the lease of existing flats. He is right that, like all leasehold properties, the value of an HDB flat will decline as leases run down. Flat buyers and home buyers have to take this into account in their financial planning. But for now, a large majority of flats have more than 60 years of lease remaining. They continue to be highly liveable and the neighbourhoods will benefit from upgrading from time to time. There is still value in our resale flats. We will continue to find ways to help our elderly Singaporeans monetise the value of their flats in an orderly fashion and we will also publicise the schemes for doing so, as Members like Mr Alex Yam, Mr Faisal Manap and Mr Chen Show Mao have highlighted. Minister of State Koh Poh Koon will elaborate on this later in his speech.

At the same time, whether buying a new BTO flat or a resale flat, there is a need to be financially prudent. We have homes for every budget – 3-room flat can vary from $180,000 for a BTO in Bukit Batok to $368,000 for a resale flat in Queenstown. My message to home buyers is this: we will do whatever we can to support you in your home ownership goals. But please choose a home that meets your needs and is within your means. I understand the desire to buy a large flat or one with a central location, but this should not come at the expense of a huge debt burden overwhelming the entire family.

Having cleared the backlog for first timers and made progress for singles and second timers, we are now getting more requests for new flats to accommodate other buyer groups. For example, Mr Gan Thiam Poh suggested giving Singaporeans the chance to buy a third BTO flat. I understand why people would like to buy a new flat from HDB. That is why we are allowing them to do so twice. We also have short-lease 2-room flexi flats for seniors to buy a third flat from HDB. But I do not think we can go beyond that.

To allow a "third bite of the housing cherry" for all is not sustainable. And we have to be realistic. Our land is limited; our financial resources are finite. We must, therefore, prioritise among various home buyers. It is easy to give in to the demands and accommodate all the immediate requests and build as much as we can today and not think about tomorrow. But this would not be a responsible thing to do. We must consider the impact of our actions today on the next generation. We must always be mindful of the implications of over-building and consider how a glut of flats will have a negative impact on the value of homes for all Singaporeans

So, we need to strike that balance. And that balance includes looking at resale and new flats. This year, we are building 18,000 new flats. This is more than the previous year, and we have done so to accommodate the increased demand from recent policy changes. But we cannot continue at this rate perpetually. We intend to gradually taper down our building programme to achieve a more sustainable level over the medium term.

Likewise, we are monitoring the property market very closely. Several Members spoke about this and called for a lifting of the cooling measures. Mr Christopher de Souza mentioned this earlier in the Budget debate. Mr Alex Yam and Mr Chong Kee Hiong suggested this earlier as well.

Madam, our cooling measures have been effective in stabilising the property market. But it is too early to declare victory and unwind the measures. Any relaxation of the measures now may risk a premature market rebound and I am sure that is an outcome we all want to avoid. Nevertheless, we recognise that the property market is affected by the broader economy and global events. We are also very mindful that the property market, in turn, can have a broader impact on other sectors of the economy. We are keeping a close watch and will be prepared to respond where needed.

While we have made progress in housing, we know that there are some families who may not be able to afford a home. Many Members spoke about this, including Mr Muhamad Faisal Abdul Manap and Er Dr Lee Bee Wah, and they asked about how we can help these lower-income and vulnerable families.

We will exercise flexibility and compassion and do all we can to help the families in need. For those in need of housing, we have ramped up our rental flat supply to ensure that they have a roof over their heads. We will continue to build more rental flats to accommodate this demand. Minister of State Koh Poh Koon will say more about this later.

Besides providing rental flats, we want to do more to help second timers in public rental buy a home. For many of them, second-timer families in the rental flats, they are no longer eligible for housing grants; they are probably unable to get a bank loan and so they will face greater difficulties in moving out of their rental situation to have a home of their own. That is why we are introducing the Fresh Start Housing Scheme. It is aimed at parents with school-going children, so that their children can grow up in a stable home environment.

Let me share the key features of the scheme. First, the families who qualify will be able to buy a new 2-room flexi flat. The flat will come with shorter leases, ranging from 45 to 65 years, to keep the price affordable. It will also come with a longer MOP, I think Mr Gan Thiam Poh also suggested this just now. The longer MOP will be 20 years to ensure a stable home for the children.

Second, we will give them another HDB concessionary loan, regardless of the number of HDB loans they have taken before. They may have taken two loans before from HDB, but we will give these families another HDB concessionary loan. They can use their CPF for the downpayment and also for the mortgage payments.

Third, we will help them with a Fresh Start Housing Grant of up to $35,000. The amount of grant will be prorated according to the lease of the flat they buy. Together, I believe these measures provide significant help for second-timer families in rental flats to own their own home again.

The scheme is not just about buying a new flat, but also about integrating financial assistance with personal responsibility and social support. To qualify for the scheme and receive the full grant, families will have to show commitment to remain in stable employment, manage their finances well and ensure their children are attending school regularly. These are conditions that we have worked out through our consultations, and they were also highlighted by several Members, including Mr Alex Yam, earlier. In line with the efforts they make, the grant will correspondingly be disbursed in tranches over time: $20,000 will be given out when they collect their keys, and the remainder will be disbursed annually over the next five years.

Mr Saktiandi Supaat expressed some concerns about the conditions attached to the grants. I am very mindful that these conditions should not be onerous. But at the same time, we are making a major move for these families by giving them another grant. So, it is fair that they must be able to show a certain level of commitment towards homeownership. And I want to assure Members that our approach is one where we will handhold the families closely and walk this journey with them.

We will be working with MSF on this. So, MSF officers will check in with the families regularly to ensure that they are doing well and they will link them up with partners for social support where needed. If along the way, some families encounter difficulties, the social agencies will be there to help them. We will consider their individual circumstances and the effort that they are making to meet the conditions. In doing so, we will not rely on just a single matrix or single criterion because we will exercise judgement and discretion and will look at it case by case. We hope this approach will keep the families motivated, so that they can make the most of this opportunity to get a fresh start and own their own homes again.

How will the Fresh Start Scheme help a rental family? Mdm Chair, if I may have your permission to show a worked example for illustration?

The Chairman: Yes, please. [Slides were shown to hon Members.]

Mr Lawrence Wong: On the slide are Mr and Mrs Tan. They have a son and are now staying in a rental flat paying rental of $240 a month. With Fresh Start, they will be able to buy a new 2-room flat with a 60-year lease. They will have a monthly instalment of about $300. It is slightly more than their monthly rental. But the key is this: they can now pay for this largely through their CPF. If you look at the illustration, the bulk of it will now be paid through CPF and their cash outlay is $10 a month. Ultimately, this will be their flat. It is not a rental flat. They will own this place. It is a comparable amount that they have to pay overall, but a large part of it is paid through CPF now and they would be able to own their own flat eventually.

We plan to implement the scheme by the end of this year. If you look at the profile of those living in rental flats today – those who are second timers, with school-going children, based on the demographic profile that we are aiming for and who do not have excessive rental arrears with HDB presently – the estimate is that this group is about 1,000.

Not all of them may choose to take up the scheme. It will depend on their individual finances and circumstances. The numbers may not be very big, but I believe the scheme can and will have a meaningful impact on the families that we are reaching out to. That is our first priority on home ownership and the different ways in which we are strengthening home ownership.

Our next priority is to transform our urban landscape and build our city for the future. Over the last 50 years, we have succeeded in making Singapore a modern global city. This did not happen by chance. We had bold and innovative plans for urban renewal. We did it through systematic implementation over many terms of Government.

We must consider how we want to build our future city over the next 50 years. In some ways, it will be a more difficult journey because we are starting from a higher base with more biting resource constraints. The competition is also becoming more intense. We are in a new era of city competition. There are more than 400 cities in the world, each with at least a million people. Among them are many emerging world cities, all vying for talent and investments. There is intense competition. We are starting from a higher base, but we cannot afford to stand still. We should take comfort that we are moving from a position of strength. Despite our limitation of size, we are far from saturation. There are still many possibilities for urban development and transformation.

Members will know that we are consolidating our port at Tuas, and this would free up more land for redevelopment at the Greater Southern waterfront. How much land will it free up? That parcel there is about three times the size of Marina Bay. I am not saying that we are going to build three Marina Bays there, but it is to give a context that it is three times the size of Marina Bay.

We are expanding Changi Air Hub with a new Terminal 5 and relocating Paya Lebar over at Changi. Again, this will free up 800 hectares of prime land for mixed-use development. What does that mean? Again, in comparison, that is equivalent to half a Jurong Industrial estate, one Ang Mo Kio Town and two Tampines Regional Centres. I am not saying we are going to do that. But this is the perspective of what kind of scale we have, and the mix of uses can vary because we have to plan and think through what plans we want to do with this land that is freed up.

Over the next 10-20 years, we will be building up several regional nodes. We have the second central business district (CBD) at Jurong Lake District which will also be the site for the high-speed rail terminus to Kuala Lumpur. We have a new Creative Cluster at Punggol, together with the new Singapore Institute of Technology (SIT) campus. We have a new Northern Growth corridor at Woodlands and Sembawang, with many opportunities to transform the waterfront for new jobs and homes.

We are also looking at new and innovative infrastructure solutions, for example, exploring autonomous vehicles, infrastructure needed for driverless cars, smart power grids and underground options for electrical substations and drainage reservoir systems. There is a lot to do, there is a lot of potential for us to move forward and we are studying all of these ideas in the Committee on the Future Economy, in particular, in the subcommittee on the Future City which I co-chair.

We are also planning ahead for our HDB towns and estates. In the early years, priority was just to get the blocks of HDB flats completed. But over the years, much more attention has been paid on planning the entire HDB town − the amenities and facilities that come with it, as well as ensuring that there is access to greenery and public spaces.

4.45 pm

Planning work is not easy, but we are trying very hard to have a range of facilities and shops in our housing estates ready when residents move in. HDB will ensure that there will always be some shops built in tandem with new flats, so that residents will always have access to some facilities, greenery and public spaces.

But development plans that are based on assumptions may not always pan out or the assumptions may not always pan out, or they may take time to be staged. It is easy to criticise our civil servants for "poor town planning", as Mr Dennis Tan said earlier in the Budget debate. But I think that is not being fair to them and the work that they do. At the end of the day, what is important is the ability to continually update our urban plans to keep pace with the needs of society. That is the approach we take in our HDB estates.

For existing towns, we are continually upgrading and rejuvenating them through various upgrading programmes. Senior Minister of State Desmond Lee will elaborate on them later. For new housing areas, we learn from our past experience, and we are developing HDB estates and towns with distinctive character. We pay attention to the history and heritage of the place, we provide for beautiful greenery, beautiful blue spaces, and neighbourhood amenities. And we can see these in all our new projects, be it in Bidadari, Punggol or Tampines North.

Soon, we will be opening up a new HDB town called Tengah. That is next to the Jurong Innovation District. Members have seen the slides and the video that Minister Heng Swee Keat showed on the Jurong Innovation District. Tengah will be just next to it. It is an area surrounded by greenery. We will plan this as a "Forest Town". It will be integrated with nature and also the nearby Jurong Innovation District. I am not going to do an extended sales pitch here in Parliament. Members can see a picture of what Tengah can be. I have seen many more plans, pictures and visualisations of what our planners are doing. I think it will be a very exciting place to live, work and play. HDB will release more details in due course.

Finally, a key priority for us is to make Singapore a more car-lite and people-friendly city. Cities are centres of economic activity. But they are, first and foremost, places where people meet, interact and connect with one another. That is even more important for us in Singapore, where we only have one city, which is our country and our home. As we transform our city, we must make this place more sustainable, more beautiful and more invigorating to the human spirit.

That is why we emphasised clean and green from the outset, and we are making progress as a City in a Garden. In our next phase, we must focus on our public spaces, streets, squares and footpaths. We must make sure that these developments, these public spaces, are well designed, they relate to the human scale and are well-connected and conducive for walking and cycling.

Several Members, including Miss Cheryl Chan, Mr Saktiandi Supaat, Mr Darryl David and Mr Louis Ng spoke about this, and I fully share their views.

I am also glad that Mr Saktiandi Supaat shared the example of the Novena Health City. I think this is one area which we have planned for a comprehensive coverage of underground pedestrian links, street-level walkways and elevated link-bridges. It is a good example of what we are striving to achieve. Indeed, we have similar plans for other areas too – in the CBD, Jurong Lake District and all our regional centres.

To further bolster these efforts, the Land Transport Authority (LTA) and URA will be introducing a new requirement for developers. This new requirement will make sure that developers incorporate the needs of pedestrians and cyclists upfront in their development plans. For example, developers will have to review the locations of the vehicular access points to minimise conflict with pedestrians and cyclists, taking into account key pedestrian and cyclist access routes and the location of bicycle parking facilities. This is especially critical for developments with high footfall like our schools, shopping malls, office buildings and business parks. Through these requirements, we will ensure that our built environment is more conducive for pedestrians and cyclists.

Besides new developments, I agree with Mr Ang Wei Neng that we need to do more for greater connectivity in existing buildings. In fact, I am not sure if Mr Ang heard this earlier, because we had a debate when Dr Tan Wu Meng moved an Adjournment Motion on this. I had shared earlier in the House that we are studying and reviewing legislation to allow us to mandate existing developments to receive new elevated and underground links. Once this is in place, we plan to get more pedestrian connections along Orchard Road and other areas as well.

What do we hope to achieve with all of these changes? How can we be a better, more attractive city for walking and cycling? Let me paint a picture of what we can see in the future. First, within every HDB estate, we will have more dedicated paths for active mobility, be it walking, jogging, cycling or the use of other personal mobility devices. This will enhance our first-mile/last-mile connectivity to MRT stations. Our newer housing areas, such as Bidadari, Punggol and Tampines North, are already designed with these paths. For existing towns, we will progressively improve the infrastructure through our upgrading programmes.

Here is one example in Bedok Town, which I will show on the slide, where a comprehensive cycling and walking network of approximately 14 km will be completed next year. This will allow better connectivity to MRT stations, major employment areas, parks, schools as well as the Neighbourhood Centres. Intra-HDB towns, new ones, we will do it upfront; existing ones, we will do so through upgrading progressively. We will have a very well-connected route of dedicated walking, cycling paths within each HDB town.

Next, we will also have active mobility routes that connect our residential towns to our city centre. This will enable people to get to their workplaces without having to drive. For a start, we are looking at towns that are within a 30-minute cycling distance to the city. So, we have identified six possible routes to the city, as shown in the map.

These cover connections from towns and estates in various regions: from the east, such as Geylang and Marine Parade; northeast, such as Hougang and Macpherson; and the west, such as Queenstown and Bukit Merah. These routes are largely already in place today. These are not new routes because they are largely in place today through our Park Connectors. If you actually travel or take a cycling ride through one of these routes, you will realise that they are not fully seamless and there are some gaps along the way. We intend to plug these gaps, so that the routes can be seamless, and they can better connect our HDB towns to the city centre.

I give an example of the Bishan to City route which runs along the Kallang River. Today, if you take that route, as a cyclist or jogger, you will have to traverse several pedestrian overhead bridges and underpasses, and the biggest obstacle is that you have to cross the Pan Island Expressway (PIE). So, it is very difficult if you want to cycle down that route to the city. You have to dismount, go up the pedestrian overhead bridge, underpass, and then you have to find some way to get round the PIE.

URA has initiated a consultancy study to look at possible solutions to bridge these gaps. So, this is just one possibility of how something can be done to bridge the gap. The picture on screen shows a bridge across Serangoon Road, a potential bridge that you can cycle through. So, if we are able to smoothen out these different kinks in the route, say, with potential links like this, then residents staying in Bishan, Bidadari, Toa Payoh would have a more direct and seamless travelling experience, whether it is through walking, cycling or any other personal mobility device, from their HDB towns to the city centre. This is an example, conceptually, of what we are looking at, how we can enhance connections from HDB towns to the city centre.

We will also look at active mobility routes within the city centre itself. And here we can have potential for wider pedestrian sidewalks and dedicated cycling and walking paths as well. These will connect to the major office developments. Some of these pathways in Marina Bay have already been implemented and we will continue to do more in other parts of the CBD.

These are some of our ideas and plans to make Singapore a more attractive city for walking, cycling and active mobility. URA will hold a major exhibition later this year. They will seek the public's views on these different active mobility routes and the types of enhancements needed to make them more useful.

The infrastructure is important, but we must certainly go beyond infrastructure planning to embrace a car-lite mindset. I think Miss Cheryl Chan spoke about this and highlighted the need for more basic awareness and education. I fully agree with her. MOT will be sharing more about this in its COS later.

We also need strategies to better manage the use of cars. One way is to facilitate more car sharing schemes. It can be through electric vehicles (EVs), as suggested by Mr Ong Teng Koon. Our agencies are studying this, as well as the charging infrastructure that may be needed to facilitate the take-up of such EVs.

Car park charges are another important lever that we can use. I know Mr Lim Biow Chuan has called for more free parking in car parks. But free parking is not really free. Free parking is a subsidy to the motorists that is paid for by non-motorists. It is not really free parking. It is a subsidy to motorists. In fact, our car park charges are generally lower than most other major cities. Perhaps, we should not be thinking about lowering car park charges or making them free, but we may even have to look at raising car park charges if we want to move in the direction of a car-lite city.

But the specific concerns raised by Mr Lim Biow Chuan are, I think, about the availability of lots which are being used up for commercial vehicles today, or it is really about how we can provide for more lots for commercial vehicles in residential areas, so that they will not have to park next to his residents' homes. We have to look at that more specifically and find other ways to address this issue.

Madam, I recognise that it will take time to bring about this mindset shift towards a car-lite Singapore. That is why we have started by pedestrianising our vehicular roads, where possible, to create car-free zones, be it on weekends or even on a permanent basis. It is our attempt to show how car-free streets can become attractive public spaces for all to enjoy.

We have held our first Car-Free Sunday. In fact, we have had two editions of it so far. We have it at the Civic District and the CBD area and there has been a tremendous response to this. We are also expanding car-free zones to streets all over Singapore. Currently, if you look at our city centre, there are 18 streets which are closed for pedestrians to use on a regular basis, such as during weekends. These are marked out in the map, in addition to our car-free zones on Sunday.

With more support from the community, we can do more in other areas as well. In fact, recently, additional roads have been closed for car-free events – Jalan Pisang, Keong Saik Road and Armenian Street. We want to do more, not just in the city but also beyond the city, so that we can have more pedestrianised and car-free zones in our HDB estates as well.

How do we decide which roads to close or which streets to activate? It is not done centrally by URA. It is really based on ground-up feedback and proposals. For example, I visited Kampong Glam recently on one of the car-free weekends, trying to revisit my childhood with the kids skipping. I think I can still keep up with the kids because if you look at the picture, I am the one who is jumping among the highest. [Laughter]

This is a completely ground-up initiative by the business owners and stakeholders in the area. It is a completely ground-up initiative by the stakeholders there, the business owners. They decided to do it and URA supported them. The feedback has been very positive. The business owners reported an increase in sales due to higher footfall and the public also enjoyed the bustling street life.

We want to support more of such ground-up initiatives, not only to activate our streets, but also our public spaces in the city and in our HDB estates. URA has an existing programme which they will enhance and will call it, "Our Favourite Place", to invite Singaporeans to collaborate and play a greater role in shaping the use of our public spaces.

Through this programme, we will support individuals or groups who have ideas and are keen to activate public spaces. We will assist them to streamline regulatory approvals from Government agencies and we will provide seed funding to get the ideas implemented on the ground. I hope that, in time, a network of like-minded volunteers and civic partners will grow through this programme. This will help us catalyse a broader movement to get Singaporeans involved in shaping our streets and public spaces. It will strengthen our sense of ownership, identity and emotional connection to home.

Mdm Chair, we are all familiar with the song "Home", and there is one line in the lyrics that says, "There is comfort in the knowledge that home's about its people, too." Indeed, everything we do in MND, and the whole-of-Government, is about the well-being of Singaporeans. People are always at the centre of our policies, be it our housing programme, our urban transformation plans or our initiatives for more vibrant public spaces.

5.00 pm

People are also a critical factor in the success of our policies. That is why we want Singaporeans to be actively involved in shaping our policies and our future city.

Madam, I began by noting how housing has always been a hot-button issue, and that is to be expected, because ours is a stakeholder citizenry with the highest home ownership rate in the world. Taking ownership of the spaces we live in is what makes a house a home. So, as we take our first step towards SG100, let us make this a journey of closer partnerships. Let us work together to build a better home with our families and a better community with our neighbours and fellow Singaporeans. Let us shape, together, our residential and urban landscape and build the best Singapore we know how for all Singaporeans. [Applause.]

The Chairman: Mr Alex Yam.

Municipal Services Office (MSO) – One Year On

Mr Alex Yam: Mdm Chair, rarely has one fishball stick meant so much on Government policies. Municipal issues may seem mundane, almost ordinary but the extra-ordinary efforts are taken to solve the problems of our citizens.

What must really make the work of the Municipal Services Office (MSO) difficult in the last one year must be ploughing through, what I call, the three big mountains – a mountain of feedback to sort, a gunung of red tape to unravel and one bukit full of agencies to coordinate. While the Minister-in-charge has lauded partner agencies for the progress made by MSO, are there still challenges yet to be resolved? Though the response time has come down from eight to six and a half days, would MSO be setting a target for even better response time for the next one year?

The OneService mobile app has been downloaded currently by close to 40,000 users, which is low. Does the MSO project more for the coming year and what other feedback mechanisms are in place, especially for the elderly? I am also sure I am not the only one to notice the app has a minor bug that seems to make the name the Infocomm Development Authority (IDA) officer who worked on the app appear every time we load it. I think thanks are due to this particular staff and the team for their good first effort at an all-encompassing app.

Would MSO also update on the integration of the systems with Town Councils? Has the pilot progressed and what are the major hurdles, if any? I would like to take the opportunity to thank all the MSO staff for all the hard work over the last one year.

MSO – Delivery of Better Service

Mr Chong Kee Hiong: Mdm Chair, it has been over a year since the Municipal Services Office (MSO) was set up. Would the Ministry share what have been the improvements in terms of the coordination among its partner agencies? What have been the challenges encountered? One of the key initiatives by MSO was the OneService app. What has been the usage rate of OneService app and how much has it facilitated the timely response to the problems brought to the attention of the agencies? What proportion of the partner agencies' feedback comes from OneService app?

I understand that MSO has been making enhancements to the OneService app, including adding new reporting categories. Would the Minister share with us an overview of the enhanced features and what are the plans for the OneService app going forward? What other agencies will be added as partners?

Last year, the focus had been on making feedback easier for residents and working with agencies to address feedback more effectively. Would MSO take on a further role to review partner agencies' actions on the feedback? Would MSO provide feedback to partner agencies to improve their processes and workflow so as to improve service delivery to the public? With growing manpower and resource constraints, how does MSO and its partner agencies leverage technology to boost the productivity of municipal service delivery?

Improving the OneService App

Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang: Madam, one of the key initiatives started by MSO last year was the OneService app. In the past, members of the public might not know which agency to call and get bounced around by the different agencies before action is taken. The app was designed to make it more convenient for the public to report municipal issues in Singapore.

In the follow-up to the OneService app, MSO mentioned that they will continue to fine tune and improve on the functionalities and performance of the app, taking into account public feedback and suggestions for improvements. MSO also plans to invite more agencies to participate in the app and include additional features in future versions.

Can MSO now provide updates on how it will improve the app further, whether more agencies will be participating in it and what are any further plans for the OneService app going forward?

MSO – Working Together to Deliver Better

Mr Ong Teng Koon: Mdm Chair, the Municipal Services Office (MSO) was one of the landmark announcements of the 2014 National Day Rally Speech. Its objective was to help provide a one-stop shop for municipal issues, such as estate cleanliness and maintenance. That way, residents would not need to navigate the various Government agencies in charge of different operations and services.

It has now been slightly more than a year since the MSO was set up. I would like to request an update regarding the progress that has been made, specifically whether there are concrete indicators that the overall service experience for residents has indeed been advanced.

Looking back at this first year, a key initiative of the MSO was the launching of the OneService app. With the widespread use of mobile communication devices in Singapore, such an app should in principle help the MSO extend outreach more effectively. I would like to ask for an update on the following: how many times has this app been downloaded? And how many requests for assistance have been received via this app? Looking ahead, what plans does the MSO have in terms of enhancements to the OneService app?

Moving beyond the issue of gathering feedback more effectively, the real test of the MSO's effectiveness will be in its ability to respond to and resolve municipal issues in a timely fashion, in collaboration with existing agencies, such as local Town Councils. This has started in a modest way, with a pilot involving two Town Councils. I would like to ask for an update regarding how successful this pilot has been, as well as what MSO's concrete plans are for scaling up and rolling out such working arrangements to all Town Councils in Singapore.

Last but not least, given the existing manpower constraints in Singapore, what plans does the MSO have to seek to leverage technology to raise the productivity of municipal service delivery?

The Chairman: Mr Baey Yam Keng, please take your two cuts together.

MSO – Better Coordination among Agencies

Mr Baey Yam Keng (Tampines): Mdm Chair, last year, MSO announced that NParks will take over all greenery maintenance works, like grass-cutting, that were previously done by different agencies such as the Singapore Land Authority (SLA), Public Utilities Board (PUB) and the Housing and Development Board (HDB). I would like to ask the Minister how that is panning out and the challenges faced.

I note that the new arrangement does not include grassland under the Town Councils' responsibility. However, there are areas where a plot of Town Council land and another plot under NParks are side by side, for example a strip of land between Tampines Block 498 cluster and the Tampines Expressway, which does not have a clear physical boundary. I would like to suggest that MSO assign just one agency, so in this case, either NParks or Tampines Town Council, to handle the grass-cutting for better maintenance. Currently, when both agencies have different schedules, there is no one time when the grass of the entire strip is nicely cut.

Apart from public greenery maintenance, there are still other municipal services today that are provided by several different agencies. Having similar issues handled by various agencies could slow down response time to feedback, especially when it is not clear which agency should be the one to follow up or if no agency steps up to take up the lead.

One area that MSO could look into is the treatment of pest problems. Pests as defined by the National Environment Agency (NEA) include rodents, mosquitoes and cockroaches while general wildlife handled by AVA includes crows and pigeons which can also become pests. Bees or birds on roadside trees are referred to NParks while those on trees on state land are handled by HDB, and Town Councils will handle insect or bird complaints on trees in common properties of HDB.

Unlike grass and trees, rodents move, insects and birds fly. Residents can complain to the Town Council about a pest problem, but the nest or source could be across the boundary in a non-Town Council area.

In a compact environment where land boundaries of various agencies are in close proximity, having multiple agencies work together to manage a pest problem is not efficient and often not effective.

The current approach of handling such issues by referral to different agencies is based on land boundary. I would like to ask MSO to identify such similar functions that are handled by various agencies and have them integrated to avoid duplication of services.

MSO – Pilot with Town Councils

Mdm Chair, the Town Councils play an important role in residents' experiences with municipal services as Town Councils maintain the common spaces of HDB estates. As such, many residents approach the Town Councils with feedback on municipal issues. Some of these fall under the public agencies' purview and we have to redirect to the agencies accordingly.

Therefore, as the Chairman of Tampines Town Council, I am glad to hear that MSO started a pilot with Jurong and Holland-Bukit Panjang Town Councils last year to finetune feedback management protocols and to better channel feedback cases to the right agency for follow-up.

It has been a year since the pilot started. I would like to understand how the pilot has helped to improve feedback management between Town Councils and the public agencies.

Minister Grace Fu also indicated in March on her Facebook post that MSO is now ready to extend the collaboration to other Town Councils. How many Town Councils will be partnering MSO and when can we expect to come onboard?

Besides improving feedback management, are there other initiatives under this collaboration with the Town Councils?

Can MSO also look at matters under private companies providing public services, for example Singapore Power and telecommunications companies? These companies have pipes, cables and meters at HDB common corridors and residents tend to complain to the Town Council when something is amiss. The Town Council refers the feedback accordingly to the respective companies but the tracking and closing of loops need to be better managed. Would MSO be able to look into this by tapping on the existing system with public agencies?

Use of Technology

Mr Gan Thiam Poh: Mdm Chair, MSO was set up to resolve municipal issues, especially those which involve multiple agencies or where the lines of reporting are not clear. MSO's objective is to provide a convenient single point of contact for residents to make reports and coordinate multiple agencies or Ministries to help solve the problems at hand.

I would like to ask the Ministry what some of the technologies are which MSO and its partner agencies have utilised to improve service delivery to residents so far.

The Chairman: Minister Grace Fu.

The Minister for Culture, Community and Youth (Ms Grace Fu Hai Yien): Mdm Chair, thank you for allowing me to speak. A famous writer once wrote: "What is essential is invisible to the eye". Municipal services are a bit like that. They are often overlooked, like having a clean pavement to walk on or a damaged railing repaired promptly. But these are essential things in our living environment.

It has been slightly over a year since MSO was formed to work with various agencies to improve these essential services. Let me share an update on our progress in response to Mr Chong Kee Hiong and Mr Ong Teng Koon.

In our recent survey, 77% of residents indicated that they are satisfied with municipal services in their neighbourhoods. This is a good base to build on.

For feedback that involves multiple agencies, MSO is actively improving the work process. You may have read about the case concerning the cleanliness of waters around Marina Country Club earlier this year. Litter accumulated on the waters and an adjoining temporary drain, making the area look unsightly. MSO brought together the relevant agencies – the Maritime and Port Authority (MPA), NEA, PUB, SLA – and facilitated a coordinated response. With SLA fronting the operations, the agencies cleaned the area and embarked on constructing a permanent drain. The agencies also agreed on procedures to address future cases.

Mr Alex Yam and Mr Chong Kee Hiong asked about our challenges. Complex cases like this are inevitable and invariably take longer to resolve. But through systematic culling of issues, one by one, ascertaining responsibility, facilitating coordination, we have reduced the average time taken to close such complex cases that require multiple agencies to work together by about eight days over the past year, from 21 to 13 days.

Improving response time to feedback is not our only goal. We have also been working to make it more convenient for the public to get to us on municipal issues. MSO launched the OneService app in January last year. Several Members asked about the public response to the app. More than 55,000 users have registered. More than 31,000 cases were submitted.

Many users have found the app useful. In February this year, Mr Darren Siow used the OneService app to report on a pothole along Thomson Road, without having to identify the owner of the problem, and this is what he said, "The efficient OneService ecosystem of receiving reports, assigning cases to the relevant agency and the resolution of issues is indeed praiseworthy."

5.15 pm

Indeed, digital channels, such as mobile apps and web portals, make it easier for the public to provide feedback and speed up our response process. There has been a four-fold increase in the proportion of municipal feedback received via digital channels over the past year, from about 3% – a low base – to 12%. Specifically, 5% of feedback was received via the OneService app. MSO and our partner agencies will continue to improve our digital channels.

We have received suggestions on the app and introduced several enhancements. These include adding new reporting categories and push notifications on the status of your cases. Many Members wanted to know our upcoming plans. This year, we will introduce a new crowdsourcing feature to collect information that helps our agencies to address municipal issues which users do not expect a reply.

We will pilot crowdsourcing in the retrieval of abandoned supermarket trolleys. I am sure many of us have encountered the odd supermarket trolley at void decks or walkways, which caused obstruction or was being used as a litter dump. To address such problems, MSO is working with five supermarket chains on an initiative called "Spot Abandoned Trolleys". This feature will be available on the OneService App by the end of this month and it marks a milestone in extending our partnership beyond Government agencies to the private sector.

When you next see an abandoned trolley, simply use the OneService App to submit its location. We will pump the data to the supermarkets which will go around to collect them periodically. This is a win-win arrangement. For residents, there will be fewer abandoned trolleys in the community; for supermarkets, they will be able to retrieve their trolleys more efficiently. If the "Spot Abandoned Trolleys" initiative works well, we will look at expanding crowdsourcing arrangements to other municipal issues.

Besides the OneService App, MSO will be introducing the OneService Web Portal in the latter half of this year. This will be a one-stop platform that aggregates relevant information from our partner agencies that affects your neighbourhood, such as dengue clusters in your neighbourhood, HDB block-cleaning schedules in your precincts and traffic incidents in the surrounding areas.

You can also report and track your feedback on either the app or Web Portal through the same account. We hope our efforts will make it even easier for you to interact with Government agencies on issues relating to you and your neighbourhood. Of course, residents can still submit feedback to agencies via existing channels.

Mr Chong Kee Hiong asked if MSO would look into improving processes and workflows. During the Budget debate, Dr Tan Wu Meng similarly called for better coordination on the ground. Indeed, MSO will focus on improving the coordination between agencies in operations this year.

Having a lead agency as your point-of-contact helps us to ensure timely response to your feedback. AVA has been the first responder for animal-related issues since 2012. As Mr Baey Yam Keng mentioned, MSO facilitated the centralisation of public greenery maintenance under NParks last year. NParks has been taking over the greenery maintenance functions in phases, starting with grass cutting. From June this year, NParks will be taking over other forms of greenery maintenance from HDB, SLA and PUB.

Mr Baey also asked that MSO look into other functions that cut across agencies to better streamline processes. I am happy to announce that from June this year, LTA will be the first responder for feedback on the maintenance of connectivity-related infrastructure. What are they? It means that if you see a damaged footpath or sheltered linkway and are unsure of whom to contact, you can use the OneService app, which will route such cases to LTA to assess and lead in the response.

As first responder, LTA will promptly attend to cases of public safety concerns to mitigate the risks. For instance, LTA was recently alerted to a footpath damaged by tree roots in front of Hong Kah Secondary School. LTA immediately inspected the site and placed safety cones to warn pedestrians of the hazard. And together with NParks, both agencies worked together on the repair works.

For non-emergencies, LTA will also be a first point of contact and coordinate the issue, although the repair might be done by another agency.

As for other cross-cutting issues, including the issue of pest control mentioned by Mr Baey Yam Keng, given their complexity as well as the local context involved, we will accumulate experience and knowledge as we go through the cases, helping the agencies to solve local cases one by one. We will explore how to improve on the process and look at systemic improvement over time.

It is not enough for MSO to work with just the Government agencies, as more than 80% of Singaporeans live in HDB estates which are managed by Town Councils. We started a pilot with Jurong-Clementi and Holland-Bukit Panjang Town Councils last year to align the feedback management process between Town Councils and agencies. To answer Mr Ong Teng Koon and Mr Baey Yam Keng, the pilot was a success. For instance, MSO co-created a manual with the pilot Town Councils and our agencies to clarify responsibilities for common municipal issues and facilitate prompt referrals. This is to ensure that residents' feedback will be promptly attended to, regardless of who they first approach.

A number of Members asked about our plans, following the pilot. I am glad to update that we have invited all 16 Town Councils to participate, and they have all agreed to come onboard. Each Town Council has its unique processes and systems, and we will need time to work with each of them to ease the transition. We will progressively bring the Town Councils onboard from now to the fourth quarter of this year. This means that by the end of the year, residents across the island will be able to benefit from the closer coordination between Town Councils and Government agencies.

Similar to our approach with the agencies, we have also moved beyond feedback management to collaborate on operations. Several municipal issues require the Government and Town Councils to work closely together. One example is water leakage from pipe fittings in HDB blocks. When residents call PUB to report on a pipe leakage, often without a clear description of the location of the leak, PUB has to visit the site. If the leakage occurs within the segment of the pipe under the Town Council's care, PUB will temporarily stop the leak and refer the case to the Town Council for proper repair. Two sets of technicians are often involved before the repair is done. It leads to a delay in repair and wastage of labour.

To facilitate faster resolution, PUB and the pilot Town Councils tried a first responder protocol last year. Under the protocol, they are assigned first responder roles for specified types of water supply issues. So, when a case on pipe leakage in Jurong East was reported to PUB in October last year, Jurong-Clementi Town Council attended to the feedback as the first responder for leaks in HDB estates and resolved it straightaway.

Similarly, MSO will look into improving the coordination between agencies and Town Councils for other issues like high-rise littering and pigeon feeding. However, our collaboration with Town Councils, as with other MSO initiatives, is not meant to and will not replace the functions of the Town Councils nor weaken their autonomy in service delivery.

MSO and its partners are also leveraging technology and learning from each other to improve processes and productivity, which was what Mr Gan Thiam Poh, Mr Chong Kee Hiong and Mr Ong Teng Koon have asked about.

A good example is HDB, which used technology to manage their car park enforcement. Instead of conducting time-consuming and manpower-intensive physical checks on the location of their wardens, HDB has enhanced the Electronic Handheld Terminals used by the wardens to capture their locations. HDB officers can now focus on car park management, such as addressing public feedback on illegal parking and obstruction of vehicles in car parks.

SLA has been harnessing technology to improve the efficiency of their land surveys. They have now started using a software application called Oblivision, which allows officers to inspect and even measure structures on a particular plot of land, without physically going to the site. MSO has also commenced work with SLA to see how we can extend Oblivision to other agencies to reduce labour-intensive site visits.

MSO is on a constant lookout for technologies that can help our agencies deliver better and more efficient services.

In conclusion, as MSO moves into improving operations and productivity, many of our initiatives will be "invisible to the eye". There will not be major infrastructure built or goodies given out. But through what we do, we constantly improve the essential services which define the quality of our living environment.

To do this, we will need to expand our network of partners, including private companies providing public services, like what Mr Baey asked for. While the Government does not regulate the operations and feedback management processes of private businesses, we are prepared to work closely with them and all relevant partners, to improve our common spaces.

But most of all, we want to engage residents as our key stakeholders. In line with the call for Partnering for the Future, MSO will enable greater community partnership in municipal services. Residents have an important role to play by alerting us to issues in your neighbourhood, by being an active and engaged resident and by participating in community building. Together, we can create a better living environment for one another and for the ones we love.

The Chairman: Er Dr Lee Bee Wah.

Construction Industry

Er Dr Lee Bee Wah: Mdm Chair, improving our infrastructure has been one of our top priorities. To achieve this, we must establish higher productivity within the construction industry. Last year, the second Construction Productivity Roadmap was rolled out. Can the Minister give an update on its progress?

What is the take-up rate of the Construction Productivity and Capability Fund (CPCF)? How useful has it been in encouraging greater innovation and productivity? What is the progress of adoption of new construction technologies, including Design for Manufacturing and Assembly through Prefabricated Pre-finished Volumetric Construction (PPVC)? Do they bring about savings in manpower and shorten the construction period, as expected? Will the Government consider absorbing the difference in the cost of PPVC during this initial period which, I am told, can cost up to 40% more?

At the same time, I was told that in Australia, PPVC is not so common. They use a lot of steel works. With proper planning, steel works can be faster than PPVC. So, I hope the Government does not over push PPVC and forget about other construction methods.

CPCF mainly encourages firms to adopt more productive construction methods. But we might need to look deeper. A few Singaporean developers who ventured to Australia told me that, in Australia, they can build faster because they spend more effort and time in the design and planning stage.

[Deputy Speaker (Mr Lim Biow Chuan) in the Chair]

In Singapore, as the land cost is high, the developer would normally rush to have design and planning approval obtained so that they can launch quickly. As a result, a lot of details are not ironed out properly during the design and planning stage. Tackling the downstream construction methods may not yield the results that we desire. We need to have fundamental changes in our workflow.

How to have fundamental changes? Besides giving more time for the upstream design and planning, we need to have experienced Singaporean Core engineers, architects and construction managers, that is, we need to retain and build on the construction expertise in Singapore to get better results.

The Government can also help in procurement matters. Do not automatically award the contracts to the lowest tenderer. Instead, scrutinise the companies' local expertise too, and ask that they have a certain level of local expertise before they can get the contract.

Future of Construction Industry

Dr Teo Ho Pin (Bukit Panjang): Chairman, Sir, the construction industry is a very complex industry, comprising many stakeholders, such as the authorities, developers, consultants, suppliers, and contractors.

With rising expectations from clients and users, construction projects are becoming more complex. Thus, we need to find new ways to improve construction productivity and quality.

5.30 pm

Sir, I wish to ask the Ministry to provide an update on the progress of the construction industry. First, what are the key initiatives implemented by the Ministry to improve the innovation, productivity, quality, safety and professionalism in the industry? Two, what is the future roadmap for the construction industry?

Sir, the construction industry needs a major transformation to grow and succeed in the future. I would like to propose four recommendations for the Ministry to consider.

One, review the terms and conditions of all land sales and qualifying certificate for developers. The land sales' terms and conditions such as project completion period, extension premium scheme, use of Prefabricated Prefinished Volumetric Construction (PPVC) method and the need to sell all dwelling units in a housing development within two years from the temporary occupation permit (TOP), have increased development risks and construction costs correspondingly.

These cost increases are ultimately passed on to property buyers and users. I propose that we review or remove these land sales requirements to allow more flexibility for developers to adopt more innovative and productive methods in their developments and encourage developers to be more creative in finding more cost-effective solutions for their developments.

Two, develop a fair remuneration framework for building consultants. Today, building consultants, such as architects, engineers and quantity surveyors, are usually paid a percentage fee based on the value of the project. Such a fee structure may result in a conflict of interest as some consultants may not be incentivised to produce simple, functional and lower-cost designs.

I urge the Ministry to consider developing a fair remuneration framework that will encourage building consultants to adopt professional practices and for a fair fee. This could be in the form of lump-sum fees based on the size and complexity of the project.

Three, build a core team of Singapore builders. Sir, over the last 30 years, the construction industry has suffered a serious brain drain of building professionals. Many architecture, engineering and building professionals have left the industry. This is attributed to a lack of recognition of the professions, tough work environment and the poor image of the industry.

At local universities, architecture, engineering and building courses are not top choices among university applicants. In fact, the building course in the National University of Singapore (NUS) had to be repackaged in order to attract applications as the building degree is not recognised by the authorities in Singapore.

Sir, if this outflow of talent continues, we will soon face a shortage of local building professionals to build and rejuvenate our city. I urge the Ministry to take immediate action to build a core team of building professionals in Singapore.

Four, Construction Future Steering Committee. Sir, the construction industry needs a steering committee to map out its development for the next 50 years. I propose that the Ministry set up a Construction Future Steering Committee to make Singapore a Global City.

Lift Upgrading Programme Designs

Mr Png Eng Huat (Hougang): Sir, the Lift Upgrading Programme (LUP) is coming to a close. Many residents in Hougang welcome the new lifts although, for some elderly residents, it came too late. For others, the Lift Upgrading Programme (LUP) introduces a new set of problems and issues they never had to contend with before.

For example, many would have thought that the installation of privacy louvres for the new LUP lift lobbies is a standard feature and a simple process as these are non-­structural installations. However, some privacy louvres serve no purpose whatsoever because the gaps between the fins are too wide. Some are not even angled correctly to achieve any effect. In the same block of flats, some lift lobbies have louvres, and some do not.

The flow of water along the common corridors is also affected by LUP. Water ponding and flooding became an issue for some residents as the original path of the water flow along the common corridor has been altered or re­routed.

One major bugbear of LUP can be found at Block 314, Hougang Avenue 5. Residents living at lift lobby C found out to their disappointment that a new 1.2-metre lift landing bridge was built right beside one of the two benefiting units on each floor without factoring in the proximity of the affected unit and the dry riser.

While the new bridge may comply with the statutory requirements, the cement base of the dry riser effectively reduces the clear width of the entrance to less than 950 millimetres at the base level. With the landing valve of the dry riser sticking out substantially, the clear width of the entrance of the lift landing was further reduced at about the shoulder height level. Taken as a whole, the lift landing bridge at Block 314 does not comply with the Singapore Civil Defence Force’s (SCDF) requirements as the entrance does not have the 1.2-metre clear width.

I thank the HDB team for trimming the cement base and re­orientating the landing valve of the dry riser to widen the width of the lift landing entrance at Block 314, but the fact remains that such measures were needed goes to show that some LUP designs need to go beyond just meeting statutory requirements.

In the case of Block 314, the new lift landing bridge meets the requirements, but it is located right next to a dry riser and a resident's flat. Affected residents can no longer leave their gates open or leave their shoes outside their doorway as that will also cause obstruction at the entrance of the lift landing. These residents do not even have any space left to put a simple shoe rack anymore.

The Town Council has no issue to enforce its by­law to ensure that these passageways are not being obstructed indiscriminately but we are looking at a situation where the design of the landing bridge is being forced upon the residents to such a point where anything left outside their units will cause obstruction, no matter what.

LUP is a comprehensive $5.5 billion programme. Is there any room for HDB to make good the bad designs as residents have to live with the consequences, day in and day out? And it does not help that LUP designs for similar flats in an estate can vary depending on the contractor who is doing the job. I must stress that I am not talking about defects but design anomalies.

The Chairman: Mr Low Thia Khiang, you have two cuts. You can take them together.

Lift Maintenance

Mr Low Thia Khiang (Aljunied): Thank you, Sir. The Aljunied-Hougang Town Council currently manages 1,760 lifts in HDB estates, out of which 470 are new lifts installed under the Lift Upgrading Programme (LUP) being turned on from 2012 onwards. Based on the figures gathered for lift breakdown in financial year (FY) 2015/2016, there were 3,683 breakdowns in total, or 7.84 breakdowns per lift on average.

This is a relatively high breakdown rate, considering these new lifts are barely three years old. I am not sure whether this happens only in Aljunied-Hougang Town or across the board. I would like to urge MND to take a look at the quality of the LUP lifts.

Next, with the growth in the number of lifts contributed by LUP, the expenditure on lift maintenance for each year is also rising. In the case of Aljunied-Hougang Town Council, the latest revision in maintenance contracts by the original lift manufacturers will result in a cost increase of between 4.08% and 8.52%. The projected upward revision in maintenance rates beyond 2017 is even higher, estimated to be between 8.66% and 10.72%.

I believe that moving forward, lift maintenance will be a heavy financial burden on all the Town Councils. Hence, I request MND to consider providing a special grant for lift maintenance.

Finally, new lifts are designed by different lift manufacturers with their unique features and parts, especially the motherboard. This gives rise to maintenance issues, as the original manufacturers control the parts and pricing.

I suggest HDB consider a standardised lift design for HDB estates to require manufacturers to produce lifts based on a standard design and make the standardised lift parts, so that both electronic and mechanical parts will be readily available. This will ensure competitive pricing in the manufacture and maintenance of lifts.

Pneumatic Waste Conveyance System

Sir, since 1997, we have heard about the idea of pneumatic conveyance systems for waste disposal in our HDB estates, brought up in this House by the then Minister for the Environment, Mr Yeo Cheow Tong. In 2013, I filed a cut noting that a pilot project under the Greenprint Initiative was slated to be carried out in Jurong East in 2013 and 2014.

I would like to seek an update on this, as pneumatic waste conveyance systems would be a huge productivity improvement over having to manually empty individual bulk bin inside each bin chute every day. Such a system can afford all Town Councils not only better productivity but also savings in manpower costs. It is environmentally sustainable and gets rid of the problem of foul smells during refuse collection.

In June 2015, HDB said it would test-bed this pneumatic system in Yuhua. What has been the Ministry's assessment of applying the system to an existing HDB estate? Can the Ministry comment on how feasible it will be to roll out the system to other HDB estates, especially the older ones?

It appears that upcoming HDB projects at Tampines North, Bidadari and Punggol Northshore will also have the same system. However, the modernisation of waste collection is a benefit that should be experienced by as many HDB estates as possible, including the older HDB estates.

HDB Goodwill Repair Assistance

Mr Muhamad Faisal Bin Abdul Manap: Sir, HDB provides assistance through the Goodwill Repair Assistance (GRA) Scheme where HDB arranges for the repair works and co-pays 50% of the cost. The balance 50% is shared equally by the upper and lower floor flat owners who share the joint responsibility for the repair of ceiling leaks due to wear and tear.

Many residents I have spoken to welcome this form of assistance rendered by HDB and it lessens their financial burden. However, concerns persist, and I would like to reflect my residents' sentiments in this House. For instance, if the ceiling at the lower floor unit faces a leak or has signs of leakage, such as distinct watermark or a blotted patch, no repair works would be done to the damaged ceiling. Only the source of the leak located at the upper floor would be rectified, but upon the completion of the repair works, both flat owners, the upper floor as well as the lower floor, will each be billed 25% of the total repair cost. This is not fair to the lower floor home owners.

As a Member who represents a mature estate, I have regularly received feedback on the wear and tear to the ceiling in the unit. In fact, a resident who is staying in the lower floor unit said to me that in order to make repairs to her unit, she had to fork out additional costs. She is of the view that the repair of this damaged ceiling and its consequent repair costs should be included in the GRA scheme as the damage of their unit's ceiling should be the joint responsibility of both owners in accordance with the spirit of this particular policy.

I am in agreement with her on this. The present policy has good intention, but we must be careful not to allow one set of family feeling shortchanged and left out.

Sembawang Hot Spring

Dr Lim Wee Kiak (Sembawang): Mr Chairman, not many people know that there is a natural hot spring in Singapore, and it is located in Sembawang, off Gambas Avenue. This Sembawang hot spring is our one and only natural hot spring on our island here.

The exact source of the hot spring remains unknown. Hot springs are formed when under groundwater enters the earth's crust as deep as three kilometres underground and get heated up to high temperatures by the hot rock masses. The high pressure causes the hot boiling water to seep upwards through cracks, thereby forcing itself out of the ground into a spring. At this point, the temperature of the water drops to about 70 degrees.

There is an interesting history to our hot spring. In 1909, Seah Eng Keong, the son of Pioneer Seah Liang Seah, had discovered hot springs in his pineapple estate and channelled the springs all together so they could be concentrated in one area. A well was built along the spring and became popular with the villagers. The village was then known as Kampong Ayer Panas, which means "Village of Hot Water".

In 1922, soft drinks firm Fraser & Neave (F&N) acquired the site and set up a plant nearby to tap the hot mineral water, which it bottled and called "Seletaris". During World War II, the Japanese forces, upon learning the existence of the hot spring, built a number of thermal baths, or onsen, in the area, to relax as well.

But it is more than just that. It is a national treasure that is sadly unknown to many Singaporeans. I appeal to the Government to redevelop the area now into our national Sembawang Hot Spring Park to be managed by NParks. There is immense educational value for our students as well. If the hot spring park is properly developed and promoted, I am confident that it will become a popular attraction for all of us to enjoy.

Rail Corridor Old Bukit Timah Fire Station

Ms Low Yen Ling (Chua Chu Kang): Chairman, the development of the Rail Corridor as an oasis and unique community space is an exciting one for many Singaporeans, especially to residents staying around that area.

The award of tender for proposals features eight distinctively themed stretches along the 24-kilometre-long Rail Corridor and 10 community nodes offering differentiated experiences. Green areas, foot paths and bicycle paths, as well as surrounding developments along the Rail Corridor, are woven together seamlessly.

5.45 pm

The old Bukit Timah Fire Station will be developed as an attraction and gateway node to the Rail Corridor. The winning design has plans for the former Bukit Timah Fire Station to be a gateway to the Bukit Timah Nature Reserve. Here, a forest walk and observation tower will let visitors get close to nature.

Residents staying at Hume, who live near the Bukit Timah Fire Station, are very keen to know about the developments of the Rail Corridor. Increased human traffic to the area will be a key factor of consideration for the building of a Hume MRT station. The opening of Downtown Line 2 has brought much convenience and easy commute to many Singaporeans. However, Hume residents presently continue to look longingly from the outside, as the line passes through their area without a stop.

May I know when is the expected visitorship of the Rail Corridor area expected to peak, and if MND would consider releasing new sites around Hume and the old Bukit Timah Fire Station for Government Land Sales? Under the Railway Corridor development, a 16-hectare site in Choa Chu Kang that falls along the stretch of the former 30-metre Keretapi Tanah Melayu (KTM) railway line will be the test bed for a future housing concept hosting 3,000 units. New land sites for housing can enhance the liveability factor along the Railway Corridor and enhance its unique proposition of a residential and community oasis.

As implementation on various stretches of the corridor is being studied carefully and paced accordingly, we hope MND will give this serious consideration as plans for the Railway Corridor continue to be shaped and refined in response to public feedback.

Rejuvenating our Heartlands

Miss Cheryl Chan Wei Ling: Chairman, several existing businesses would like to continue their trade in the same area rather than moving to a new location. However, in mature neighbourhood centres, many of their remaining leases are 10 years or less. Business operators and residents share strong sentiment of the place and businesses were their "go-to" shops in the neighbourhood. The operators are hesitant to participate in the enhanced Revitalisation of Shops (ROS) scheme as the amount they have to invest, albeit co-funded, does not justify the remaining lease period. Co-funding for the scheme and rent-free period during renovation do not resolve their concerns over the lease period.

The Government should, therefore, consider giving these owner-operators an option to extend their leases so that the cost-benefit of the enhanced ROS scheme is more attractive to them.

For shops that were previously sold, many would have been sublet to tenants. This usually results in frequent change of tenants. The shop owners also have no keen interest to be part of the ROS scheme as maximising rental is their primary aim. We often end up with a poor mix of business types, having multiple tenants within same vicinity conducting similar businesses. This creates competition but yet a lack of diversity in offerings.

In this regard, since the Government is encouraging startups, it should consider and assist those with innovative business models or those revitalising traditional trades by offering shop spaces in the neighbourhood over a shorter lease period. This helps to reduce their startup cost, serves as an incubation bed for potentials and inject new elements to the mature estates, at least a different variety from the retail chain stores that are common in our malls today.

I believe that rejuvenation of our heartlands is just as important, if not more than infrastructural changes or beautifying and modernising the landscape. We also need to ensure that we have a right mix of businesses and encourage startups or social businesses to form an ecosystem in our neighbourhood and town centres.

Improving Liveability

Mr Saktiandi Supaat: Mr Chairman, enhancing the Revitalisation of Shops (ROS) scheme and the just announced Favourite Place initiative, serve up an excellent opportunity for small and medium enterprises (SMEs) in the neighbourhood to strive towards their full potential. This is great news all around.

Heartland businesses play a major role in job creation. They also make the estates a livelier place to live in. Moreover, they provide residents with services and products with the added benefit of convenience of access, and I believe usually at greater affordability than the shops in the shopping malls.

Can the Minister or MND kindly give an update on the progress of the ROS scheme for shops in the heartland? How many estates have undergone revitalisation and which estates are next in the pipeline? Has the range of services and products offered at these revitalised shops expanded as a result of the upgrading programmes?

May I also suggest that to rejuvenate out-of-reach heartland food and retail shops, whether MND and other agencies are able to consider the possibility of allowing free parking or lowering charges at selected HDB parking during lunch time, between 12.00 pm and 2.00 pm, for example? But of course, this has to be weighed against the higher traffic during that period. So, the selection of the heartland shops or the shop location is important to boost the activity.

Revitalisation of Shops Scheme

Mr Ang Wei Neng: The Revitalisation of Shop (ROS) scheme needs to be revitalised as it has suffered from a low take-up rate. Chairman, in Mandarin, please.

(In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] We have high hopes for the Enhanced ROS scheme announced by the Finance Minister.

During the Budget debate last year, I highlighted two shortcomings of the current ROS scheme to the Ministry of National Development (MND). These are the main reasons why only a few neighbourhood shop precincts have been successfully upgraded.

Firstly, the current ROS scheme requires 100% support from the neighbourhood shops for the upgrading to proceed, not a single less. Although we have merchant associations to bring the heartland shops together, not all act in unison. Very often, there will be one or two shops that are less cooperative, especially for shop owners who lease the shops to other tenants. They are basically investors who are more concerned about rental income than neighbourhood upgrading. As a result, the upgrading programme cannot proceed because of them. Thus, I hope the Minister can take into consideration the interest of the majority of the shop owners and patrons and adopt the model for Home Improvement Programme (HIP) on the use of polling. Perhaps we can consider amending the law, so that merchant associations only need to obtain support from 75% of shop owners for the upgrading to proceed.

Secondly, wages and construction costs have gone up in recent years, and the cost of upgrading has increased in tandem. However, Government grants for upgrading have remained the same. As a result, the ROS scheme has become increasingly unattractive. Since the Government is committed to helping revitalise neighbourhood shops, I hope the Minister can help merchants associations by doubling the grant to S$20,000 per shop.

In response to my plea last year in Parliament, MND agreed to set up a new Revitalise Heartland Shops Committee, chaired by then Senior Minister of State Mr Lee Yi Shyan, to review and refine the ROS scheme. I was invited to join the committee and had several meetings with shop owners, grassroots organisations and HDB. We have received a lot of valuable feedback but there was no conclusive decision. So, I hope the Minister can give our shop owners a reply in Parliament today.

Private Estate Upgrading

Mr Chong Kee Hiong: Chairman, many of our private estates are at least 30 years old with many elderly residents. The Estate Upgrading Programme (EUP) is necessary to prevent many of the shared public areas from degenerating into safety and health hazards. I would like to request for upgrading works to be sped up.

Fences or railings to separate pavements from open drains will be helpful to prevent falls into the drains. Old footpaths and open drains may be pitted and become breeding grounds for mosquitoes after the rain. New widened footpaths with ramps will be welcomed by wheelchair or stroller users. Public playgrounds and exercise areas may need renovation so that they remain safe for users.

In the event that EUP could not be sped up, the waiting time for upgrade for these old estates could take several years. Can areas that need urgent repairs for safety reasons such as covering up of open drains to create wider footpaths be sped up under a special fund or programme?

The Chairman: Senior Minister of State Desmond Lee.

The Senior Minister of State for National Development (Mr Desmond Lee): Sir, in the course of my presentation, may I have your permission to show some slides?

The Chairman: Yes, please. [Slides were shown to hon Members.]

Mr Desmond Lee: Thank you, Sir. I will focus on three areas. First, working with the community to rejuvenate and transform our heartlands; second, enhancing greenery in our City in a Garden; and third, partnering the construction industry to transform the way we build our city.

Let me start with the first. Minister Lawrence Wong earlier described how newer HDB towns, such as Bidadari, Tampines North and Tengah, will be better designed. At the same time, we have been Remaking Our Heartland under a programme started in 2007 with that name, to rejuvenate and transform our older estates.

At Dawson Estate in Queenstown, one of our oldest HDB towns, new public housing is set within a park environment, but heritage elements of old Dawson are being preserved. For example, the former wet market at Block 38 Commonwealth Avenue has been conserved and will be refurbished to house retail shops. Over in Yishun, residents can look forward to a new integrated development comprising shops, an air-conditioned bus interchange, a community club and town plaza, all of which will add greater buzz to the town centre. In Bedok, with the Outdoor Play Corridor, residents and park users will be able to cycle seamlessly from East Coast Park, through the Bedok Town Centre, all the way to Bedok Reservoir by next year. If you have been to Jurong East recently, you would have seen the transformation of the Jurong Gateway area, with the opening of commercial malls next to the MRT station, and two hospitals, Ng Teng Fong Hospital and Jurong Community Hospital. The Jurong Lake Gardens West, part of our third National Gardens, will also be completed in two years' time.

Miss Cheryl Chan suggested that agencies involve local communities more during town design, especially for mature towns. We fully recognise this. Last year, we shared our plans to rejuvenate Woodlands, Pasir Ris and Toa Payoh under the Remaking Our Heartland 3 programme. Over the course of one year, HDB connected with some 400 residents and local stakeholders in these towns to consult them on preliminary concepts.

It was a very fruitful exercise. Some residents from Woodlands hoped that their town remains green and asked for a larger community space within Woodlands Central. Pasir Ris residents requested for a rejuvenated town centre and for the existing parks and commercial spaces to be upgraded. Toa Payoh residents desired a balance between older and newer developments, and for a greener and even more senior-friendly environment.

HDB has been refining the proposals based on these ideas and suggestions. The preliminary proposals are exciting, and cover three broad themes, namely, Identity, Public Spaces and Connectivity. Let me briefly elaborate.

For Woodlands Town, residents can look forward to a transformed Woodlands Waterfront with interesting landscaping. In addition, within Woodlands Central, there will be a town plaza, which will offer a sizeable space for various large-scale activities, including those for the community. For Pasir Ris, we plan to introduce a mixed-use development integrated with a new bus interchange in the town centre and upgrade the parks in the town. In Toa Payoh, we are looking to revamp the pedestrian mall in Toa Payoh Town Centre with more greenery, rest areas and covered shopping streets at selected stretches for residents to enjoy, even when it rains. We will also introduce dedicated cycling paths throughout the town to improve connectivity.

Let me now move on to our HDB shops and the Revitalisation of Shops (ROS) scheme, which a number of Members have asked about. Since 2007, the scheme has benefited about half of all HDB shops in town and neighbourhood centres, with upgraded shop fronts and funding support for business promotional activities.

Last year, we announced that we would revise or review the ROS scheme. HDB shops play an important role in building our heartland communities and we want to support them better. As Mr Saktiandi Supaat said, they make our estates a much livelier place to live in. They are where we buy our daily necessities and groceries, get our nasi lemak, chicken rice or kopi-o. The shopkeepers in our heartlands are often familiar faces that we grow up with.

In carrying out the review, we consulted the heartland retail community. We set up the Revitalisation of Heartland Shops Committee comprising representatives from various merchants associations, retailers and grassroots organisations, to tap on their experience.

We also conducted focus group discussions with merchants associations across the island, to hear their views. I thank the committee, previously under the leadership of Mr Lee Yi Shyan, for their many suggestions. We have evaluated the suggestions carefully, and this is what we plan to do.

6.00 pm

First, for upgrading works under ROS, we will adjust the co-funding ratio among the Government, the HDB shopkeepers and the Town Councils. What this means is that our shopkeepers pay less, while the Government and Town Councils pay more.

Second, we will provide some startup funding to support the formation of new merchants associations.

HDB will announce the details before launching the next batch of ROS soon. Our review is still continuing and there may be more in the pipeline. So, for instance, we are collaborating with the Ministry of Trade and Industry (MTI) and SPRING to explore other areas of support for our local HDB heartland shops.

We are also studying very carefully whether to introduce a requirement for polling for ROS upgrading. Let me explain. Mr Ang Wei Neng makes a valid point that one of the challenges preventing a higher take-up of ROS upgrading is the need for unanimous or near unanimous support from shopkeepers or shop owners before upgrading works can commence.

One possible solution is to set a threshold so that a certain percentage of shop owners polled want ROS upgrading, then this binds all the shops in the neighbourhood centre.

On the other hand, some retailers have also shared that upgrading works are less useful to them. Therefore, while they understand that it could benefit other retailers and residents, they were less inclined to support the programme. So, we are looking carefully at whether we should make legislative amendments to make polling a requirement.

Miss Cheryl Chan said we should ensure a right mix of businesses in the heartlands and asked whether SMEs and startups can be encouraged to set up shops there. In fact, we are already seeing a trend of an increasing number of young entrepreneurs setting up shops in the heartlands, such as ice cream parlours, artisan bakeries and hipster cafes. HDB is also partnering MTI and SPRING Singapore to tap current schemes to better support these young entrepreneurs.

Let me now move on to the second of my three points. Sir, as we rejuvenate our heartlands and develop our urban spaces, we must also remember that we are special because we are a City in a Garden. Not only do we have an extensive network of parks and park connectors, we have also incorporated greenery wherever we can, from walls to rooftops, to make it pervasive. But we can do even better. Let me outline, briefly, some ways.

First, we will make our parks more community centric. In the next few years, we will continue to roll out inclusive playgrounds in our parks. They enable all kids to have fun together, whether they are physically able or have disabilities. The first was launched last year at Bishan-Ang Mo Kio Park, with the support of the National Council of Social Services. NParks will launch eight more in the next few years.

We will also use greenery as therapy, especially for seniors. A study conducted by NParks and the National University Health System (NUHS) showed improved mental health in participants who participated in "horticultural therapy". Seniors and their caregivers can look forward to an upcoming network of therapeutic gardens, with contemplative spaces and activity zones, to support dementia and post-stroke patients.

Second, with rapid urbanisation, we recognise that Singaporeans are also concerned about green spaces rich in our cultural and natural heritage. One such space is the Rail Corridor. Ms Low Yen Ling had asked about URA's plans for the development of the old Bukit Timah Fire Station as a key attraction and gateway to the Rail Corridor.

Indeed, the winning proposal for URA's Request for Proposals last year shows how we can sensitively adapt the former Bukit Timah Fire Station as a hub for nature activities, providing seamless access to the nearby nature parks and the Bukit Timah Nature Reserve.

As we implement these plans, we want to involve people who live, work and play along the Corridor, and create opportunities for them to lead community-based initiatives along the Rail Corridor. This is why URA recently embarked on an unprecedented effort to consult residents along the Rail Corridor, from Tanjong Pagar Railway Station in the south to Kranji in the north, through a series of local exhibitions and dedicated workshops.

Residents told us about the types of trails and landscapes they wanted to see and how to retain its rustic character while making improvements so that it can be enjoyed by all Singaporeans. Many workshop participants also tried their hand at master planning, drawing out their own ideas for each area. So, different residents with different interests had to debate, discuss with one another and then decide what to put where, what to have and what not to have. With such localised feedback, URA and the designers will review and refine our current plans to make the Rail Corridor an inclusive green space, with the community as active stewards.

Another is the Sembawang Hot Springs. Dr Lim Wee Kiak asked if it can be developed into a park. As he rightly pointed out, the springs have an interesting history and are currently on the Ministry of Defence's (MINDEF) land. We are studying if we can sensitively enhance the area, in line with existing natural features, heritage and land use. Where possible, we want to retain and enhance such places, with the community, for everyone to enjoy.

Beyond creating new green spaces with the community, we also want to support ground-up greening efforts. Today, we have about 1,000 Community in Bloom (CIB) gardens and 20,000 community gardeners.

Some of these gardeners have gone the extra mile, contributing their harvests to disadvantaged families in the neighbourhood. Others use the gardens as an outdoor classroom to teach the younger generation about nature and how life used to be in the past, passing down knowledge and values along the way. The CIB programme is no longer just about spreading the love of gardening, but also the spirit of neighbourliness. They are about how communities come together to generate a greater social good.

We have seen organic communities form at other parks, too, such as brisk-walkers, joggers, exercise groups, cyclists, nature lovers, heritage buffs, educators and so on. That is why NParks launched the Friends of the Park scheme two weeks ago. Through this, volunteers can be even more involved in our parks, for example, by organising their own activities and partnering NParks in park management.

We are happy to have some of our long-time volunteers step up to lead these communities. For example, Mr Sivasothi will chair the community for the Friends of Chestnut Nature Park, which we just opened. Well-known in the nature fraternity, he has been volunteering for over 20 years, conducting coastal clean-ups and nature walks, and is also an avid cyclist. We are grateful to have him onboard. Over time, I believe we will see more people like him coming forward to jointly create and sustain a green and liveable environment for all Singaporeans.

Coming to the third plank of my speech, Sir, this spirit of partnership, which I spoke about earlier, to rejuvenate our heartlands and enhance our green spaces also extends to our ongoing efforts to transform our built environment sector and how we will build our city of the future.

Over the years, we have progressively raised the professionalism, safety and quality in the sector through initiatives, such as licensing builders, regulating buildability and raising workmanship quality through CONQUAS and Quality Mark. From 2010, we have also put in significant effort and resources to raise construction productivity.

The transformation that we are seeking is slowly taking shape. The level of prefabrication for building structural systems and wall systems has increased significantly. Safety and quality will also be enhanced with more prefabrication. Site productivity, or the amount of floor area completed per man-day, has steadily increased by an average of 1.3% per year since 2009. In fact, for the last two years, we saw a 2% annual improvement. While this is positive, we should make a big push for even higher productivity gains over the next five years.

Our vision of the future built environment sector is one that is efficient and collaborative, where industry stakeholders jointly go through the design and construction of a project in virtual reality first to finalise details and minimise abortive works. The building components are then manufactured and prefinished offsite in factories and then transported onsite for clean and quiet assembly. Meanwhile, autonomous drones are used to complete other tasks concurrently.

Our built environment sector of the future will be one that is highly advanced, highly skilled and highly integrated. Buildings will be constructed faster with higher quality and lower impact on the surrounding neighbourhood.

As both Er Dr Lee Bee Wah and Dr Teo Ho Pin have rightly pointed out, the Government has to very closely partner the industry and the entire ecosystem, if we are to effectively change the way we build, because there are different industry players involved in every project – developers, consultants, architects, contractors, sub-contractors – and there are many moving pieces. Jobs will have to be redesigned, and processes will have to evolve or change, as part of the transformation. Critically, there needs to be more collaboration among key stakeholders upstream, as Er Dr Lee Bee Wah quite rightly pointed out. Everyone has to play our part and be prepared to break out of our comfort zones.

To date, we have seen a handful of projects in the public and private sectors adopting the Design for Manufacturing and Assembly (DfMA) approach and embracing game-changing technology.

The Nanyang Technological University’s (NTU) North Hill Hostel and OUE's Crowne Plaza Extension were the first projects to adopt Prefabricated Prefinished Volumetric Construction (PPVC) in Singapore. Such projects can be built quite quickly, with less disamenity to people living and working in the surroundings because the modules, the entire rooms, so to speak, are prefabricated, sometimes with all finishes and fittings complete, before being brought onto the site for installation.

But besides PPVC, there are many other productive technologies on the DFMA spectrum that the industry can adopt, as Er Dr Lee Bee Wah mentioned. These include advanced precast, structural steel and cross-laminated timber (CLT), which can bring about productivity gains and a reduction in manpower, as compared to traditional methods.

At the same time, we recognise that there are challenges. Workforce upgrading, regulatory hurdles and logistics issues are some of the teething problems that the early adopters have faced. We value the industry's feedback and will do what we can to help the industry quickly overcome this learning curve. So, let me share some of the work in progress.

First, we have set up the Construction Productivity and Capability Fund (CPCF), and set aside a total of $885 million, over two tranches, to help firms raise their capability in the immediate term.

Today, over 8,000 firms have already tapped on this fund to either invest in more productive technologies, mechanise their processes or up-skill their workforce. BCA has also formulated a Sectoral Manpower Plan to ensure that future manpower demand can be met. With the support of our firms, we will continue to attract, retain and upgrade our workforce.

For example, companies can partner BCA in its suite of scholarship and sponsorship programmes which aims to bring in new Singaporean entrants to the built environment sector. More than 2,000 students and jobseekers have been brought in through these programmes since 2010.

Further, through our Earn and Learn Programmes under SkillsFuture, our diploma and ITE graduates can continue learning while working, through on-the-job training, mentorship and upgrading courses. BCA also works closely with the industry associations, such as the Singapore Contractors Association Limited (SCAL), to conduct regular Productivity Clinics since 2011. About 350 companies have benefited from these one-on-one sessions with BCA as they embarked on their productivity journey.

To encourage the wider adoption of DfMA and Virtual Design and Construction (VDC) and smoothen their implementation, we have taken the lessons learnt from the early adopters and set up a taskforce to look at building up an ecosystem. Dr Teo Ho Pin spoke earlier about having a whole-of-ecosystem steering committee. Here, we have set up a task force to drive the entire ecosystem. The industry will be consulted on its recommendations as part of the process.

We have also reviewed regulatory requirements where necessary. For example, SCDF has relaxed height requirements for the majority of CLT building-use types from 12 metres to 24 metres. To facilitate optimal design for prefabrication and modularisation, LTA is reviewing requirements for the escort of oversized loads being transported, without compromising road safety.

We are also considering setting aside land for PPVC production in Singapore. To fast track the regulatory approval process for innovative technologies new to Singapore, we have set up the multi-agency Building Innovation Panel since 2011.

For the long term, we are scanning the horizon for potential technologies and new ideas. A Construction Productivity R&D Roadmap is currently being developed together with industry players and will be launched in the second half of this year. Promising areas include 3-D printing, robotics, infocomm technology (ICT) and data analytics in the built environment sector. The roadmap will help guide our R&D efforts for the sector and can provide valuable insights to the Committee on the Future Economy.

6.15 pm

Just like how prefabrication and precast have now become prevalent, we can expect DfMA and VDC to become the norm in future. With the public sector leading the way and closely partnering the industry, I am confident that our vision of a highly integrated, advanced and skilled built environment sector is achievable.

Let me now briefly address the remaining cuts. On the Lift Upgrading Programme (LUP), Mr Png Eng Huat had mentioned some concerns at Block 314. I presume it is in his area. Please raise it to HDB or to MND so that we can have a better look at it.

Mr Low Thia Khiang spoke about lift maintenance, lift parts and lift breakdowns. On the point on lift breakdowns, there is a tele-monitoring system in every lift in HDB, which provides data remotely to the Town Council, so you can establish what the cause of the fault is. So, I would urge the hon Member to take a look at the Town Council data and have a sense as to what the causes of these frequent breakdowns are. Some of it could be the nature of the use of the lift, some of it could be the frequency of the Town Council's maintenance regime or the capability and competence of the engineers they engage, among other reasons. So, I think it is good to drill down and analyse what your problems are.

As for the cost of maintenance which Mr Low Thia Khiang said is high because some original parts are owned by the lift manufacturer, this is something that will depend on the complexity of the part. There are over 20 lift brands used in HDB estates. So, there are a variety of parts, from smaller parts, simpler parts that can be manufactured by others to those that are more specialised and specific to the lift.

Mr Low Thia Khiang also talked about the high cost of lift maintenance and replacement. MND is reviewing ways to help Town Councils better manage the lifts and to plan ahead for the lift replacement needs. Given that lift replacement is a major sinking fund expenditure, Town Councils should monitor their long-term financial sufficiency. MND is also considering ring-fencing part of the Town Councils' sinking fund to cater for such expenditure.

Even so, my Ministry has provided Town Councils with additional assistance schemes. For instance, in September 2014, HDB rolled out the Selective Lift Replacement Programme to help Town Councils replace older lifts that lack key features, such as energy-efficient motors, infra-red door safety sensors and vision panels, found in more modern lifts.

Mr Low Thia Khiang has also asked about the outcomes of the Greenprint programme. HDB launched the first two HDB Greenprint projects at Yuhua in 2012 and Teck Ghee in 2015 respectively to introduce sustainable living concepts into existing HDB estates. The Yuhua project was just completed last November and we are still assessing the effectiveness of the project, the various components of the project, including the Pneumatic Waste System that Mr Low talked about. Based on HDB's preliminary survey, Yuhua residents welcome the green features, including the secured bicycle parking and hobby farming zones.

Mr Low Thia Khiang asked specifically if the Pneumatic Waste Conveyance System will be extended to all suitable HDB estates. We plan to do so in new BTO developments where viable, including in Tampines North and Punggol Northshore. It may be more challenging to do so in existing older estates, due to site constraints and higher costs, but we will assess the performance of the system at Yuhua first before deciding on the next step.

Finally, Mr Muhamad Faisal Abdul Manap asked about certain cases involving Goodwill Repair Assistance in his constituency. I listened to what the Member said and I think it will be better if he raises the specific cases to us, for us to be better able to assess what the problem is.

Sir, engagement takes time and effort. Working with diverse stakeholders, especially those with conflicting viewpoints, may not be the fastest way of getting things done, but it is necessary if we are to ensure that we, as Singaporeans, take ownership of the kind of Singapore we want for ourselves and our children, that we hear and understand the differences in views from the diversity of interests making up our plural society and respect the choices then made to create not only a liveable environment but also a sustainable one.

I believe the process of engagement, collaboration and joint stewardship can bring us closer together as a national community, as a plural but cohesive nation. This must be the foundation upon which a better, brighter future will be built in the decades to come.

The Chairman: Mr Alex Yam.

Transforming the Agricultural Sector

Mr Alex Yam: Chairman, Sir, as Singapore rapidly urbanised, new blocks and offices mushroomed, while farms were almost completely weeded out. With agricultural land relatively scarce today, the farm-trepreneur needs to be prudent to ensure that their investment pays off.

The $63 million Agriculture Productivity Fund (APF) was set up at the end of 2014 and helps farmers to boost yields and raise their general productivity. Yet, to the best of my knowledge, only slightly above 1% of the funds have been utilised till date. That is a rather low yield. The previous 2009 to 2014 Food Fund also saw only 60% of the $30 million set aside utilised.

While APF is committed to driving up productivity, perhaps the key factor driving down adoption is the short tenancies, coupled with the longer time it takes for farm owners or farm operators to recover investments, and double coupled by the uncertainty of land acquisition.

They currently have a basic 10-year lease with another uncertain 10, only if there are no other developmental uses for the land. How do we do business like that? As such, I urge the Ministry to consider providing for the flexibility of 15-year leases, which is half that of industrial leases.

At the current moment, we import nearly 90% of our food produce and food security dictates that we continue to increase local productivity, innovate through mechanisation, and maximise land usage for better yields. We need to transform our local farming industry to make it a strong productive pillar of our economic defence.

The Chairman: Mr Louis Ng, you have two cuts. Can you take them together?

Improve Collaboration between AVA and Animal Welfare Groups

Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang: Sir, I first declare my interest as the Chief Executive of an animal welfare group. The current estimated populations of stray dogs, stray cats and wild monkeys are about 7,000, 60,000 and 1,900 respectively. Last year, AVA euthanised 942 dogs, 888 cats and 623 monkeys in an effort to manage the populations of these animals or in response to public feedback.

AVA currently devotes significant resources into hiring for-profit companies to manage stray dogs, cats and wild monkeys. AVA is working with animal welfare groups (AWGs) to rehome the dogs and cats that were impounded but this does not address the root of the problem. AVA currently does not partner any AWGs to manage the monkey issues.

Will AVA consider working more closely with and divert funding from the for-profit companies to the non-profit AWGs who are struggling to find funding and were already on the ground and helping to manage these issues?

This is a win-win solution that will address both public safety and animal welfare concerns and result in a more humane and long-term approach. It might also result in cost savings for AVA.

Increase Funding to Tackle Animal Crime

Sir, in the past five years, the number of alleged animal cruelty cases investigated by AVA rose from 410 cases to 606 cases. With increased awareness on animal welfare, we can expect more reports from members of the public who are now more vigilant and concerned about this issue. This will result in an increased workload for AVA. Can the Ministry clarify whether it has sufficient resources and manpower to respond in a timely manner and rapidly to such cases?

In addition, wildlife trafficking has been added into the list of transnational organised crimes in ASEAN. Wildlife trafficking pushes species towards extinction and also destroys the habitat these animals live in. There are now also reports of how wildlife trafficking funds the activities of some terrorist groups.

In the past decade, there have already been several high-profile cases of wildlife trafficking in Singapore. Can the Ministry elaborate on its plans to tackle wildlife trafficking and similarly, clarify whether it has sufficient resources and manpower to respond in a timely manner and rapidly to such cases?

The Chairman: Minister of State Koh Poh Koon.

The Minister of State for National Development (Dr Koh Poh Koon): Mr Chairman, thank you for allowing me to speak. In his speech, Minister Lawrence Wong quoted from our iconic national song "Home", which says: "There is comfort in the knowledge, that home's about its people too". I would like to expand on this with the preceding lines, "When there are troubles to go through, we'll find a way to start anew". For households who have fallen onto hard times, the Government helps them in various ways. One of these is enabling them to stay in heavily subsidised public rental flats.

A few Members asked about our supply of rental flats. We have ramped up the rental supply from 42,000 in 2007 to 53,500 now, and it will go up to 60,000 in 2017. As a result, the waiting time for a rental flat has been reduced significantly from 21 months in 2008 to four months today. For those in urgent need of rental housing or any housing, HDB may give them priority allocation for a rental flat or provide them with Interim Rental Housing while they await their rental flat.

The increase in rental flats is not only about the increase in quantity. We build rental flats in more locations with a better geographical spread and we integrate them within estates by locating them together with home ownership flats.

These efforts help to promote interaction among residents, as Mr Chong Kee Hiong has called for, and ensure that tenants have the same access to amenities that people staying in home ownership flats enjoy. With rental flats in more locations, it is also more likely that tenants can get a flat nearer the preferred location of their choice.

However, we should not increase our rental supply indefinitely. Staying in public rental flats should only be temporary for families to rebuild their lives. Mr Lee Kuan Yew said, "My primary preoccupation was to give every citizen a stake in the country and its future. I wanted a home-owning society". We want to see families in rental flats progress into homeownership. Thus, we provide substantial help, such as generous housing grants of up to $80,000 for first-timer families.

Mr Gan Thiam Poh asked about the supply of 2-room flats to help our rental families to buy a flat. We currently set aside 10% of 2- and 3-room flats in our sales exercises under the Tenants' Priority Scheme (TPS). The scheme has been open to first-timer rental families. So, in 2015, we set aside 411 2-room flats under TPS. This is 8.5 times more than the 48 applications we received that year.

I am happy to announce that we will extend TPS to second-timer rental families, including the Fresh Start beneficiaries that Minister Wong announced earlier. These second-timer families in rental flats have the same housing need as first-timer rental families. But as second timers, they have a lower allocation quota when it comes to balloting for new HDB flats. Therefore, extending TPS to these second timer families will increase their chances of selecting a flat and moving on to home ownership. So, from HDB's next sales exercise, second-timer rental families can also benefit from the 10% quota of flats set aside under TPS. Like their first-timer counterparts, they will be eligible if they have stayed for at least two years in a rental flat and are applying for a 2- or 3-room home ownership flat.

Taken together, the Fresh Start Housing Scheme and the extension of TPS to second-timer rental families are significant measures to help our rental families achieve homeownership again and to build a more inclusive society.

I would like to assure Mr Muhamad Faisal Abdul Manap and Mr Alex Yam that we review and exercise flexibility on our policies to help vulnerable families and those having problems keeping up with their mortgage.

For those in mortgage arrears, our primary objective is to help them retain their flats. HDB proactively engages households on how to resolve their HDB mortgage issues, especially those with loan arrears. For example, HDB may temporarily reduce or defer their mortgage instalments to help their cash flow situation. For those who need more long-term solutions, HDB may help them right-size to a more affordable flat with another HDB concessionary loan if necessary.

6.30 pm

We also take a needs-based approach in assessing applications for a rental flat. If an applicant is assessed to have low income, no other affordable housing options and no family support; in other words, those who are at extremely high risk of having no roof over their heads, HDB will help them.

Even if the applicant does not fulfil some of the eligibility criteria, HDB will exercise flexibility based on their individual circumstances. Together with other agencies and social workers, HDB will hold joint case conferences to find the best way to help them.

As Mr Faisal Manap said earlier, many of these families have multifaceted and multifactorial, complex issues. Therefore, we require a multi-pronged and a multi-agency approach to help them get to the root of the problem. Housing is perhaps one of them; it could be just the surface and the symptom. We want to help them get on with their lives again by solving the problem at its root. As for the 30-month debarment that Mr Faisal Manap said earlier, HDB takes a very flexible approach, and will look at this on a case by case basis to make sure that none of our residents is disadvantaged and has no roof over their heads.

Er Dr Lee Bee Wah and Mr Saktiandi Supaat asked about how we help single parents with housing. We can do so in a few ways.

Firstly, we help them secure a flat through a priority scheme dedicated to second-timer divorced and widowed persons with young children, if they are applying for a new 2- or 3-room flat in non-mature estates. Some Members will know this as the Assistance Scheme for Second-Timers (ASSIST). Secondly, if they face difficulties paying for the flat, HDB will assess their financial situation and provide them assistance wherever possible, for example, by allowing them to spread out their resale levy in their loan instalments. Thirdly, we can offer them temporary housing at below market rates while they await completion of their flat, under the Parenthood Provisional Housing Scheme (PPHS) or in Interim Rental Housing. Lastly, if they have no housing options and no family support, we will enable them to rent a rental flat.

Let me move on to our efforts to help the elderly.

Mr Muhamad Faisal Abdul Manap asked whether we can help elderly flat owners who want to rent out a room to find a tenant. We interviewed about 1,200 elderly flat owners on subletting a few years ago. Among those who did not rent out their flats or rooms, only 5% of those interviewed had genuine concerns about finding a tenant. And in actual fact, tenant-matching is already offered by estate agents and various websites. On HDB's part, we have made the procedure to rent out a room very straightforward. Owners just need to register with HDB within seven days of finding a tenant for the room that they are letting out.

Mr Chen Show Mao and Mr Alex Yam asked about the Lease Buyback Scheme (LBS). We enhanced LBS in April last year in a few ways: (a) we extended it to 4-room flats, which is the most common HDB flat type today; (b) we increased the income ceiling from $3,000 to $12,000; (c) we relaxed the CPF top-up required for households with multiple owners; and (d) we gave households a wider choice of how much lease they wish to retain.

Five hundred households have taken up LBS since it was enhanced about a year ago. This is a significant increase from the average of 160 per year prior to the enhancements.

We will monitor the response to LBS further before considering any extension to larger flat types. But let me emphasise that LBS is not the only option to monetise a flat. Elderly households staying in larger flats, for example, 5-room flats, actually have a few options to monetise their flat. Firstly, they can choose to rent out a room, especially if their children have moved out and they have a spare room. Secondly, they can also move to a smaller flat, if they are a couple with no children staying with them. By doing so and staying in a short-lease 2-room flexi flat, they can also benefit from the Silver Housing Bonus which is a cash bonus. Thirdly, for those who have moved in with their children to enjoy mutual support, they can also consider renting out the whole flat. These are all good ways to monetise a flat.

In answer to Mr Chen Show Mao's question earlier about LBS, I think there are many options other than LBS in which the flat owner can monetise the flat, especially if the flat owner or the elderly couple has the desire to pass the flat on to their children. Monetising their flats in ways other than LBS will be an option for them to consider.

The take-up of these monetising schemes is not a numbers game. There is no key performance indicator to meet, to see how many people should monetise their flats. They are options for the elderly to consider to suit their needs. In fact, many elderly today have personal savings and support from their children. They may not feel a need to monetise their flat.

Nonetheless, HDB continues to publicise monetisation options through various means, through its website, local media, public talks, exhibitions and at enquiry booths at community events. Interested flat owners can approach HDB and be given one-to-one advice on how they can monetise their flats based on their individual needs.

Beyond housing, MND also oversees the Agri-Food and Veterinary Authority (AVA), which has a wide scope, ranging from managing animals to ensuring Singapore's food security.

AVA manages stray dogs, cats and wild monkeys to address feedback on public concerns caused by the animals. AVA's contractors are required to have the necessary expertise and comply with animal welfare guidelines in handling these animals.

I also want to reassure Members that we take all animal cruelty cases seriously. AVA will investigate feedback on animal cruelty and welfare issues and take the wrongdoers to task.

Mr Louis Ng has asked about collaboration between AVA and animal welfare groups (AWGs) on animal-related issues. AVA already does so. For instance, the Animal Concerns Research and Education Society (ACRES) is one of AVA's contractors for responding to wild animal issues.

AVA also works with the Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (SPCA) and the Cat Welfare Society (CWS) on the Stray Cat Sterilisation Programme (SCSP). Under the programme, AVA co-funds the cost of sterilising and micro-chipping stray cats in HDB estates. The AWGs also help to mediate cat-related feedback and manage community cat feeders to prevent nuisance to the community. AWGs play a very important intermediary role in the community. Going forward, AVA will expand the programme to cover stray cats in industrial and commercial areas, and private estates. With this expansion, we hope to sterilise 20,000 more stray cats.

AVA also works closely with AWGs on public outreach regarding animal-related issues. Through the Responsible Pet Ownership Programme, AVA has held roadshows and joint adoption drives with AWGs, emphasising that a pet is for life and should not be abandoned. AVA plans to collaborate with AWGs to further such outreach efforts.

Besides AWGs, AVA also works with the Immigration and Checkpoints Authority (ICA) and Singapore Customs (SC) to clamp down on illegal wildlife trade. AVA also works closely with international partners, such as wildlife authorities in ASEAN countries and the International Criminal Police Organization (INTERPOL), to deter such illegal animal trade. Through these efforts, the number of wildlife trafficking cases has decreased from 23 in 2011 to 12 in 2015.

With the support of these partners, I would like to assure Mr Louis Ng that AVA will remain vigilant and continue to optimise resources to tackle animal issues and animal crimes.

Mr Alex Yam spoke about the need to transform our local agriculture sector. Indeed, this sector holds great potential. Climate change, whether it is global warming or irregular weather patterns, is causing greater uncertainties in overseas food supply. At the same time, the world population is growing, projected to increase from 7.3 billion today to 9.7 billion by 2050. Developing countries are also seeing their young people migrate to the cities, leaving less manpower for farming. So, there is no certainty that the global food supply will keep up with the growing global demand. We need to raise our local food production to buffer against such uncertainties in the future.

Singapore can carve a niche in urban solutions by becoming a living lab for food production technologies, just like what we have done for water recycling and desalination, turning a disadvantage into something we can be proud of.

To facilitate that and hearing our farmers' feedback, we are reviewing our agriculture policies, including the lease tenure, to give farmers impetus to invest in transformative technologies. Through our Agriculture Productivity Fund, we will continue to provide financial support to promising farmers in adopting these technologies. We will create the right environment where our farmers can grow more with less, through the use of technology and innovation.

Mr Chairman, may I have your permission to show some visuals on the LED screens, please?

The Chairman: Yes, proceed. [Slides were shown to hon Members.]

Dr Koh Poh Koon: Thank you, Sir. We envision that farms of the future will make use of integrated vertical and indoor systems, automation and robotics. They will be highly intensive and productive and operate on minimal manpower.

We are already beginning to see this new breed of farms in Singapore. Just last month, I visited Apollo Aquarium and Sky Greens, which represent state-of-the-art urban and vertical farming technologies.

Take Apollo, for example. Apollo Aquarium houses its fish in indoor, vertical multi-tiered tanks. They use less land, yet produce more fish. In a controlled environment, the farm can be monitored and operated remotely, without the risks of uncontrollable environmental factors that can threaten the yield of the fish stock.

Sky Greens is the world's first commercial vertical farm. Its three-storey-high vertical racks can produce about 2,500 stalks of vegetables. This system requires less water, less electricity and less labour, yet produces five times more leafy vegetables than traditional farms.

Across the board, local production levels for our key food items, such as food fish, leafy vegetables and hen's eggs, have steadily risen over the years. In 2015, our farms produced about 5,300 tonnes of fish for food, 11,400 tonnes of leafy vegetables and 421 million eggs. Compared to five years ago, production volumes have gone up by 52% for fish, 21% for vegetables and 10% for eggs respectively.

We can do much more. The Netherlands and Denmark employ technologies that are five to six times more productive than our most productive fish farms, and two times more productive than our best vegetable farms. Imagine what we can achieve if all our local farmers employ these technologies! We may become much more self-sufficient in some of our essential food items.

To realise their full potential, besides adopting transformative technologies, there is scope for the agricultural sector to consolidate and intensify their operations. This will move the needle in production and in their manpower optimisation strategy.

We have a mission to achieve that is as crucial as water and that is to strengthen our food security in an era of global food uncertainty. My Ministry and AVA will make the development of our local agricultural sector a priority for the coming years.

The Chairman: Thank you, Minister of State. I do have a little bit of time for clarifications. I want to remind Members that clarifications are for clarifications and not to make speeches, and to ask clarifications relating to the Minister's answers only. Mr Alex Yam.

Mr Alex Yam: Thank you, Chairman. I have a clarification for the Minister with regard to the Fresh Start Housing Scheme. Could the Minister explain the rationale behind deciding the MOP as 20 years? The reason behind it is that if you set it at 20 years, it means that the average age of families who are entering this scheme would mean that most of them would not be able to move to a bigger flat by the time they hit the 20 years.

6.45 pm

The second clarification is about the 1,000 families that the Minister mentioned earlier. This seems to be a small proportion of the total number families. Would this scheme be incremental after the first pilot?

Lastly, for large families, the 2-room flexi flats are a little bit small. Would the Ministry consider any flexibility in this area?

Mr Lawrence Wong: Mr Chairman, I understand the Member's concern with regard to the size of the flat, the MOP requirement and also the number of potential beneficiaries of Fresh Start.

I would just highlight that when we thought about the scheme and we looked at the potential beneficiaries, the profile I was talking about, second-timers in rental flats with young children, school-going children. If you look at the savings and the balances they have today, there is an affordability issue even if we, say, buy a 3-room flat now, even with the grant. It is not going to be so easy for them to do so.

So, we have to be realistic about what they can afford. Even after the Fresh Start grant, given the balances that they have in savings and the situation they are in, I think it is more realistic to aim for a 2-room flexi flat for a start. And the longer MOP is there to make sure that there is a stable environment for the children.

Should any of these families who apply, eventually down the road, say that they have been able to be successful, with better incomes and now are better able to afford a 3-room flat, I think we can facilitate that. Even if it is within the MOP, we will find ways to facilitate that. Because that is a success story which we should celebrate; meaning this is a household which came under Fresh Start, got a 2-room flat, and then said, now we have succeeded, incomes are stabilised, are better, we are able to afford a 3-room flat. We will find ways to facilitate that. But we wanted the long MOP to make sure that there is stability for the home environment and also to avoid situations where families cash out their flats early.

The Chairman: Mr Low Thia Khiang.

Mr Low Thia Khiang: I want to clarify that the Town Council does have a regular maintenance regime for the lifts. What we found out is that the breakdown or failure of the parts are unusually fast, compared to some other lifts. The question then is what is the quality of the LUP lifts? What are the safeguards or specifications that HDB has got, in terms of the tender?

On the issue of lift market, maintenance market, I understand that the new lift being installed with the manufacturing company will come with its own motherboard, which other companies will not be able to maintain. Which means that, going forward, the Town Council's lift maintenance will be held ransom by this manufacturing company.

The fundamental question is what is the situation of the lift manufacture and maintenance market in Singapore? Is the market competitive or are we in a situation where you have not much of choice, but are dependent on these companies? Will they decide how much they will increase the price in maintenance every year? Of course, probably Opposition Town Councils will be at a disadvantage, because we are not given the leeway of discounts, as they give to PAP Town Councils, from what I know.

The Chairman: Senior Minister of State Desmond Lee.

Mr Desmond Lee: Sir, the Member now raises a couple of issues which were mentioned earlier. On the issue of lift breakdowns, the Member talks about the quality of LUP. In deciding what lifts are put into a housing estate, including in LUP, we process projects by way of a price-quality procurement process where you look not just at price, but also the quality of the lift. So, there are certain specifications that have to be met. As I said earlier, I think we need to really have a proper drill down by the Town Council. If you think there is an issue, raise it to MND and HDB, so that you can assess whether it is an issue of the lift brand, lift model, or is it a specific issue with regard to a particular shaft. Is it a maintenance problem? Is it a usage issue? So, I think beyond speculation, it is better to look at specifics.

The hon Member also speaks about motherboards of lifts and that, therefore, he is concerned about whether there is market competitiveness with regard to maintenance of lifts in HDB estates, which responsibilities then fall on Town Councils across the island. As I said earlier, there are many players in the lift supply market and the lift maintenance market. In HDB estates across Singapore, there are easily at least 20 brands of lifts being used. Equally, many players in the lift maintenance market, including the original lift manufacturers and third-party contractors.

So, Mr Low Thia Khiang talked about the manufacturer then having proprietary ownership in the technology of the motherboards, but there are also other parts of the lifts. Each of these lift maintenance companies, whether they are manufacturer or third-party contractor, comes in variant profiles and capabilities. There may be more complex maintenance issues which may require certain parties with specific competencies, such as the original lift manufacturer, to resolve.

HDB upholds a competitive market and will not allow any particular party to abuse its market power, whether it is a part, or whether it is a maintenance regime. If there are any concerns that the Member raises, please let us know specifically, whether the motherboard, the type he is concerned about, let us know.

Mr Lawrence Wong: Mr Chairman, I just wanted to add in response to Mr Low Thia Khiang's query, as I understand his suggestion is to look at how we can standardise more components within the lifts. We have two objectives. One, to bring down costs, and secondly, so that we will not be held hostage or the Town Councils will not be held hostage by any particular Original Equipment Manufacturers (OEMs).

I agree fully with those suggestions. The objectives that we have are, indeed, aligned, because we have, over the years, been doing more standardisation. That is why, in the early days, all the lift maintenance contracts were done by OEMs entirely. We were in a very difficult situation where we had to pay whatever prices that the OEMs charged.

Now, we have a more competitive market. There are third-party contractors, but Mr Low Thia Khiang is right, that not everything can be done by the third-party contractor. Sometimes, for very complex things, for certain parts, you still need to go to the OEM.

We should try and aim for an even more competitive market, so I agree with the Member. With just one caveat, that we have to study this very carefully, because this is quite complex. If we were to overly prescribe certain standards, and say only these things can be done, we may end up with a situation where we limit our choices that we have to purchase. Fewer OEMs will bid for lift contracts in Singapore, the cost may be higher. So, it is complex and we have to look at this in detail.

I would say that the direction of what the Member has suggested is something we agree with. HDB has already done this and we will continue to do more of it.

The Chairman: Mr Muhamad Faisal Manap.

Mr Muhamad Faisal Bin Abdul Manap: Sir, I would like to clarify my point that I have made in my cut on the Goodwill Repair Assistance scheme, which was replied to by Senior Minister of State Desmond Lee.

The main point of the cut is that under the current scheme, the repair is only being done to the upper floor. Basically, there is an issue of leakage, so repair work will be done on the floor of the upper floor unit, the source of the leak. But due to the leak, it damages the lower floor's ceiling. So, the repair of this damaged ceiling is not covered under the Goodwill Repair Assistance scheme. The feedback that I have got from those living on the lower floor units is that they wonder why they should pay a share of the repair done on the upper floor. Sorry for being a bit confusing.

Mr Desmond Lee: Mr Chairman, the Goodwill Repair Assistance scheme involves HDB coming in to help facilitate the resolution of maintenance issues faced by both upper and lower floors.

In this particular instance, it will be the residents of the lower floor who are suffering from the leakage and, therefore, the scheme encourages both parties to do what is necessary to solve the problem. So, the Government, HDB will pay half the cost of fixing the leakage. Most of the work, as the Member rightly points out, involves waterproofing membrane works for the upper floor unit. For the lower floor unit, you may need to fix some spalling of concrete, because of the leakage problem. So, the Goodwill Repair Assistance scheme also addresses that. For the Member's particular case, let us have a closer look and we will see what aspect of the ceiling has been damaged and whether it is related to the leakage.

The Chairman: Er Dr Lee Bee Wah.

Er Dr Lee Bee Wah: Thank you, Chairman. I have three clarifications. First, on the singles scheme. I would like to know, based on HDB's records, how many singles are still applying for a flat and have not gotten it successfully? The Minister mentioned that it will be cleared soon. I would like to know how soon?

The second question is on the Fresh Start Grant. The Minister mentioned that they should have school-going age children. May I ask does it include children who are in tertiary education? Does it include private tertiary education?

The third question is on the construction industry. I would like to know whether there is any plan to encourage, retain and build up Singaporean Core professionals like engineers, architects and construction managers?

Mr Lawrence Wong: Madam, on the first point about singles. We would not be able to exactly pinpoint what is the demand from singles, because there may be more coming forward to apply. We do not have the exact number in terms of forecasting demand from singles, but I would say that it is still quite strong. We still see quite a lot of applications even in the last BTO exercise. If you look at the application rate, as I mentioned, it is more than seven, which indicates that there is still very strong demand.

Based on that level, I think we will take two to three years to clear that level of demand. Will even more come forward once the queue gets shorter? Maybe. That is why I said even after we have cleared this current surge of demand, there may be more coming forward, but that is the kind of numbers and timeframe we are looking at.

The second question is on the Fresh Start Grant and the condition for the school-going children. We are looking at a parent with at least one child in school, particularly because we want to make sure that the child has a stable environment to grow up in. At least one child, so that means school-going age, which is anything that is less than 16 years old. But if they have more than one child, they can be in university, they can be in tertiary institutions, private institutions, and that is fine.

Mr Desmond Lee: Chairman, may I deal with the Member's last question, which is on whether BCA is doing anything to encourage the growth of the Singapore Core with regard to the built environment sector. I presume the Member is talking about architects, consultants, designers and contractors.

Yes, certainly that is key. I spoke earlier in my speech about how BCA is going upstream and having a whole suite of scholarships to encourage Singapore students in our institutions, whether it is in ITE, polytechnics and universities, to come onboard the built environment sector. There is also an Earn-and-Learn scheme, where after they join the particular programme at an institution, they learn and earn along the way and get brought into the sector.

Certainly, building that core is critical. In fact, whilst the push to productivity is one of the key drivers behind adopting higher technology or game-changing technology in construction, such as VDC and DfMA, ultimately, if you look at it, by using technology, using ICT, building in a smart and creative way, this also creates niches and opportunities for Singaporeans to come into the built environment sector as well.

The Chairman: Dr Teo Ho Pin.

Dr Teo Ho Pin: Chairman, I would like to seek a clarification from the Senior Minister of State whether the Ministry will consider reviewing or removing the terms and conditions of the land sales, such as specifying the method of construction, which has an effect on increasing development cost?

Mr Desmond Lee: Sir, there are certain requirements that we put into our Government Land Sales (GLS) in order to drive the industry towards higher productivity methods of construction. I think we all agree as to the direction. The Member is concerned about whether these actually achieve the objectives. The objective is the same but, on the methods, we might have a slight difference of opinion.

7.00 pm

Some of our GLS sales come with a condition that they meet certain buildability scores. That has been the norm. Now, we have some GLSs which specify that the construction must be by PPVC, and it is not 100%. I think it is about 60% by PPVC; the rest can be by casting in situ; so, we provide some flexibility. It is transparent and it is a level-playing field. Parties who bid for these land sale sites know that there is a certain technological requirement. These help create lead demand for us to adopt the higher productivity methods.

As for one of the points, the Member raised in his speech earlier about whether we can relax the requirement for contractors or developers to finish the project within x number of years, I think we do not want the land to be hoarded. There are certain requirements that drive us to have GLS, especially for residential and commercial uses. They are meant to meet the demand that we have projected and we do not want and, certainly, no Singaporean would want land to be hoarded indefinitely. We want to see that the project is developed. The timeline that URA provides is a reasonable one.

The Chairman: Mr Alex Yam.

Mr Alex Yam: Thank you, Chairman, two clarifications for Minister of State Dr Koh Poh Koon. One, I am happy to hear of the exciting vision to ensure food security. Dr Koh mentioned a review on the land lease for agricultural land. Would the Minister of State be able to share when this information will be made available and whether any criteria will be put in place for any longer leases?

Secondly, for financial assistance, I mentioned in my speech, whether previous economic downturns have provided us with any lessons. I wonder if the schemes that the Minister of State had mentioned earlier are sufficient to prepare us for any future major downturns.

Dr Koh Poh Koon: Mr Chairman, I thank the Member for his clarification questions. First of all, on the issue of land and farming, we obviously want to encourage our farmers to be more productive. It is something that we want to encourage them to do, and the Agricultural Productivity Fund is one of those measures. We will continue to engage our farmers actively to encourage them to do so.

In terms of the question earlier about how we can increase the tenure to encourage them to be more productive, we are still in the midst of consulting our farmers. The indication is that they would prefer to have a longer tenure in order to allow them to invest sufficiently. We will take their feedback into consideration in deciding how we want to award our tenures and scope the policy accordingly.

As for the question about whether the current schemes and measures are sufficient to help families in the economic downturn, there are quite a number of schemes and policies that can help families, whether they are first-timers, second-timers or divorced. At the end of the day, HDB does take a flexible approach to help families who are in need, even if they do fall within these schemes, the whole idea being that we want to make sure that they do have a roof over their heads.

We will monitor the situation closely and if there are cases that we are beginning to see more, especially at our Meet-the-People Sessions (MPS), that there are more families that seem to fall through the cracks. We will see how these schemes can be enhanced or if there is any new scheme that we can introduce to plug the gap.

The Chairman: Mr Png Eng Huat.

Mr Png Eng Huat: Chairman, Sir, I just want to clarify the issue I brought up about the LUP design in Hougang, that I have met HDB. Some of the issues have been resolved and some have not because some of them, like the lift-landing breach, HDB said it meets statutory requirements.

Like I said in my cut, because of the proximity to the resident's house and the dry riser, nothing else can be done. I would like to ask the Minister what else we can do to rectify all these design anomalies.

Mr Desmond Lee: I do not have the precise details. I have heard from the Member. I think what is important is to just let us have the details and then we will look into that. I cannot address it here in this Chamber.

The Chairman: Mr Leon Perera, did you want to raise a clarification?

Mr Leon Perera (Non-Constituency Member): Thank you, Mr Chairman, just a few points of clarifications to the hon Minister of State. Firstly, on the statistics he cited that flat owners who are seeking to rent out rooms, a survey was conducted a few years ago, where only 5% of them had difficulties finding tenants. The anecdotal feedback I have from residents —

The Chairman: Mr Perera, please state the clarification and not make a speech.

Mr Leon Perera: Yes. So, my question is: would the Minister of State consider doing this survey on a regular basis? Because my understanding is that the market has softened and the markets do go through cycles. So, would such a survey about whether flat owners have difficulties finding tenants, be something that the Ministry would do on a regular basis?

The second point of clarification is regarding LBS. The hon Minister of State mentioned rental and downgrading as other options but, of course, rental depends on the market; downgrading has other downsides, like commissions and costs. There is evidence to suggest that the bequeath motives hold back some people from exercising LBS. Would the Ministry look into ways to address the bequeath motive issue that is holding back some people from making use of LBS, such as the suggestion made by Mr Chen Show Mao?

Lastly, on APF, I would like to ask the Ministry why the disbursement of the fund has been quite low so far. Clearly, there are deserving projects, in terms of indoor and vertical farming. Is it because of a lack of deserving projects? Or is it because of some lack of connectivity between the companies, the farmers, and the agency in charge of disbursing the fund?

Dr Koh Poh Koon: Mr Chairman, Sir, for the first question that the Member raised about the rental survey, we all do our Meet-the-People Sessions (MPS), we have residents coming to see us and telling us their issues. One of the ways we can sense whether this is going to become an important issue is through our MPS. We can sense whether this is a common enough problem.

If it is picked up that this is a much more prevalent problem and is increasingly so, we can reconduct another survey. But with or without a survey, estate agents are available, websites that allow matching of rental tenants and people with rooms to rent are also available. So, we do not quite need a survey for any of these services to be available. So, those who need this can avail themselves of these presently available services right now.

For the second question on LBS and whether bequeathing is one of those things that holds people back from taking part in LBS, I think, at the end of the day, it is an option and a choice that the elderly couple has to decide, how they want to monetise their flat. If they do want to bequeath their flat, then I think it makes more sense for them to retain the whole flat, rent it out in the meantime – either whole flat or a room – while keeping the full intact value of the flat to bequeath it to their children.

If you have an LBS where you already sold part of the lease back to HDB and you only have such a short lease left, I am not sure how much value there is for the couple to bequeath to their children. If the intent is to bequeath the flat to their children, they should keep the flat. But if what they want is to monetise their flat, there are many options. We are not trying to push people to go onto LBS, so there is no real need to try to make it so attractive for people to go onto LBS. At this moment, by expanding LBS to allow 4-room flat owners to join, we have already catered to almost 75% of the elderly who own flats. That is adequate for the moment.

Regarding APF and why the take-up rate may not be as high as we would want it to be, part of the reason could be that farmers make their choices about how they want to transform. We have to do it from two ways. One, encourage them to continue to look forward, to be more forward-looking and to adopt technology. So, the persuasion part has to be there. Secondly, perhaps some farmers may find that the existing farms may be nearing the end of their lease, so they might be hesitant to take the lead and so do. Certainly, as they renew their lease, we can encourage them to look at how they can use APF to further change the way they do farming, so that as they take on a new lease with a longer life span, they can then utilise the APF effectively to up their farming technologies.

The Chairman: We have come to the end of clarification time. Mr Alex Yam, would you like to withdraw your amendment?

Mr Alex Yam: Mr Chairman, let me first thank the 20 Members who filed a total of 43 cuts across diverse topics, such as housing municipal issues, construction, agriculture, animal welfare, and even hot springs.

With this all-rounded responsibility, MND and its eight statutory boards have their work cut out. There is perhaps no other Ministry that has such an intimate day-to-day relationship with Singaporeans as MND. I therefore, wish to record my thanks to Minister Lawrence Wong, Minister Grace Fu, Senior Minister of State Desmond Lee, Minister of State Dr Koh Poh Koon, and Permanent Secretary Benny Lim for their replies, and also to all the staff of MND for the hard work that they put in. With that, Chairman, I beg leave to withdraw my amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

The sum of $2,549,842,400 for Head T ordered to stand part of the Main Estimates.

The sum of $10,992,651,200 for Head T ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates.