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

The Chairman: Head T, Ministry of National Development. Mr Alex Yam.

Building Our Future Singapore, Together

Mr Alex Yam (Marsiling-Yew Tee): Mr Chairman, I beg to move, "That the total sum to be allocated for Head T of the Estimates be reduced by $100".

As a Member of the Class of 2011 in Parliament, like me, many Members of this House would have personally experienced the volume of appeals by our residents regarding housing matters from 2009 through to 2013. Many were young couples, and even their parents, who came to Meet-the-People Sessions, anxious and perhaps also perplexed by the housing situation then. Many try and try but were constantly unsuccessful in their applications for a flat.

Fast forward today, I think we can mostly agree that the situation has gotten much better. Just by volume of cases, you can tell that the increase in supply and the multiple improvements that have been made and introduced by then Minister Khaw Boon Wan and, more recently, by Minister Lawrence Wong and the MND team have made a difference. This is a Ministry that has listened intently to feedback from the public and suggestions from backbenchers for a re-emphasis on the centrality of housing to the social compact that we have with fellow Singaporeans, and that there are housing options for Singaporeans at every life-stage.

While the appeals on purchased flats have dropped, there is still work required on the other end of the housing spectrum, and this is rental housing. At last year’s Committee of Supply, I spoke on the issue of co-living, as well as our public rental flat schemes. I am thankful that the Ministry has made improvements on many fronts, yet it is still an issue that vexes. I, therefore, welcome the Senior Parliamentary Secretary’s reiteration yesterday that public rental should be temporary.

To help households in rental housing to move to home-ownership is certainly not straightforward. There are multiple issues that rental families face. We have experimented with different schemes before, such as the HOPE Scheme (Home Ownership with Education) which I previously raised issues with. We now have the Fresh Start Housing Scheme which the Senior Parliamentary Secretary also updated the House that 74 families have now been emplaced.

Yet, with a scheme that has been in place since December 2016, the numbers seem to indicate a fresh but no so fast start. I took a look at the available numbers. In December 2017, 56 applied, 33 were successful. In December 2018, Minister announced that 70 were placed. Today, in March 2019, we have 74.

If we look at the figures of the number of families who have progressed from rental to home-ownership of 3,500 over the last six years, 74 seem very small indeed. And 3,500 households across 56,000 rental units seem to indicate that the journey, though encouraged, is honestly quite fraught.

[Deputy Speaker (Mr Charles Chong) in the Chair]

Most of us would have rental households in our constituencies. We are certainly proud and happy for our residents who have successfully progressed to purchasing their own homes. But do we also shed a tear for the many who are left behind? We have seen their struggles first-hand – to try to hold a job, to fight ill health, to balance family needs, to pay debts, and, for some of them, to stay on the straight and narrow. For us and many community partners, we do whatever we can to help them. Yet, often, challenges remain and continue to surface that keep them from completely lifting themselves out.

5.00 pm

I am, therefore, heartened by Senior Parliamentary Secretary's announcement of a Home Ownership Support team to provide stronger personalised help for those with potential for home ownership. The work for the new team will certainly not be easy. Could the Ministry, therefore, update the House on the ambit of this new team and what are the conditions that the team will be looking at to identify households that can potentially become homeowners?

Based on the understanding of this criteria, could I also ask the Ministry how many of rental households today would potentially move towards home ownership in the next five years and what are the main barriers that would keep the rest from moving towards these aspirations?

While we address the issue of families progressing to home ownership from rental, there is also a group who faces even greater challenges. These are our elderly poor, often single, without family support. Last year, I raised the issue of joint-singles where co-tenants are unable to get along. Would the Ministry consider having more rental flats refurbished to provide for more privacy within the flats for co-tenants to have some semblance of their own space? This reduces the disagreements that may surface. Also, I would suggest for an adjustment period to be included for the benefit of both co-tenants so that they have time to adjust to each other before committing to a full rental contract. This could be for a month and come with certain pre-conditions.

From elders in rental flats to elderly homeowners, the Ministry has provided additional options over the years. One example is the Lease Buyback Scheme (LBS). After the enhanced LBS was first announced by Deputy Prime Minister Tharman in 2012, fellow Members and I have pushed for great adoption of the scheme and also for the scheme to be extended. Further improvements were then made in 2014, and I was most heartened when Minister Lawrence announced after last year's NDR that LBS will be extended to all flat types effective from 1 January this year.

I have actively promoted the LBS to my older residents and, as I have a high number of larger flats, the extension is welcome news for my residents. However, I also wish to point out that there are many who are still unaware of the details and grapple with issues surrounding leaving an asset for their children or should they live beyond the period under the LBS agreement. Would the Ministry, therefore, consider better communication on the scheme and perhaps offer a customised info-kit to home owners who qualify for the scheme so that they can be better informed of their options?

Related to this is, of course, diminishing lease and its impact on home prices. The Ministry had earlier indicated in August 2018 that it is studying the possibility of allowing liberalisation of the usage of CPF for older, shortest lease flats. I wish, therefore, to ask the Ministry for an update on the study so far and the parameters that the Ministry is looking at to make this work. I would also point out that while this will open up the market for older flats and allow younger home owners the option of purchasing an older flat using more of their CPF, we must not solve two problems and yet move the main issue of diminishing leases further down the line.

For younger aspiring home owners as well as second-timers, the Sale of Balance Flat Scheme and the Re-Offer of Balance Flat Schemes are often seen as the easier and quicker option to getting keys to your own flat. But I often caution younger residents who try for SBF that they are competing for a smaller pool with a bigger crowd, and yet they still try. Therefore, I welcome the Ministry's announcement that the ROF will now be extended all year round and made available online on a first-come first-served basis. However, I wish to ask how the Ministry intends for the system to work smoothly and avoid opportunistic applications rather than from those with genuine needs. Could the Ministry also clarify how the first-come first-served system will be fair for all?

If the ROF scheme under the new arrangement is proven to be a successful model, I would ask that the Ministry also consider extending it to the SBF scheme as well.

Over the years, I have also been making an appeal for better access to housing for singles and single parents. We have made big strides for singles and the extension of grants in the last two years have been helpful for many applicants. However, one feedback I have consistently received is that while the grants are attractive, often they are hard to qualify for, such as the proximity grant when the estates that singles wish to apply for close to their parents or child are of larger flat types that they do not qualify for. For single-parents and divorcees, the waiver of the wait-out period that was announced recently is a Godsend. However, the requirement for approval of the former spouse to purchase a flat often still serves as a major barrier. Could the Ministry, therefore, consider further relaxing this requirement?

Mr Chairman, we live in a fast-changing world. Singapore prides itself as a city that keeps pace with technology. Could the Ministry update on the plans to make our nation's built infrastructure future-ready? In doing so, can we also ensure that it continues to be a welcoming and liveable city where all Singaporeans can feel a part of?

What are the challenges that lie ahead of us? Last year, I had the privilege of accompanying President Halimah on her State Visit to the Netherlands. While there, I saw for myself the Dutch living out the Polder Culture in all aspects of their lives, especially in how they build and plan their city. Like us, we are a small country surrounded by water and at risk of global warming and rising sea levels. I watched a simulation there at the Research Institute of our city centre flooded as sea-waters rise. We can talk about it. But watching it really hits home quickly. The reality is that the risks are real. How can we plan in advance for this possibility and learn from the experiences of others?

Singapore, ultimately, is our home. It must be one that is endearing and enduring. Our homes must be places of comfort and safety, our communities built on trust and cohesiveness, our environment green and welcoming, our nation united and strong. At the root of it all is our compact with Singaporeans, a promise that we have kept and must continue to keep – come hell or high water.

Question proposed.

Building Our Future City and Home

Mr Chong Kee Hiong (Bishan-Toa Payoh): Sir, many visitors remark on how rapidly Singapore's skyline is changing. Indeed, we are constantly building up, expanding out and tunneling down. As we develop and transform our city, how will the Ministry continue to ensure that housing, industry and business needs are met as we stay green, create space for agricultural development and take measures against the effects of global warming?

HDB flats will continue to be where the majority of Singaporeans make their home. As HDB is in the process of reviewing the Home Improvement Programme (HIP) 2 and the Voluntary Early Redevelopment Scheme (VERS), it is timely to also consider the redevelopment of entire precincts or estates, instead of making incremental changes.

The benefit of a "whole-of-precinct" or even "whole-of-estate" redevelopment project is a better integrated layout with improved accessibility and connectivity. Infrastructure could also be improved in a more holistic manner. Another plus is the viability of installing systems incorporating new technologies, such as the pneumatic waste conveyance system (PWCS). Redeveloping a precinct or a cluster of precincts may even be more economical and technically easier to carry out. Redevelopment also provides the opportunity for rejuvenation. For many older estates close to the Central Business District, the height of the new blocks can be increased to accommodate more young families who have members working in the CBD.

HDB is not only the main provider of housing. It also has to fulfill many social objectives. HDB estates must foster inclusivity through the distribution of household types as well as the design and layout of high-quality social and community facilities. Meeting the needs of different family compositions, the elderly, persons with special needs and other vulnerable groups require redesigning blocks, the precincts and surrounding facilities. It is far more feasible to have a total makeover than piecemeal renewal.

Infrastructure – the transformation of our infrastructure is necessary to enhance our ability to cope with climate changes, including higher temperatures and heavy rains, and to become more resource-efficient, such as through the installation of solar panels and other energy-efficient measures. Our city also needs to undergo infrastructural renewal to keep up with technological revolutions, such as the installation of charging points for electric vehicles. Would the Minister share with us an update on the major projects to make Singapore more resilient in the face of climate change? Will our city be sufficiently equipped to deal with or, better still, lead other cities, in technological advances?

To attract more investments, we need good infrastructure and buildings which provide reliable and seamless support to businesses and industries, particularly those in the innovative and cutting-edge sectors. Whether we are building homes, tunnels or roads, we must constantly check and enforce the high quality of our structures through construction oversight and strict audits of certification works. The lessons of Opal Tower in Sydney and its wider implications for buildings across Australia is a timely reminder of the importance of quality control. What measures does MND have in place to enhance the quality and safety of our building projects?

Aesthetics is also important. We should be a city which is not only efficient and functional, but also beautiful and interesting, with buildings reflecting our unique historical and cultural heritage. We should be a city attractive to visitors but, more importantly, a joy to live and work in for Singaporeans. In this aspect, I urge the Ministry to continue to provide support to HDB to create beautiful and practical homes and estates.

We want to become more independent in terms of our food supply. This is a great challenge in our land-scarce island. Would the Ministry share its plans for helping our farming communities through the creation of space and building of supporting infrastructure?

Finally, Singapore needs to protect her areas of greenery as this is an important component of a liveable environment. I would like to request for an update of our efforts in this area.

Draft Master Plan 2019

Mr Ong Teng Koon (Marsiling-Yew Tee): Sir, the URA has indicated that the updated Master Plan will be published this year. This time round, more so than for previous years, there will be intense public interest to see how URA will lay out its vision for the physical future of our country. I can also sense palpable excitement on the ground, with some calling this the Master Plan for underground space.

I think it is quite cliched to talk about how technology is changing our lives, but they are definitely new developments that could fundamentally change how we think about physical space. For example, the advent of autonomous vehicles could totally revolutionise land-use. One direct but profound outcome is less need for parking in each building, as fewer people will drive themselves. Commuters will arrive in AVs, which will then drive off and pick up other passengers. It is not uncommon now to have three to five storeys of every building dedicated to carparks.

Widespread adoption of AVs could free up several extra floors per building and create a 5% to 10% uplift in lettable area. Another issue of concern is the potential impact of climate change, such as rising sea levels. What impact would this have on low-lying coastal areas and on reclaimed land? I remember the Minister for National Development's reply to a PQ that I asked in 2011 in relation to rising sea levels that all new reclamation projects would have to be built to 2.25 metres. Does MND have any plans to raise this requirement further?

A Master Plan typically has a 10- to 15-year planning horizon, but buildings can easily last 30 to 40 years. How do we balance the long- and short-term needs and make optimal use of scarce land? At the same time, we need to balance commercial uses with recreational space and maintain greenery even within the central core. I would, therefore, like to ask the Minister how the URA will ensure that the Master Plan will effectively support our next phase of growth? Will there be opportunities for public input? How will this be done and what can the public expect to see?

I have noticed significant rejuvenation within the CBD over the last few years, as old buildings have been replaced or refurbished to meet future needs. Trends, such as the rise of co-working, have also helped to bring more vibrancy into the CBD, as smaller companies and start-ups can now afford space downtown. How does MND plan to also rejuvenate older areas of the city, within the CBD, as well as in the surrounding areas?

The Government shared plans about the Greater Southern Waterfront (GSW) last year. The opportunity to replace the existing port operations at Tanjong Pagar are exciting, given the prime location so close to both the CBD and to leisure zones, such as Sentosa. What can we expect to see at the GSW and what is the timeline for realising these plans?

Finally, I would like to thank the Ministry for doing important work to redefine our urban landscape for the next decade, and I look forward to the Minister sharing his exciting plans with fellow Singaporeans.

5.15 pm

The Chairman: Mr Gan Thiam Poh, you have five minutes for your three cuts.

Housing Needs

Mr Gan Thiam Poh (Ang Mo Kio): Sir, for young couples, many have to wait more than a couple of years before collecting keys to their new HDB flats. This is really not conducive for family planning. Most of these couples put up at their parents’ flats instead of renting in the interim to save money for their future. Considering that current flats are not big, it is quite a squeeze to house another new family member with babies on the way.

Because of this, most couples postpone having a child until they get their own flats, which is again, not ideal, as more and more couples are getting married when they are older, in their 30s. Hence, it would be really helpful if the wait can be shortened. Would the Ministry continue to build BTO flats ahead so that buyers can enjoy shorter waiting times of 18 months or less?

In addition, for families wishing to upgrade to a bigger flat, can priority be given according to the number of children they have? After all, the more children there are, the greater the urgency for more space. This will also encourage our young couples to have more children as they can be assured that they don’t have to wait too long when they need to upgrade to bigger flats to house more kids. May I ask how many such applications have been received and what is the percentage of success?

Lastly, will the Ministry consider additional measures to encourage first-timers to continue to live near their parents in existing mature estates? Can some form of additional rebates or incentives be provided? This is because first-timer young couples have to pay a premium for these locations, which are generally more centralised and have more amenities.

Continued Vibrancy of Mature Estates

What measures will MND take to ensure mature estates remain vibrant and liveable, especially with the falling average household size? How about building more BTO flats targeted at young families? This will enable young couples to stay near their parents and their children will bring more vibrancy to a mature area with high numbers of elderly.

Optimise the Use of Car Park

To optimise our car parks, would HDB and URA consider introducing another type of season parking, namely, for half a day, either day or night parking, at HDB, URA and heavy vehicle car parks to provide an alternative for those who do shift work and to ease their parking needs and optimise the parking space?

Improving the Liveability of HDB Towns

Mr Saktiandi Supaat (Bishan-Toa Payoh): Mr Chairman, Sir, the release of each BTO estate brings about better upgrades and facilities than the last one, reflecting the needs of the different demographics over the years. From the early days of no-frills living, to addition of playgrounds of fitness amenities, to green-living aesthetics, HDB flats have come a far way.

Yet this creates a significant difference between the mature estates and newer estates, and there are some concerns that mature estates will not catch up with the newer estates in terms of technology and liveability. Imagine living in a non-smart technology enabled estate, and then visiting a grandchild’s new estate and finding it too foreign to navigate. The state and appearance of one’s living environment projects a certain standard of living, so we do not want to create a situation whereby residents living in different neighbourhood estates have a different quality of life.

Moreover, estates should be upgraded regularly to maintain safety and inject freshness in the neighbourhood. What is the Ministry doing to ensure HDB estates and flats remain liveable and vibrant even as they age? Can the Ministry share how the timeline is decided for the implementation of upgrading projects in the older mature estates, so that they can catch up with the newer estates? Will rental flats benefit from these upgrades as well?

Endearing Homes – Can We Do More?

Er Dr Lee Bee Wah (Nee Soon): Sir, I was pleased to learn from last year’s National Day Rally that flats built between 1987 and 1997 will also be included in Home Improvement Programme (HIP). Half of Khatib homes were built in 1986 and the HIP have been completed or near completion. The other half of Khatib homes were built in 1987 where residents are still waiting for their HIP. May I know how soon can they have their HIP? Their flats would require repair in many areas. Despite the conditions of these flats, many residents are waiting and hoping. They want to save on renovation cost because many are elderly, retired or semi-retired.

In private estates, many residents look forward to the Estate Upgrading Programme (EUP).

Can we have EUP in more estates? Like HDB estates, amenities around the private estates too deteriorate with the years, and they too should be subject to renewal. renewal. We can serve the private estates better by introducing more community facilities, like playing fields, courts, carparks and so on. Create opportunities for the neighbours to come together, to facilitate community togetherness. I would like to request for a large-scale town-wide funding to be extended to private estates too.

Designated Smoking Points (DSPs) are increasingly popular among my residents. We have been relying on private funds to build the DSPs. Can we tap into the Community Improvement Projects Committee (CIPC) funding for maintenance and addition of new DSPs? With CIPC fund, more DSPs can be rolled out to other parts of Singapore too. Perhaps, HDB should be bold enough to pilot smoke-free new BTO block.

Buyers are informed upfront that there is no smoking allowed in the block including their own homes. I would like to volunteer to take up this pilot in Nee Soon South. I have residents who have been asking to sell their flats before five years MOP is up as they cannot stand the smokes from their neighbours.

Next, my residents who use heavy vehicles for work often face a long wait for heavy vehicle parking in Yishun Town. Many new residents who shifted into new BTOs are having difficulty in buying season parking.

Many have to wake up early and stop work till very late. Hence, they take the risk of parking along the service road near their homes and ended up receiving summons regularly. On behalf of my residents, I would like to plead to MND to increase the amount of parking space for heavy vehicles to match the demand. I have made such request many times in Parliament.

Next is the plight of divorcees. Although divorcees with care and control of children can now buy subsidised flats without the three-year restriction, when the ex-spouse is not cooperative, it becomes difficult to sell their matrimonial homes. So they do not have money to buy their next flat. I hope more can be done to facilitate the post-divorce sale of flat process.

Next, may I know how many 2-room flats has HDB built and how many singles are still waiting to buy 2-room flats? Will MND consider allowing singles to buy 3-room flats so that they can accommodate their elderly parents?

Finally, I would like to know how does HDB determine the TOL fee that they charge for essential services like ATM and AXS machines? I have been asking for an AXS machine to be installed at Block 507 where there are coffee shops and other shops. I was told that HDB is charging $200 per month.

Hence, the operating cost of an AXS machine is $500 to $600 per month. This makes service provider procrastinate. Can HDB waive the fee so that the service providers are more willing to provide such essential services?

I hope MND can address all the above for our endearing homes. The more we do, the more enduring our homes are.

Void Decks and Shared Spaces

The Senior Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministers for Foreign Affairs and Trade and Industry (Dr Tan Wu Meng): Mr Chairman, in our HDB estates, our void decks are anything but empty. They can be places of friendship and fellowship, when neighbours gather. The void deck can be a place of joy, a wedding venue for a community to celebrate. The void deck can be a place of sadness, when a resident has passed away, and family and friends and neighbours come to say goodbye. The void deck can be a place of potential – white space that can someday be used for a social service office, a senior activity centre, a kindergarten and more. Indeed, our void decks are not devoid.

But some residents worry about the shape of newer HDB blocks that do not have void decks. Some of my older residents may someday move in with their children. Some have en bloc SERS and move from old blocks to new blocks within Clementi. My older residents look upon newer precincts with some curiosity. The see the new pavilions, the new sky gardens but to these seniors, they feel it is quite different from the void deck. Maybe not so adaptable, not so airy, something different. Sir, infrastructure policy must have a long tail. What we build today must be future-proved to meet the needs of tomorrow and void decks and other wide spaces add to that flexibility for tomorrow.

So, can the Minister share with us, what HDB's plans are, to provision for sufficient shared common spaces in our newer estates? How is HDB designing newer estates, so that neighbours can gather together; so that children can play together; so that families can celebrate together and so that when there is a bereavement, people can say goodbye to loved ones near to home and among neighbours.

Coordinating Infrastructure

Mr Png Eng Huat (Hougang): Sir, it was reported in the news last November that the estate of Punggol was morphing into one of the largest housing estates in Singapore. However, residents there were reported to be suffering from growing pains as the infrastructure and services in the estate did not keep up with the growing population. Residents found themselves staring at growing congestion and longer commuting time with each new development sprouting up in the estate.

In another report, it was stated that the traffic congestion in Punggol has been a long-standing problem, stretching back to almost five years ago. Even when a new link road connecting Punggol Centre to the nearby expressways came into operation, one resident predicted that the traffic congestion would return in a few years’ time.

Amenities like childcare centres, healthcare facilities, and food outlets were also reported to be in need of improvement to meet the demands of the growing population in Punggol.

Sir, it is going to be déjà vu in the estate around Upper Serangoon Road, leading towards Hougang Avenue 7 and KPE. There are now new housing estates and condominiums sprouting up and the traffic on Hougang Avenue 7 enroute to KPE is also coming to a crawl every weekday morning. This part of the estate is also short on amenities like childcare centres.

Residents in Hougang can already predict what is to come in the not too distant future when more people start to move into the new developments in the estate. Would we be seeing a repeat of what the residents of Punggol were experiencing the past five years? Would other upcoming estates be facing the same problems as well?

Sir, when supporting infrastructure is playing catch up in a growing estate, the belated construction work will only add to the traffic congestion woes and exacerbate the misery of the residents living there. Some things can be hard to predict but we are living in an era of big data. Some trends and problems can be predicted and anticipated with a fair amount of accuracy.

I would like to ask the Coordinating Minister for Infrastructure how often do the various Ministries and authorities meet to share and address such mismatch of housing developments, transport infrastructure, and amenities.

The Chairman: Mr Muhamad Faisal, you can take both your cuts.

Dual Parking Lot (Heavy Vehicle and Car)

Mr Muhamad Faisal Bin Abdul Manap (Aljunied): Thank you, Sir. Sir, I have residents who earn their living as a heavy vehicle driver who seek my assistance to appeal on their behalf for waiver of fine for illegal parking. The common presenting issue is that they are unable to find a parking lot for heavy vehicles, resulting in them parking their vehicles illegally. Many of them were issued fines while they were attending to their needs such as answering to nature's call and when buying packed food for lunch or dinner during their working hours. The fines imposed have a great impact on them financially. Sir, I feel and empathise with the plight faced by these heavy vehicle drivers being penalised due to a lack of parking spaces for heavy vehicles while they are trying to fulfill their humanistic needs.

Sir, I observed that there are existing heavy vehicle parking areas in some HDB housing estates, usually located in the proximity of neighbourhood centres which have dual vehicle parking lot. This dual parking lot has double markings; one marking with the dimension to cater for Class 3 vehicle while the second marking a bigger dimension is for heavy vehicle. Such dual parking lot will allow any type of vehicle to park on first-come-first serve basis. Sir, I would like to suggest for such dual vehicle parking lot to be introduced at roadside in industrial areas and as well as non-major roads which have high flow of heavy vehicles. Such implementation will definitely facilitate heavy vehicle drivers to park legally by fulfilling their needs.

HDB Rental Flat

Sir, HDB subsidised rental flat under the Public Rental Scheme (PRS) is meant to provide low-income families who are unable to afford home ownership and have no family support with a roof over their head. One of the eligibility criteria for an applicant to make is household income ceiling of $1,500.

Sir, during the Budget debate, Minister Heng announced changes in enhancing the current available support measures for two groups of Singaporeans: first, low-wage Singaporeans and second, Singaporeans who are permanently unable to work and have little family support, to support their living expenses.

Sir, for the former, one of the measures announced in the enhancements of Workfare Income Supplement (WIS) where the qualifying income cap will be raised from current $2,000 to $2,300 per month. As for the latter, the ComCare Long-Term Financial Assistance Scheme amount will be increased.

5.30 pm

Sir, the revision enhancement to financial and support schemes from time to time are indeed necessary due to the ever increasing cost of living. On this note, can I urge the Ministry to conduct a review on HDB's subsidised rental flats' household income ceiling eligibility criteria. I do not have the information on when was the last time a review was done. However, I do believe that it has been a while since it was conducted. I do hope HDB will make this timely review.

Rental Flats

Mr Lim Biow Chuan (Mountbatten): Sir, some years ago, when I was serving as a grassroots leader, I visited rental flats regularly. My experience visiting these flats are that many of the older rental flats face each other via a common corridor and there is little ventilation or light between the flats. As a result, the entire area smelt musty and the living environment is usually not pleasant due to the presence of hoarded items.

When I became a Member of Parliament for Mountbatten and visited the Dakota Crescent rental flats in the constituency, the living environment was much better as the flats were spacious and better ventilated. However, the building was almost 60 years old and one can see the wear and tear on the building and the facilities. The lifts were old and break down regularly due to their age and the lack of spare parts. These lifts could not be upgraded due to the smaller size of the lift shaft and any extra lift extension could not serve every floor because of the design of the building.

Older rental flats usually result in hoarding by long-time residents and the collected items would be placed at the common corridor. Sometimes, there would be infestation of bed bugs, cockroaches and other pests.

I urge MND to consider plans to gradually upgrade the existing older rental flats to make the living environment better for the residents. As an example, the new rental flats at Cassia Crescent is better ventilated with more facilities in the building so that the residents can gather together outside their flats. The lift also stops at every floor and this allows elderly residents or those on wheelchairs to travel out of their flat.

Can HDB consider doing a overall assessment of the needs of rental flat residents so that we can gradually upgrade the rental flats to better serve their needs? I was glad to hear Senior Parliamentary Secretary Sun Xue Ling speak yesterday about the setting up of the social service hub to offer services to the elderly. This is important because some of the elderly who are illiterate need help to understand official letters from Government agencies like HDB or Town Council. They need help to understand their SP Services bills and even police warnings about conmen cheating the elderly. They cannot understand the notices. So, the Social Services Offices would be of great help to help these elderly illiterate residents understand messages better.

I also urge MND to consider providing more facilities to support the elderly residents in the rental block of flats. Even simple things like having food stalls near the flats, bus stops near the rental flats would make life better for some of the elderly staying in the rental flats.

I was also delighted to hear of HDB’s plans to help rental flat families own their own homes. For example, some of the residents at the rental flats at Dakota,were offered the opportunity to buy their flat at Cassia Crescent, however, they did not take up the offer as they were concerned about buying a flat in a new and unfamiliar environment.

Having stayed there for a while, they found that the flat is suitable for their needs and wish to buy over the rental flat. However, they were told by HDB that they could not do so. Why should this be the case? We should encourage all sitting rental flat residents to buy over their existing flats whenever they wish to do so as we should promote home ownership among them. I urge HDB to have a more flexible scheme for rental flat residents to buy over their flat.

Rental Issues

Mr Seah Kian Peng (Marine Parade): Public housing is one of the pillars of what it means to be a Singaporean, but it is also one of our most under-appreciated forms of welfare. Home ownership is a way for us to provide peace of mind, to give the lower income a disproportionately higher amount from our national budget, and also to communicate important values such as family togetherness, resilience and optimism about the future.

We do so with a complicated jigsaw of home proximity grants, means testing, and eligibility criteria to ensure that the most disadvantaged benefit the most. Human lives are complex – and our rules reflect this complexity. Over the years, the rulebook for the sale, purchase and rental of HDB has become very thick indeed.

Sir, I have spoken about “Officer X” in my cut on MSF. One of the most important areas where I think Officer X can be deployed is to help the lower income in rental flats. They also need to be able to help these families who want to move out from the Flexi-flats and into bigger ones – including bending the rules on the Minimum Occupation Period of 20 years. Indeed, if we do our job well, there may be many who see their lives improving substantially beyond 20 years.

So, I would like to ask the Minister the following three questions:

(a) An update on the Fresh Start Programme, including the problems encountered such as the complexity of rules, and the difficulty in understanding them.

(b) How does MND help public rental tenants to eventually own their own homes?

(c) How can MND help to ensure rents remain affordable and do not disincentivise progress among tenants?

Social Mobility

Miss Cheryl Chan Wei Ling (Fengshan): Sir, among the estimated 50,000 households that are living in public rental flats. I believe it is MND’s intention to focus on a segment of these public rental tenants and help them improve their social mobility by eventually owning their own homes.

From my observations, the public rental flat occupiers are mainly the single parents with children, seniors with no extended family, families with foreign spouse, families with interim issues and singles co-tenants. I would like to point out three areas for MND’s consideration to enhance the primary objective of encouraging social mobility of this group and also to help those families that does not qualify under the current Fresh Start Housing.

The first area, enhance guidance on the home ownership process. We should consider a few aspects that will be helpful for the families who had low income for an extended period. First, to provide more financial planning and more detailed assistance in guiding them on their first purchase so that they can make more informed decisions of flats that are within their buying power. Second, their home loan eligibility limit with HDB has to be increased as it is unlikely they can qualify for a loan from the private banks. Third, as many of these public rental tenants are low-income workers, they are usually on freelance jobs which does not contribute much to their CPF. So, CPF should not be part of their mortgage payment plan until they are able to build some sufficient funds.

The second area, review rental rate based on more factors beyond household income. Rental rate review today takes into account all household income of the occupiers in the flat. Sometimes, the rate is increased as it is based on most recent payslip before tenancy renewal. I feel that this needs to be reviewed more holistically or taken into account with a different treatment for each condition. For example, families that have once off bonus, jobs that are commissioned based, odd jobs on project basis, families with sons that are serving National Service; these income cannot be treated in the same manner as a regular full-time source of income.

Moving forward, if we want to enable social mobility for them, we need to look at the efforts of these families in stepping up and over different periods of their life cycle.

The third area, invest in upkeeping of public rental flats. As we try to integrate public rental flats with regular flats in the newer housing estates, I would like to ask MND to also consider investing in upkeeping older rental flats. The exterior facades are now refreshed through the regular Town Council Maintenance Repair & Redecoration programmes. However, there are many seniors living in these rental flats who are not only unable to afford interior renovation of their units, they are most likely to live there for good as they have no next of kin. Existing programs like Enhancement for Active Seniors (EASE), spalling concrete treatment, leakage treatment; should be extended to these tenants readily without any difference compared to regular flat owners.

I hope that MND’s goal in helping these families and also would like to know how many target households we are looking at.

The Chairman: Mr Png, you have eight minutes for your three cuts.

First-timer Flat Applicants

Mr Png Eng Huat (Hougang): Sir, it was mentioned in this House in 2014 that HDB had cleared the backlog of first-timer applicants for HDB flats. A year before that, in a Committee of Supply speech, the Minister for Housing Development said. “A couple of months ago, HDB announced that they were planning about 23,000 Build-To-Order (BTO) flats. I decided to tell them to up the figure to 25,000 because I wanted to decisively clear the backlog of all married HDB first-timers this year.”

Sir, five years have passed, I am still hearing young couples, married or waiting to tie the knot, sharing about their difficulties of securing their matrimonial flat. I have a resident who has just made his sixth attempt to apply for a flat recently, having started the application process about two years ago, and he is getting married in a year’s time. Some first-timers were given queue numbers that far exceeded the number of flats available for booking, while others were not even given a queue number to begin with, especially when balance flats are put on sale. I can understand why some young couples are only interested in Sale of Balance Flats (SBF). If they have put off starting a family for two years trying to secure a flat, they may not want to wait another three more years for a BTO flat with their biological clock ticking away.

How can HDB help these young couples own their first matrimonial flats with less stress and more certainty as the future of our next generation depends on them? Some of them were told to spread their options further if they want to secure a BTO or SBF flat, but that will mean living further away from their parents who, more often than not, would be the first port of call to help when they are starting their own families.

Sir, first-timer married applicants are also encourage to live near their parents. And if their parents are living in a mature estate, who can fault these first-timer applicants for wanting to secure a new flat in and around the popular estate? Next, would HDB consider offering balance flats to young couples who were unsuccessful in previous attempts to secure their first flats, be it in the same development or not, so as to help them secure a flat sooner?

Sir, when the Minister announced that HDB had cleared the backlog of first-timer applicants, does it actually translate to shorter waiting time for new first-timer flat applicants?

Lift Upgrading Programme 2.0

The Lift Upgrading Programme (LUP) has benefited many households since the programme was launched in 2001. The LUP has allowed many senior citizens to go out and meet their friends or watch the world go by at the playground or at the void deck, even if they are on mobility aids. In short, the LUP has given these senior citizens a comforting and reassuring sense of independence at an age when they may have to be home alone.

From the last update we have in this House, there are about 150 blocks of HDB flats left without direct lift access for all floors. Six of these blocks are in Hougang. In my conversation with the affected residents living in these blocks of flats, I can sense their anxiety and despair about ageing in an environment with no direct lift access. To some of these residents, their flats are not built of concrete alone, but of memories. They would like to age in a place they call home. But without direct lift access, these residents may become prisoners in their own homes over time. Some residents told me they need to make special arrangement just to bring their aged parents to visit the doctor. Some elderly residents would prefer not to go out at all, and they would depend on their neighbours to help them with the errands.

I would like to ask the Ministry how long more must these residents wait for a solution to free them of this physical impediment to active ageing and quality of life? It is good to give these residents an indication of the time required to resolve the lift access issue. These residents need to make long-term plans. While some HDB flats are challenging to implement 100% lift access, some are relatively easy to resolve.

Take for example, residents of Blk 363 Hougang Ave 5 are just three additional lift shafts away from achieving 100% lift access. So, it is only a cost issue. For those HDB flats with complicated structures, can HDB look into solutions like vertical platform lifts, which are suitable for wheelchair use, and rather compact and inexpensive to implement for short level access?

Sir, the $5 billion LUP has brought relief to many residents residing in over 5,000 HDB blocks. In all fairness, residents living in the remaining 150 blocks should also get the benefits of direct lift access. I seek confirmation from the Ministry that effort is continuing to bring 100% lift access to these affected blocks in the near future.

Home Improvement Programme (HIP) and (HIP2)

My third cut. Sir, The Home Improvement Programme (HIP) has also brought much relief for many households suffering from water seepage and spalling concrete issues due to wear and tear over time. Some of these issues are long standing but such relief offered by HIP should not be short lived.

While residents can pay as low as about $300 to have their bathrooms completely upgraded with new tiles, piping and sanitary wares, they should not be made to correlate the low cost of upgrading with lower quality of fixtures or workmanship. The bulk of the costs of HIP is funded by taxpayers. The contractors are not subsidising the upgrading. These contractors are expected to deliver quality works and fixtures that commensurate with their winning bids at the very least.

While wear and tear can continue over time in an old flat which has undergone HIP, spalling concrete or leaks cannot possibly resurface at the same spot shortly after the one year Defects Liability Period (DLP). It does not make sense to the affected residents that HIP is meant to resolve such long standing issues for about a year at the very most.

5.45 pm

Although there are not many such cases reported, it certainly lends weight to the fact that the upgrading works were not carried out properly for some of these flats in the first place. Thus, affected residents should not be made to pay again if such issues were to resurface at the same spot shortly after one year. I hope HDB can look into having a slightly longer DLP for spalling concrete and water seepage problems that HIP is supposed to resolve.

Next, I would like HDB to consult residents living on the ground floor before installing the new clothes drying racks in their units. The new rack compromises the safety of residents living on the ground floor as the structure will allow intruders to gain easy access into their units via the kitchen windows using the new rack as a support.

Residents living on the ground floor also generally do not use these designated areas to dry their clothes as they are located right next to the bin chutes. They would prefer to dry their laundry elsewhere.

There are a number of such ground floor units in the two HIP clusters announced for Hougang Avenues 2, 5 and 7 and they are about to go through polling soon. I hope residents living in those ground floor units can be consulted this time round before HDB proceeds to install those new racks by default.

Next, I do welcome the announcement of a new HIP2 for qualifying flats at the 60- to 70-year mark. I may not be around to enjoy HIP2 but I do have faith that technology would play a big role in making those aged homes more liveable in the future.

So, apart from the standard spalling concrete and water seepage issues, which will probably return with vengeance after another 30 to 40 years, I hope HIP2 can make these old flats more elderly friendly and smarter in energy consumption and safety. I hope these old flats can be rejuvenated with better connectivity to help the elderly access e-services easily with dedicated smart devices. More importantly, I hope all physical barriers to active ageing would be removed completely by then, inside and outside the flats.

Income Distribution and Public Housing

Assoc Prof Walter Theseira (Nominated Member): Sir, public housing should play a role in integrating Singaporeans across all socio-economic groups. However, over time, substantial differences have developed between HDB estates. Chairman, may I have your permission to display a slide on the screen?

The Chairman: Yes, proceed. [A slide was shown to hon Members.]

Assoc Prof Walter Theseira: Thank you. Let us compare the third lowest and the third highest HDB town by resale price. In 1990, mean resale prices for a 4-room flat ranged from $60,000 to $95,000. By 2018, the equivalent range was from $340,000 to $650,000. As a percentage of the mean resale price that year, the range was from about 75% to 120% in 1990, and from about 80% to 150% in 2018. Similar figures hold for other types of flats.

Sir, the same HDB towns are still popular. Eight out of the top 10 HDB towns by price in 1990, are still in the top 10 in 2018. However, rising incomes and wealth among better-off Singaporeans appear to be driving prices up because these HDB towns are close to the city centre and well-connected to amenities.

Let us also consider the policy of favouring private development over public use, for high-value locations. Sir, I am not used to telling stories but here is one.

When the bus interchange at Yishun, where I live, was redeveloped, the HDB commercial centre there was demolished. The land was integrated into the private Northpoint City development. Hon Members will have seen similar examples in their own constituencies.

When I wear my economist hat I see why the private sector should maximise the value of that land. Otherwise, we would have to subsidise it heavily. But this is the heart of the problem. When value is assigned by the market, it is those with the ability to pay, who will get to live closer to MRT stations, closer to the city centre, closer to any amenity that people want.

I believe public housing should act as an integrator. Public housing must play a role in checking the forces of segregation that would otherwise put rich Singaporeans in the most desirable places, and poor Singaporeans everywhere else. Large BTO discounts cannot solve this completely because they just give windfall gains to those who can already afford a high-end HDB flat.

What is MND doing to monitor income stratification in HDB housing? Can we consider alternative forms of HDB ownership in high-valuation areas to ensure that public housing continues to integrate Singaporeans of all types, and lower-income Singaporeans have a wide choice of locations to stay? This may include equity-sharing with HDB or shorter term leases with guaranteed subsidised resettlement on lease expiry.

Resale vis-à-vis BTO Flats

Mr Yee Chia Hsing (Chua Chu Kang): Chairman, I am sure every Member in this house would have come across two groups of residents at our Meet-the-People Sessions relating to BTO and resale flats.

The first group would be young couples asking us to write to HDB because they have not been lucky in getting their BTO flats. Some even told me that they are delaying having a child because they wanted to have a place of their own first.

I have always tried to persuade such couples to consider buying a resale flat instead. I will explain that resale prices have softened. HDB has increased the CPF Housing Grant for first timer buying resale flats in from $30,000 to $50,000, for couples buying 4-room or smaller resale flats, and from $30,000 to $40,000 for couples buying 5-room or bigger resale flats.

There is also the Proximity Housing Grant of $20,000 for young couples who buy a resale flat near parents – 4 km. I also highlighted to these couples that a resale flat often has a larger floor size so although the absolute price may be higher but the per square foot price may be lower.

Unfortunately, even after my "sales pitch", most couples still tell me that they still want BTO because the absolute price of resale flat is still much higher than BTO and they are also concerned about the high cost of renovation for a resale flat as well as the shorter lease period.

Chairman, the second group of residents are those who are unable to sell their current HDB flats. They may have purchased another BTO or upgraded to private housing and when the time comes for them to sell, they were unable to do so due to the weak market conditions.

So, we have a situation where there are too many buyers for BTO flats and too few buyers for resale flats. Having young couples move into a mature estate through buying resale flats is also good so that the estate does not grow old. Young families can bring vibrancy and diversity to older estates. It also lessens the pressure on childcare and other school facilities in the newer estates where there are too many BTO flats.

Chairman, I have a few suggestions to make today. For new BTO flats, I expect that the implied dollar value subsidy per unit is larger for a 5-room flat than for a 3-room flat but conversely, the CPF Housing Grant for first-timers buying resale flat is smaller for a bigger unit. I would like to suggest that the CPF Housing Grant be the same regardless of the size of the flat.

The current system is an indirect form of means-testing which is not done for couples buying BTO. CPF Housing Grant should not be subject to means-testing since the Additional CPF Housing Grant and Special CPF Housing Grant are already subject to means-testing.

I also hope that both the CPF Housing Grant and Proximity Housing Grant can be increased so that more couples would consider resale flats as an attractive option. In fact, there are many intangible benefits for young couples to stay near their parents. For children with both parents working, it is important that their grandparents are around to show them love and also pass down traditional values.

In summary, I hope HDB can do more to make the purchase of resale flats more attractive to young couples. It is a waste of resources to build ever more BTO flats to meet demand while there are many perfectly fine resale flats available for sale.

The Chairman: Mr Louis Ng, you can take both your cuts together.

Waiving Mutual Consent for Divorcees

Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang (Nee Soon): Sir, parting ways with someone you used to love or perhaps still love may not be an easy process. When a child is involved, it could get even harder. Going through a divorce is an emotionally draining period and our policies might make it more acrimonious, especially for the lower income.

Couples know that if they get shared care and control of their child, they will have to fight each other for subsidised public housing. If one party gets sole care and control, then he or she is guaranteed subsidised public housing. Is it in the best interest of the child for their parents to have a more acrimonious divorce? If shared care and control is a court judgment, should not our housing policies make it possible to enforce the judgement to protect the best interests of the child?

Will the Minister consider waiving the mutual consent requirement when shared care and control is awarded by the court, especially in cases where parties are only able to afford subsidised public housing?

Ensuring Single-unweds Find Housing

Sir, single unwed parents under 35 years old need our help. Unlike those above 35, who qualify for public housing under the Singles Scheme, those under 35 can only qualify on a case-by-case basis.

With a median household income of only $600 in 2017, lacking the cash component of the Baby Bonus, and often lacking family support, single unwed parents really need our help.

I am grateful that HDB has approved several housing appeals I have made for them. But this case-by-case basis approach adds unnecessary stress to an already stressed parent.

A safe and stable home is a fundamental need for every child, and our housing policy should be child-centric. For a start, can Minister consider providing rental housing to single unwed parents under 35 years old with a monthly household income below a certain amount and who lack family support? Can we accept their applications at the HDB counters like any other HDB flat application? Let us not tell the applicant that they do not technically qualify, that it is subject to a case-by-case review, and that they should see their Member of Parliament to submit an appeal.

Diversifying Elderly Housing Options

Assoc Prof Daniel Goh Pei Siong (Non-Constituency Member): Chairman, I asked the Minister last year about retirement village models that could be transplanted here to give our seniors diverse options for retirement housing.

For public housing, Minister to Kampung Admiralty, with its active ageing hub and placement amenities within walking distance. I would like to ask the Minister about the possibility of retrofitting our public housing estates to approximate the Kampung Admiralty model.

For private housing, Minister said that the Ministry is reviewing development control guidelines to provide more clarity on retirement housing developments. I would like to ask for an update on this review.

Future seniors who have different financial abilities needs aspirations about active ageing. In the Lien Foundation and NTUC Income study, our future seniors prefer retirement villages to nursing homes by a large majority. There is a need to diversify elderly housing options.

Assisted living facilities have become popular elsewhere. These facilities allow seniors to enjoy their independence and maintain an active lifestyle while staff help with chores and monitor their health. What are the possibilities and and limitations to introducing development of affordable privately-run assisted living facilities here in Singapore.

Meeting the Needs of the Elderly

Mr Saktiandi Supaat: Sir, last year in Parliament, I expressed my concerns for minority ethnic group sellers, who are only able to sell their flats back to other minority ethnic groups under the Ethnic Integration Policy (EIP).

Failure to sell the flat is a genuine concern faced by some minority buyers, and for the elderly, this is of even greater concern when they need the money for their living expenses or illness. If they are not open to other options, such as renting and the lease buyback scheme. Already, the age of a flat in a mature estate could pose a challenge in selling the flat. And now, coupled with the limitations of the EIP, the difficulty of selling is doubled.

I have seen a number of above 65 years old residents having difficulty selling their bigger flats and to monetise them because of the EIP. To facilitate the sale of flats by seniors in older mature estates and, in the case of those not able to sell due to EIP, can HDB help facilitate by providing a grant or subsidy to same ethnicity buyers to consider buying the flats but only for seniors selling? This will help ensure there is no horizontal dimension of inequality setting in.

I would also like to ask for an update on the uptake of the various schemes for the elderly to monetise their flats. What are the challenges for the elderly in using these schemes? How will the Government be help to better-facilitate such schemes?

Turning Old Schools to Retirement Homes

Mr Murali Pillai (Bukit Batok): Sir, in July last year, I suggested in this House that vacant school sites be considered for conversion into retirement homes. The Government agreed to study the suggestion.

The main reason behind my suggestion is to pass on to our seniors the savings arising from lower capital expenditure involved in converting schools to homes. Also, there are other advantages, as noted by the hon Minister in his written reply, such as the relatively large size of the school plot which can accommodate a good number of persons and the favourable location as, usually, schools tend to be located near neighbourhoods.

Yesterday, we heard from the hon Minister for Education on his plans to redevelop Junior Colleges (JCs) which will eventually result in more vacant schools. I would be grateful for an update on this matter from the Minister.

6.00 pm

Waiver of Development Charge for Rest Areas

Mr Zainal Sapari (Pasir Ris-Punggol): Sir, in my Budget speech and my cut to MOM, together with hon Member, Dr Intan Azura Mokhtar, we made a call for provision of rest areas to outsourced workers. Minister of State Mr Zaqy Mohamad also shared yesterday that MOM will encourage building owners and service buyers to provide proper rest areas which are well ventilated and equipped with basic furniture for the outsourced workers to store their personal belongings, rest and have their breaks.

There are good examples of proper rest areas for outsourced workers provided in some buildings such as JTC Summit, Inland Revenue of Singapore, the seven new hawker centres and many others. However, there are buildings that may not have designated rest areas at the service buyers' premises, and these may not have been catered for when the premises were built.

In this aspect, I opine that the URA can play a critical role to make this happen if the Development Charge (DC) can be waived if the building owners set aside an area as rest areas. DC is a tax levied when planning permission is granted to carry out development projects that increase the value of land, such as rezoning to a higher value use or increased plot ratio.

DC can run into thousands of dollars depending on the geographical area and usage. With the hefty DC, it can explain why most building owners do not carve out a rest area which has no commercial or intrinsic value to the owners. Thus, I am proposing for the URA to include Rest Areas under the “List of Items not counted as GFA” and correspondingly be exempted from DC. This may encourage building owners to provide rest areas for the outsourced workers as well.

Construction Industry

Er Dr Lee Bee Wah: Sir, I would like to declare my interest as a professional engineer in the construction industry. Many big projects continue to be awarded to foreign contractors. Many local contractors hope that our Government can walk the talk and support our local contractors. This can help them build up track records and also stay afloat during this difficult period.

The announcement of the increase in diesel tax comes as a shock. I appreciate the Government’s effort to ensure a more sustainable environment. But it is unfortunate that there is no grace period. Contractors are locked into very competitive existing contract prices and have to incur additional cost overnight. Could there be some form of rebate that could absorb some of the impact from the increase?

Additionally, contractors, architects and engineers face a lot of red tape in the process of their work. They told me that road openings, service diversions, LTA clearances cause them the most headaches. As an example, one developer paid a few hundred thousand dollars for services diversion. Subsequently, no existing services were found on site. The developer after several years and many rounds of appeal has yet to get back his money. Also, Plan approvals often take a long time. After dealing with one written direction, very often, agencies come back with another new set of written directions, and then it is back to the drawing board, and seeking approvals again. Where is the productivity here?

Contractors said due to recent strict audit check by AGC, many variation orders submitted by them were stuck. Work has already been done but nobody wants to approve the payment.

Another non-productive practice is individual 3D modelling. In a tender, if there are 10 tenderers, 10 contractors will build their own 3D modelling from scratch. Can the project architect not issue 3D model to all tenderers instead?

Workers remains a sticky issue. How does the Ministry arrive at the man-year entitlement allocation? Many contractors said the current allocation is insufficient for a project. Because of increasing safety demands, every potentially dangerous job requires a watchman, while the foreign worker quota is being tightened. How effective is this watchman scheme? Has the number of safety lapses decreased?

I hope the Government will re-examine all the above together with the MOM.

Safe and Considerate Use of Park Connector Network

Mr Dennis Tan Lip Fong (Non-Constituency Member): Mr Chairman, park connectors are used by people for strolls, walking their babies or pet dogs, or for exercises such as brick-walking, jogging or cycling. They are also used by people to get to nearby MRT stations or bus-stops. Depending on the locations of these park connectors, they can be really busy at certain times of the days or week. Bicycles, e-scooters, mobility scooters, wheel-chairs, skate-scooters and strollers compete for use with people and pets on foot.

As a regular user, I have always been concerned about the safety of park connectors. I am particularly concerned about the uncertainty regarding the appropriate use of the lanes provided on park connectors.

Mr Chairman, with your permission, may I show a photograph so that people can have an idea of the lane marking I am going to refer to.

The Chairman: Yes, please.

Mr Dennis Tan Lip Fong: Thank you, Sir. Is the lane marked with the figure of a person walking only reserved for people on foot? Who is allowed to use the part marked PCN? Are people on foot allowed on it? If so is it not dangerous for other users such as cyclists and PMD users to use it while people are walking on it from both directions?

In practice, many people walk on both lanes and cyclists and PMD users are often left weaving through the traffic on both lanes frequently unsafely, especially during peak periods.

The lane marked with the figure of a person walking is narrower than the part marked PCN. It is too narrow for concurrent two-directional use when, say, someone is pushing a stroller or walking a big dog.

I first raised this issue last September during the Second Reading of the Land Transport Enforcement Measures Bill. I filed a Parliamentary Question with MND last month asking what actions have been taken to promote the safe use of park connectors by different users including safe and orderly adherence to the respective lane-markings for users on foot and for PCN users. The Minister did not address the issue of adherence to lane-markings. So, I would like to ask the Minister today: how are park users supposed to use the park connectors safely according to the lane-markings? Will the authority educate the public on the safe usage of park connectors?

I use the park connectors almost every day, and I have never seen any signage or advisory on this issue. I have never seen any enforcement being carried out, whether it is illegal usage, for example speeding by cyclists or PMD users, or cyclists or PMD users using the part marked of the figure of a person walking. I have, however, seen quite a few accidents and many near misses, and a recent accident involving a young child and a e-scooter on a park connector promoted me to raise this again.

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

Preventing Cat Abandonment

Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang: Sir, in the context of recent discussion on the disamenities that come from irresponsible feeding, I would like to touch on a related topic: cat abandonment.

Cat abandonment is one of the reasons for an increase in the stray cat population. It is a heartless act. It also causes problems as cat feeders struggle with the sudden increase in numbers and residents also suffer disamenities. In one recent case, 11 cats were abandoned overnight.

We have strong legislation against pet abandonment. It is easy to enforce these laws with dogs as dogs are micro-chipped and licensed and we can trace the owner. But there is difficulty with cats as there is currently no licensing requirement or micro-chipping requirement.

We have fined a person previously for abandoning her cat. She left the pet carrier there with her details. But how many owners will abandon their cat and leave traces of their details? In other cases it is not so straightforward.

Can I ask the Ministry to look into plans to strengthen measures to deter cat abandonment for instance, by micro-chipping and licensing pet cats?

Trap-neuter-release-manage (TNRM) Programme

Sir, the launch of the Trap-Neuter-Release-Manage programme for dogs in 2018 signalled a fundamental shift in the way we manage the stray dog population in Singapore.

Can the Minister provide an update on the progress of the programme? Has there been strong public support and what kinds of concerns have been raised and how have we addressed them? Can the Minister also share whether we will be adopting a similar approach for wild animals where we focus on science-based approaches that tackle the root of the problem and address both residents’ concerns and animal welfare concerns?

Strengthening Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Processes

Sir, Singapore has lost 90% of our original forest cover and we really need to protect what is left. Urgently.

Recently, there has been much concern about the environmental impact of the Cross Island Line and the Mandai developments. There will be similar developments in the future, and many have argued for mandating EIAs.

Earlier this month, I asked the Minister if EIAs will be made mandatory for construction works near national parks or nature reserves. The Minister replied that the Ministry will require developers to conduct further studies and implement more mitigating measures "if the potential environmental impact of a project is assessed to be significant."

Can the Minister clarify how and who will assess the potential environmental impact of a project and how we ascertain that further studies are required? Can we also mandate that EIA consultants file their final reports to the authorities rather than the developers so as to ensure their independence? For construction works in or near sensitive security areas, can the Ministry make EIAs public after removing sensitive data related to national security?

Municipal Services Office (MSO) Improvements

Mr Ong Teng Koon: Sir, it has been more than four years since the infamous stick of fishballs led to the creation of the Municipal Services Office. The goal, to improve service delivery and coordinate across agencies, is the right one, and certainly welcome by my residents.

Given that it has been running for more than four years now, could MSO update on how it has improved the coordination and delivery of municipal services for residents? What are some specific and tangible benefits that residents have experienced, and what are can they look forward to in the coming years?

Equally important, how are MSO and the municipal agencies harnessing technology to respond more effectively and efficiently to residents’ issues?

We have all become spoilt by online service providers that cater to our whims with a few swipes of our smartphones. While we do not expect instant responses or solutions to every problem, service gaps will seem more painful for residents. What plans does MSO have to use technology both in the front end, for example using apps, and back end (for example using AI, automation of basic services) to improve service delivery.

MSO Progress and Adoption of Technology

Miss Cheryl Chan Wei Ling: Sir, since the OneService App was launched, I have heard residents’ positive feedback on its ease of use and found the single point of contact helpful.

In today’s context where people are pressed for time and have little patience in waiting for things to get resolved, can Municipal Service Office (MSO) provide an update on how wide the adoption of the OneService App has been since its inception and in which specific areas has the app assisted its users most effectively?

Why is this important as we continue to encourage adoption of the app for more widespread usage? It is not because we do it for the sake of becoming a digital nation, but truly to reap the benefits of big data, efficiency in response and to bring it further by involving community and agency resources in the vicinity. In that respect, I have a few areas to highlight for consideration.

First, focus resources on the critical or frequently raised topics. For example, today the lift is a common facility that is widely used in HDB. While it falls under the purview of the Town Council, the usual feedback route is through the town council service hotline. If there is a case of man-trap in the lift, it will take longer for support to arrive at site as it needs multiple calls at the backend. This as compared to if the app is already connected to the lift service provider or the rescue unit to seek help in case there are emergencies or medical conditions for the person trapped. The latter would have been more efficient.

To take this further, a lot of data that is collected based on the feedbacks through many channels can be more effectively analysed and applied for future designs, maintenance regimes or to reduce recurrence of incidents. I would like to ask MSO if it has not been done, whether it is possible to link the cross-agency information and have the data analysed to provide preventive maintenance or implementation of more effective solutions that fixes the root causes.

Second, expand the app’s capability beyond a feedback tool. Besides providing feedback on municipal issues observed on the ground, consideration should be made for the tool to also serve as a channel for ideas from the ground on how we can improve situations or designs. I have heard thoughtful feedback from residents on municipal matters due to their work expertise or experience in similar situations. While we understand not all ideas are feasible due to different constraints, but it can become a useful platform for the community and the agencies to share and evolve ideas which are practical for the local context.

And third, connectivity of app to community resources for the elderly. Today, a care-giver or the family member probably has to download many apps or search online for information on suitable services for their seniors in the community. The idea I am raising is to provide more convenience for the care-givers and for them to understand or be notified if there are upcoming municipal works or unintended disruptions which may cause difficulties for the seniors who are less mobile.

As a first step, I would encourage MSO to think of how we can put community resource information on the app based on regions. This has a two-fold purpose. One, to enable the community to know what services are available in the vicinity that are suitable for seniors. Two, to connect the Silver Generation Office, the neighbourhood community police post or other VWOs in closer connection with the care-giver or the seniors’ family members who are at work to provide the extended support if required.

Should this be successful and have more capability in future, we can connect our seniors to be a part of the app. Many would say it is difficult to get the elderly to be digitally inclined. This could be true for the Pioneers today, but this will not be the case in future for the Merdekas and the younger cohorts in future. It is useful for us to think on a longer horizon and more effectively utilise the technology space.

Smart Services for a Smart Nation

The Senior Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministers for Health and Home Affairs (Mr Amrin Amin): Technology, when applied correctly, can enable Government agencies to deliver smarter and more efficient services to meet increasing demand and rising expectations. How are MSO and the municipal agencies harnessing technology to respond more efficiently and effectively to residents' issues. Good municipal service delivery is about understanding the needs of the local community and ensuring that they are met.

6.15 pm

Last year, MSO announced that it is transforming the OneService app into a one-stop community platform beyond being a tool for reporting feedback in order to meet the needs of the community. Could MSO provide more information on how it will further develop the app to meet the diverse and changing needs of residents.

Doing It Together

The Senior Parliamentary Secretary for the Ministers for Culture, Community and Youth and Transport (Mr Baey Yam Keng): Mr Chairman, like fellow Members of the House, I get my fair share of feedback on municipal issues from residents, whether face-to-face or through emails and social media. Common ones include littering, bird and cat feeding, not cleaning up after their pet dogs, noise nuisance and so on.

I do appreciate these feedback because they help us understand the ground better and relevant agencies can target their attention and actions towards more specific areas. After all, residents are naturally more familiar with their own environment as they use the area on a daily basis. They are the best eyes, ears and CCTV cameras.

I would like to use the following examples to illustrate two points and ask MSO these two things: one, how do we encourage greater community ownership of the shared living environment; two, how have MSO and the municipal agencies been partnering residents to tackle municipal issues in the community?

Sir, when an area is clean and free of litter, it means two things: either the cleaner just swept the floor or there is no littering. In other words, an area is full of litter because of two possible reasons: the cleaner has not done his work properly, or the public are not disposing of their litter properly. For most common areas in the estate, sweeping is done once in the morning. Therefore, if someone throws a piece of litter after the cleaner has swept the floor, it will be there till the next morning. When I receive feedback on littering, I am interested to know whether is it not clean, not cleaned, or not cleaned yet.

Through the feedback data received by the MSO, I wonder whether MSO is able to help analyse the information to assess the situation and identify the main root cause of issues that are happening the ground. With the information, we can then decide on the necessary intervention. For example, in the case of littering, it could mean a closer monitoring of the work of the cleaner, or public education on responsible disposal of littering, or, perhaps, NEA should be putting up CCTV cameras to catch errant litterbugs of areas where littering is very prevalent.

Sir, when MSO was set up, it was to help the public report on a municipal issue without having to navigate through the system and identify the agency in-charge of taking action. I am glad that MSO with its OneService app, has made the process much easier, effective and hassle-free.

However, there are municipal issues which clearly warrant enforcement leading to prosecution, for example illegal parking, whether is it at season lots, handicapped lots, loading and unloading bays, along double yellow lines or at the void deck. There are also cases of motorcycles riding on pavements, sheltered linkways and void decks. For such cases, depending on the exact location, it could be HDB, LTA, Traffic Police or the Town Council, which has the power to issue summons against the errant motorist. This is equally confusing to the public. So, can MSO enhance the OneService app for public to provide conclusive evidence of the offence, whether in the form of photographs, or video? This could then help to alert the relevant agency to take necessary enforcement action?

The Chairman: Minister Grace Fu.

The Minister for Culture, Community and Youth (Ms Grace Fu Hai Yien): Mr Chairman, I would like to thank Members − Mr Baey Yam Keng, Mr Ong Teng Koon, Mr Amrin Amin and Miss Cheryl Chan for their questions on the Municipal Services Office, or MSO, and also earlier, Ms Denise Phua, for her positive mention of MSO in her speech on MSF.

The MSO was set up with the belief that public services should be focused on our residents. I am happy to share that the collective actions and efforts of Government agencies, Town Councils and MSO, have translated into tangible improvements for residents over the past four years.

Residents can now conveniently access the services they need with the OneService app. We now have 157,000 app users who have reported 288,000 cases. Today, about one in five municipal feedback received by Government agencies are reported through the app, double the one in ten over two years ago.

Residents can now expect more timely responses to their feedback. On average, cases are addressed within three working days. For cases that require multiple agencies to work together, we have improved case routing processes, and integrated agencies' feedback systems for greater efficiency in case management. With the inclusion of all Town Councils in September 2016, the number of cases referred between these systems has increased from about 5,000 cases per month then, to 14,000 cases per month last December. Today, 90% of such complex cases are closed within 13 days, while the average time taken has fallen from 8.5 to 6.5 days over the past three years.

Residents' issues are being addressed more effectively. Last year, we introduced the Local Infrastructure Projects scheme to enable MSO and agencies to assess residents' requests for small-scale infrastructure in a timely manner. For example, we jointly evaluated a request supported by the Citizens' Consultative Committee for a footpath with lighting under the Sengkang West vehicular bridge. For the safety of residents, PUB tapped on the scheme as the implementing agency to build the infrastructure. Their efficiency in meeting the needs of the residents won them compliments from the residents.

As Mr Ong, Miss Chan and Mr Amrin Amin have suggested, technology offers us great potential in achieving better services with high operational productivity. As part of the Smart Nation movement, we have been harnessing technology to deliver smarter municipal services.

We have started enabling residents to do more with the OneService app to meet their diverse needs. This year, we will progressively introduce new features to transform the app into a one-stop community platform – not just to report feedback, but also to perform transactions, engage one another and access information.

For example, residents will soon be able to book and pay for neighbourhood facilities such as the barbeque pits near your block through the app. Motorists will be able to obtain paperless Electronic Parking Systems (EPS) receipts for HDB and URA car parks through the app, which can be useful for tracking expenditure or claims. Residents can also receive alerts on happenings in their neighbourhood, such as roadworks and hawker centre closures for maintenance. We will be implementing these enhancements in the coming year. And I thank Miss Chan for her suggestions on how we can deepen connections and community involvement through the app. We will continue to engage our users and partners with these ideas as we transform the OneService app.

Next, we are working with our partners to respond better to residents, by using technology to re-engineer our processes.

First, we have implemented case routing using Artificial Intelligence. This enables cases to be routed automatically to the right agency, freeing up officers to focus their efforts on solving more complex problems.

Second, agencies can access one another's proposed and on-going projects through a new Infrastructure Works Dashboard. They can use system tools in the Dashboard to de-conflict overlapping works for better coordination. Hence, we can minimise inconveniences arising from infrastructure works to residents.

In the future, we want to bring about more service improvements through the Municipal Services Productivity Fund introduced in 2017. An example of a funded project is Parking.sg, developed by GovTech, HDB and URA. Besides making it more convenient to pay for parking, removing the need for the paper coupon system, Parking.sg has actually resulted in savings for motorists. Nearly half of parking sessions are ended early, and drivers have been able to get more than $3.3 million in total refunded to them for unused time so far.

So, we have extended the fund and set aside $25 million for agencies to tap on over the next five years. We have approved two new projects under the extended fund − drones by SLA for early detection of maintenance issues, and a trial deployment of compactor litter bins by NEA for more efficient waste collection.

In total, we have awarded $5.2 million for six projects, and expect about five times that in productivity gains.

Mr Baey and Miss Chan asked about the efforts of MSO and our municipal agencies in partnering the community in tackling issues and building greater ownership. They highlighted the value of residents' feedback, which MSO can study, using data analytics, to understand root causes and develop more effective and targeted solutions. We fully agree with them, and are progressively doing so as we build up our database to tackle complex issues. Mr Baey asked if we could enable residents to easily alert agencies through the OneService app for municipal offences that may require enforcement action, such as illegal parking. We are studying this carefully with agencies, taking into account the need to ensure responsible reporting for the purpose of enforcement.

Beyond giving feedback, when private individuals and groups come forward, we can tap on diverse ideas, deeper knowledge and stronger networks to solve our problems effectively. This is why agencies are collaborating extensively with grassroots organisations, Community Development Councils (CDCs), Institutes of Higher Learning (IHLs) and the public. These partnerships enable us to harness ideas, co-create and pilot solutions for issues with the local community.

Last year, MSO organised the OneService Innovation Challenge and the Love Your Living Environment Youth Challenge. Residents from all walks of life came forward to contribute suggestions and work with agencies to implement ideas to deliver better services or tackle municipal issues.

A group of NUS students participated in the Youth Challenge and designed rubbish bins that allowed people to have some fun in expressing their opinions. They call it "PollBins". For example, people could indicate their preference for roasted versus steamed chicken rice by throwing their litter into the corresponding bin. The students tested their idea and found that people are more minded to discard their trash in the bins. The students gained from understanding gamification and its impact on behavioural change.

We also want to encourage residents to do their part in improving their living environment. We launched the HelpBuddy app pilot last year, where residents can take part in activities offered by agencies. Checking if the gravitraps set up by NEA to monitor the mosquito population, whether they are in good condition, is an example. Going forward, we will enable residents to put up simple activities on the app. For example, residents can help spot missing pet dogs, or share household tools with one another. If the pilot is successful, we will incorporate it in the OneService app.

To conclude, in the coming year, we will work closely with our partners to enable more convenient, effective and efficient services for residents. But we also want to do this with residents, because municipal issues ultimately impact us all in our daily lives. By so doing, we can build a better home for all, together.

6.30 pm

The Chairman: Minister Desmond Lee.

The Second Minister for National Development (Mr Desmond Lee): Mr Chairman, may I show some visuals at the appropriate junctures to illustrate some points I am going to make?

The Chairman: Yes, proceed.

Mr Desmond Lee: Thank you. Sir, I will speak on three areas that MND will continue to strengthen in the coming years. First, our infrastructure resilience; second, climate resilience; and third, social resilience.

Let me begin with strengthening our infrastructure resilience. We often take infrastructure resilience to mean how strong and durable our existing structures are, and how well we maintain them. This certainly is important as our buildings start to age. But resilience is also about designing and building better to meet tomorrow’s challenges, so that our buildings can accommodate higher-density living, changing lifestyle needs and also withstand tougher weather conditions. This means adopting innovative solutions in design and construction. That is why MND continues to invest heavily in Research & Development in the urban and infrastructure sector.

One example is the Housing Development Board. In recent years, it partnered A*STAR to develop the Integrated Environmental Modeller (IEM). The IEM is a 3D modelling software that predicts how environmental conditions interact with our town plans. The software can, for example, try to simulate how wind flows through different urban features and open spaces, and where solar heat is more likely to build up. This helps our town planners take some of the guesswork out of designing a more liveable and sustainable estate. Now, they can plan better for open spaces to enjoy good ventilation, and plant trees and greenery in the right places to help bring down ambient temperatures.

Singapore can be a thought leader in producing innovative urban solutions like IEM. We are both compact and well-connected which is an ideal living test-bed for new ideas. Innovations developed here have the potential to be useful in other dense, tropical cities. The team that developed the IEM recognises this. They are currently in talks with the industry to see how the IEM can be adapted for commercial use. I hear that they are even looking to bring it overseas.

We will continue to support promising research under the Cities of Tomorrow (CoT) programme, which builds on the success of the Land and Liveability National Innovation Challenge (L2 NIC). The projects we have funded are diverse. But all of them aim to develop practical solutions to the multifaceted challenges that exist in our built environment.

For example, in construction technology, we are investing in innovations such as 3D printing to build faster, safer, and more cost-effectively. In facilities management, we are studying how robots and data analytics can make the job of inspecting building facades safer and more efficiently. Ultimately, these innovations aim to improve the lives of people, and ensure that our city meets the demands not just of today but of tomorrow.

Let me now move on to climate resilience. Various Members have spoken about the importance of being responsive to the threats and effects of climate change. We fully agree. It is especially critical for small, low-lying states like us to act decisively to protect ourselves. We have conducted studies to examine the risks and impacts of sea level rise and invested in clean-tech solutions, so as to move towards becoming a more low-carbon society. Minister Lawrence Wong will speak more about this tomorrow.

Today, I will speak about an important response to climate change – protecting the diversity and resilience of our natural and urban eco-systems. This is a comprehensive effort that requires planning at different levels. First, at a design level, our colleagues at NParks have put in a lot of thought to embed climate resilience features into our urban green spaces.

At one-north Park, specially chosen wildflowers and grasses help to filter storm water runoff naturally. These plants then also serve as a habitat for various species of butterflies, birds, and aquatic wildlife bringing them into the city. Our Nature Ways – such as the one shown here in Tampines – replicate the tiered structure of a tropical forest with native trees and shrubs. So, these are not just streetscape but are grown in a particular way to replicate some natural structures. They provide important ecosystem services to people and facilitate ecological connectivity for some species.

Second, on a planning level, we work with our community partners to protect and strengthen our Nature Reserves and Nature Areas. We currently have six Nature Parks adjacent to our Nature Reserves to provide over 250 Hectares of protective green buffers. By 2020, we will add two more Nature Parks at Rifle Range and Thomson to increase our green buffers to over 370 Hectares. Over the next 10 years, we will do more to regenerate forests in our Nature Parks as well as Nature Reserves. As part of our Forest Restoration Action Plan, NParks will plant an additional 250,000 native trees and shrubs to restore our secondary forests.

Third, underpinning all this work are our continued efforts to conserve our native flora and fauna. NParks will continue to plant more trees. In the past five years, NParks has planted an average of 50,000 trees a year, twice what it used to plant in the past. It will restore and enhance more habitats, for example, restoring mangroves at Sungei Buloh and Pulau Ubin, and repopulating corals at Sisters Island Marine Park. We will implement more species recovery plans and have started this for 50 species of native plants and 10 species of native animals. What Members see on the video is the Neptune’s Cup Sponge, which is one of the species being carefully rehabilitated in Singapore waters. It was thought to be globally extinct since 1908. But it was re-discovered in Singapore in 2011 – the first known re-discovery of this species in the world. And so you see this work of NParks officers, relocating it to afford it better protection from the elements.

Another species in our recovery programme is the Harlequin Butterfly. It is rare and little is known about its biology. But NParks has been studying it closely in the field, and has been relocating it to new sites to establish more populations. Today, there is a healthy new population at Pasir Ris Park, and work is underway to introduce more at East Coast Park.

Members also pointed out that development should not come at the expense of greenery. We would like to assure Mr Louis Ng, Mr Chong Kee Hiong, Mr Ong Teng Koon and Mr Pritam Singh that maintaining and enhancing our greenery will continue to be a key pillar of our urban planning strategy. In our post-independence years, this was what set us apart from other cities with similar growth strategies. Indeed, as Minister Heng Swee Keat said in his Budget round-up speech, greening is part of our identity.

But our small size, as a city state, means that our land and resources are scarce and finite, and the tensions and trade-offs for us when it comes to land use are magnified many times compared to larger countries. This is a reality we live with every day, and our planners are always seized with these challenges. So, we have to continue to be judicious about how we use land to meet our needs as a city and as a country, while ensuring that we safeguard land for the aspirations of our children and our future generations.

In this regard, any decision to clear land and forest cover is not taken lightly. If we do, it is a decision we make after very careful deliberation and inter-agency discussion, taking into account Singaporeans’ needs and the many trade-offs involved. As was in the case of Tengah, which was needed to provide homes over the next two decades for 42,000 families, and jobs for more than 20,000 people as the town develops progressively. These are not just difficult trade-offs in the present day, between greenery and biodiversity on the one hand, and housing and jobs on the other. But trade-offs between the present and the future – between land use for today’s needs and keeping land for our children and grandchildren and generations not yet born.

At the same time, in response to Mr Louis Ng’s question, we work to ensure that when development does take place, proposals are thoroughly examined for any potential environmental impacts among other issues.

Our Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) framework covers all Nature Reserves, Nature Areas, other sensitive natural areas, as well as marine and coastal areas. Those who propose development close to these areas are required to consult our technical agencies on their plans together with URA and MND. And these technical agencies include Nparks. We take a prudent approach to this consultation. If we have reason to believe that a project may significantly impact the environment, then the developer will be asked by technical agencies to conduct a further environmental study. We would like to assure the Member that studies are undertaken in an independent and objective manner,

By specialists who have every interest to maintain their professional standing. The Study reports are also carefully assessed by the technical agencies, such as NParks, AVA, MPA and NEA, to ensure their adequacy. In addition, to reiterate my previous answer to Members’ question in this House, we will make the findings of such Environmental Impact Assessments publicly available, unless specific considerations require otherwise. That said, our review of the EIA framework is ongoing. MND and the technical agencies are studying how best to strengthen our policies and processes, to ensure the framework remains robust for the future.

Now, this brings me to my third and final area of focus. Our green spaces not only contribute to our climate resilience, they also bring people together, and are an important part of our social resilience. Singaporeans have reason to be proud of our distinctive greenery and rich biodiversity. Our common spaces allow us to interact with one another, and bond with our family and friends. More and more citizens are stepping forward to care for our green spaces.

We are indeed fortunate to have over 45,000 volunteers who work closely with us to protect and enhance our greenery and nature areas. For example, our community gardeners tend to more than 1,400 Community-in-Bloom gardens across the island. Our Biodiversity Beach Patrol volunteers help monitor key stretches of our beaches. Meanwhile, NParks’ extensive Friends of the Park communities continue to see people from all walks of life and all interests coming together with a common love for nature and open spaces.

Mr Dennis Tan highlighted concerns about the safe use of our park connectors and showed us a photograph of that. NParks has installed more safety features to enhance the safe use of PCNs. Additional lighting, speed regulating strips, and advisory signs have been put up. NParks has also installed advisory signs at high usage parks and park connectors to remind users to stay on track and give way. And NParks conducts outreach programmes to promote the safe use of park connectors, including lane usage and appropriate speed limits. And NParks is working together with LTA on joint enforcement efforts.

But the Friends of the PCN have also been contributing to our efforts. Chaired by avid cyclist and nature lover Mr Woon Tai Woon, the Friends of PCN have led the charge on ground-up initiatives, reaching out to PCN users to promote safe riding, like helping with track painting and public signage; encouraging safe riding etiquette through the “Share the Track” programme; and most recently, creating a video promoting the responsible use of Personal Mobility Devices (PMDs).

We will also activate more community nodes for citizens to enjoy. In 2017, we announced the start of trail enhancement works along the Rail Corridor. The continuous green trail stretches 24 km from the north to the south of Singapore, and is used by many as a place to cycle and trek. Today, I am happy to share that we have plans to develop the former Bukit Timah Fire Station (BTFS) into an additional recreational node along the Rail Corridor. This former Fire Station is strategically located at the intersection of the Rail Corridor and the Coast-to-Coast Trail which we announced quite recently, too. And we envision it be a base for visitors to explore the nature and heritage attractions in the area, including Bukit Timah Nature Reserve, Dairy Farm Nature Park and the Former Ford Factory. It will also be home to a new Visitor Centre for the nature parks in the area, and will host other nature, heritage, and recreational uses and we will announce more details later this year.

Finally, we will reinforce social resilience in the places that Singaporeans call home. We continue to ensure that our residential communities are served well by high quality social and community facilities. This means ensuring that community facilities are right-sited and sized appropriately, to support cohesive and multi-generational neighbourhoods.

For example, the future Punggol Town Hub will feature a public library, community centre, hawker centre, and health services, all co-located for one-stop, convenient access for residents. It will also have a cycling path that connects to the larger Punggol cycling network around it. The mix of amenities was carefully planned so as to meet the needs of the current demographic of residents, and as Punggol evolves, so, too, will the offerings at Punggol Town Hub.

6.45 pm

Let me briefly address the remaining cuts.

Er Dr Lee Bee Wah made a request to increase heavy vehicle parking options in Yishun. Public heavy vehicle parking is popular as it tends to be cheaper and closer to residential areas; and that is where the tension arises. These residents were concerned about heavy vehicles entering residential built up areas. But of course, it is usually more convenient for drivers to park near home, especially given the hours that they operate. Unfortunately, while we plan carefully to ensure sufficient heavy vehicle lots at a national level, it is not always possible to fully meet local demand, especially near heavily built up residential areas. These are in relation to site constraints, concerns of safety, noise and other disamenities.

We encourage drivers to look into private heavy vehicle lot options as well as alternatives in neighbouring areas, but also encourage employers to take responsibility and help their drivers find the right spaces to park their company vehicles. But we will certainly work with Er Dr Lee Bee Wah to look at the requirements in Nee Soon. I would like to thank Mr Gan Thiam Poh and Mr Muhamad Faisal Abdul Manap for their suggestions to optimise car park use.

Some car parks already allow day and night season parking. Since private cars, heavy vehicles, and commercial vehicles tend to need parking at different times, available space is often already used optimally, and separately, agencies have also allowed parking lots that do not have traffic and site constraints to double up as heavy vehicle spaces for short time periods. But we continue to look out for other carparks which can be further optimised to support dual use and will continue to explore the ideas that Members have raised.

We have come far together, but we have more to do to build a thriving and dynamic city, develop comfortable homes and neighbourhoods, and protect our natural and built environment. We look forward to the continued support of all our Members.

The Chairman: Minister of State Zaqy Mohamad.

The Minister of State for National Development (Mr Zaqy Mohamad): Mr Chair, at the appropriate junctures, may I show some slides?

Mr Alex Yam asked about our plans to create a future-ready built environment (BE) sector that supports the nation's changing needs. In October 2017 and February 2018, we launched the Construction ITM and the Real Estate ITM (REITM), which target to fundamentally change the way we design, build, maintain, and rejuvenate our city, while creating good jobs for Singaporeans. Since then, we have been partnering the industry, the unions, and the institutes of higher learning (IHLs) to implement the ITMs. Let me elaborate on our progress and upcoming plans.

First, on the Construction ITM. To drive change at the workforce, firm, and ecosystem level, BCA set up the BuildSG transformation office last year, to partner the industry in growing progressive firms and preparing the workforce for the future.

BuildSG has been working with the Trade Associations and Chambers (TACs), to help them build expertise in the three transformation areas, namely Design for Manufacturing and Assembly (DfMA), Integrated Digital Delivery (IDD), and Green Buildings. Six TACs have developed their own action plans to support the Construction ITM, and three more are due to complete theirs by the end of the month. These plans underline the TACs' commitment to guide firms and individuals through the transformation journey.

BCA is also partnering industry stakeholders through the IDD Steering Committee to guide the development of IDD, and encourage greater integration across the construction value chain.

As Er Dr Lee Bee Wah and Dr Teo Ho Pin noted, Building Information Modelling (BIM) is not yet seamlessly adopted across different project parties. To address this, BCA and IMDA have launched a $4 million joint call to support construction and technology firms in developing digital platforms for the BE sector, as part of the IDD implementation plan launched in November last year. The intent is to facilitate the use of a single BIM model across the construction value chain, from design, to construction, and to operations and maintenance.

We have also undertaken various initiatives to upgrade and augment the BE workforce, who are key to industry transformation. Beyond the infrastructure, manpower capability is also something that we need to build. Last month, BCA set up the iBuildSG Tripartite Committee to oversee the implementation of leadership and talent development strategies. Let me share three key updates.

First, IHLs will be updating their curricula to better equip undergraduates with skills and competencies to support transformation. As a start, NUS will pilot an inter-disciplinary module on prefabricated prefinished volumetric construction (PPVC) later this year. With PPVC, components are pre-fabricated under controlled factory conditions, and assembled like Lego blocks, as you see on the screen. This can significantly speed up on-site construction, and save up to 40% manpower. The pilot module will not only familiarise students with this technology, but also expose them to real work conditions where different stakeholders work together to deliver a project.

Second, the Committee has developed internship guidelines to help companies structure more effective internships. Good internships offer students a valuable opportunity to get a taste of work in the BE sector. The hands-on experience also better prepares students for joining the workforce. For example, Ms Tan Zi Rui went on a year-long internship with Aurecon while studying at the Singapore Institute of Technology. She helped to retrofit buildings with energy-efficient cooling systems and gained engineering experience.

Aurecon was also able to assess Zi Rui's technical and behavioural competencies and offered her the iBuildSG undergraduate scholarship, and subsequently a full-time position. It is wonderful to see young women joining the BE sector, and in this case, the construction industry as well. The Committee's guidelines aim to help more firms and students benefit from such positive internship experiences. I encourage firms to refer to them on BCA's Building Careers portal when planning your internship programmes.

Third, the Committee will upgrade and augment the industry's competencies through enhancing continuing education and training. The Committee is developing (a) a skills framework to identify skills and competencies of the future and guide training programmes to help PMETs remain relevant; as well as (b) a leadership framework to groom a core group of industry leaders.

We will also continue to support firms in training and bringing in mid-career professionals through Professional Conversion Programmes (PCPs). Last year, we introduced the PCP for Building Information Modelling (BIM) Professionals. After learning about the promising career prospects of a BIM modeller, Mr Mohamad Saifullizan Bin Abd Rahman took up the PCP. He has been receiving structured training in essential BIM skills, as well as on-the-job training with his industry sponsor, Lum Chang Building Contractors. To help more people like Saiful enter the BE sector, BCA is now working with Workforce Singapore (WSG) to expand the PCP offerings to other BE transformation areas, such as for professionals supporting DfMA projects and off-site facilities.

We will also do more to improve the attractiveness of construction industry jobs.

The use of productive technologies already improves working conditions and can create attractive new jobs, such as prefabrication supervisors. As Mr Zainal Sapari pointed out, it is also important to provide rest areas for workers. I announced at MOM's COS session yesterday that we will be looking into companies' practices in this regard. MND will also look at how best to ensure adequate provision of rest areas from a planning perspective.

Another important aspect of good jobs is remuneration. With the move towards higher skilled jobs, wages should also keep up. I urge industry leaders to continue your efforts in enhancing pay and career prospect for employees, so as to build up a strong local core of PMETs to support sustainable industry transformation.

The Government will also do our part to ensure that wages remain competitive. Last year, we announced a Progressive Wage Model (PWM) for the lift industry. BCA is working with the industry to phase in implementation, while ensuring sufficient lead time for buyers and firms to adjust.

In the meantime, the Government will take the lead to drive early PWM adoption by procuring only from firms that have registered their PWM status, starting this May. So far, 21 lift companies have pledged their commitment towards the PWM, and I hope that more will join them.

I am heartened to see progressive firms adopt productive construction technologies like DfMA. Take for instance INSTAD Pre Fabrication Pte Ltd, which set up a facility for prefabricated Mechanical, Electrical and Plumbing (MEP) systems in 2017. Through automation, the firm has achieved higher construction quality, with up to 40% time savings and 60% productivity improvement.

Workers in the MEP factory also enjoy improved working conditions – similar to the manufacturing sector – compared to traditional construction sites.

We want to support more firms in their transformation journey, and shift the industry towards adopting productive technologies like DfMA. To do this, we will need to complement existing funding schemes and manpower development initiatives with changes to our foreign manpower policies.

Currently, construction projects are subject to the Man-Year-Entitlement (MYE) framework, which manages foreign worker numbers at the project level. MYE quotas are allocated to main contractors based on project type and value. Main contractors then decide how to allocate these quotas to their sub-contractors.

We have received feedback from the industry that such an arrangement is not optimal, as Er Dr Lee Bee Wah had also fed back in her speech. For example, a main contractor may only pass on a small proportion of the allocated MYE quota to sub-contractors.

DfMA facilities are also not allocated MYE quotas directly as they are not project-based. So, most workers in DfMA facilities are employed on the higher MYE waiver levy rates. This means that the manpower cost for off-site DfMA works is typically higher compared to on-site works at construction sites.

While we have received industry feedback, as Er Dr Lee said, about the allocation of MYE quotas, increasing our reliance on foreign workers cannot be the way forward. Instead, to better align our manpower policies with our transformation outcomes, we will have to review the existing MYE framework for the construction sector.

Our intent is to progressively reduce the MYE quota for on-site works, and eventually remove the MYE framework altogether. We want to replace the MYE with a system that better enables the industry to optimise their foreign workforce, be it on-site or at DfMA facilities. This will take time and BCA will consult the industry in working out these changes to the MYE framework.

Meanwhile, to encourage more off-site works in the interim, we will introduce a new voluntary Off-site Construction Special Scheme (OCSS) for DfMA facilities. Firms on the OCSS will be able to hire an allocated number of workers at MYE levy rates. This will lower the cost premium for DfMA, and hopefully encourage more firms to shift towards off-site work.

BCA will be engaging eligible companies to explain the details of the scheme, which will be implemented later this year.

Er Dr Lee and Mr Ang Wei Neng underscored the importance of efficient and streamlined regulations and processes for construction projects. We agree. The Inter-Agency Coordinating Committee (IACC) was established by BCA in 2011 to resolve cross-agency regulatory issues. Instead of meeting only when issues are surfaced, the IACC has started to hold monthly meetings this year to proactively engage the industry.

Where there are changes to regulations, we will do what we can to help firms transition. Specific to Er Dr Lee's feedback on the service diversion and others, we take those on-board and I will have a word with BCA to see how best we can help her.

Er Dr Lee asked about rebates to help absorb the diesel duty increase. As announced by the Minister for Finance, three years of road tax rebates will be provided for commercial diesel vehicles. The rebates will also apply to commercial vehicles used in the construction industry.

Er Dr Lee also provided specific feedback on services diversion works and the Workplace Safety and Health (WSH) regulations. As many of our projects are on brownfield sites, preparatory works, such as services diversion, may be required prior to development works. It is inefficient for Government to undertake all such land preparations before tendering out sites for sale. Instead, our approach is to make known in the tender documents, any encumbrances on-site, so that interested bidders can factor these accordingly into their timelines and tender price.

As for workplace safety, our WSH regulations adopt a risk-based approach for the supervision for high-risk construction works. Supervisors need not be present at all times if the risks are sufficiently addressed, for example, by adequately briefing workers on the potential risks, and the proper use of tools and safety equipment.

The WSH regulations have contributed to reducing construction workplace fatality rates, from 8.1 per 100,000 workers in 2007, to 3.1 per 100,000 workers in 2018. As I have elaborated in my MOM speech yesterday, one of the strongest links to many of these fatalities is inexperienced workers.

Er Dr Lee also asked about our efforts to support local contractors. We know that the industry has been experiencing a slowdown in recent years. We have introduced a number of measures to help. In 2017, we announced that we would bring forward $1.4 billion worth of public sector projects to boost construction demand over the next few years. To help local companies build up a track record, we have parcelled out large infrastructure projects into smaller contracts that SMEs can take on and allowed smaller consultancy firms to band together to bid for higher value projects.

So, to assure Er Dr Lee, we want to provide as much support as we can for local firms and, certainly, within our procurement guidelines. That is why we also have to continue to review our processes, policies and how we work with inter-agency regulations. This is one of the reasons why we are looking at the MYE framework as well.

Our longer term focus remains on helping firms build capabilities and strengthen their competitiveness. We currently provide funding support to firms in various areas, including construction productivity, manpower development and research and innovation. To help firms navigate the schemes more easily, we will consolidate our existing schemes under an umbrella BuildSG Transformation Fund (BTF) amounting to about $770 million. This includes top-ups to two existing schemes, namely, the Productivity Innovation Project (PIP) and the Public Sector Construction Productivity Fund (PSCPF).

More than 300 firms have benefited from the PIP, which co-funds capability development initiatives that improve site productivity. The good news is that we will add about $200 million to the PIP to support more firms in adopting productive technologies. The PSCPF supports Government agencies in procuring innovative and productive solutions for public sector projects. Since its launch in 2017, most of the $154 million fund has been committed. We will add another $95 million to the fund to sustain the effort.

Next, let me provide an update on the progress of the transformation efforts in the Real Estate industry. In April last year, BCA formed the tripartite Facilities Management Implementation Committee (FMIC) to transform the FM industry into one that is more productive and that leverages on data analytics, predictive maintenance and smart solutions. To this end, the FMIC, which comprises representatives from both the Government and the industry, has proposed recommendations in four areas, namely:

(a) Designing for maintainability;

(b) Enhancing maintenance productivity and quality through smart FM;

(c) Enhancing guidelines for FM procurement; and

(d) Ensuring adequate training and development of the FM workforce.

While implementation details are being worked out, the public sector will take the lead to uplift the FM industry through various initiatives, such as by adopting outcome-based procurement guidelines. This provides flexibility for FM service providers to focus on improving outcomes, instead of meeting headcount requirements.

On the property transaction front, we will continue to enhance and streamline the transaction processes for users through automation and digitalisation. A key thrust is to make it easier for industry players to access property-related Government data, thereby enabling the automation of time-consuming administrative processes. We have done this for data related to rental transactions since February. This means that checks, like whether a seller is the legal owner of the property, and whether a landlord is eligible to lease out a HDB unit, can now be done with the click of a button. I believe this will benefit many, as rental transactions account for about 60% of all residential property transactions.

I am happy to share that we will be doing likewise for data related to the sale and purchase of residential properties from the end of this year. We encourage the industry to take advantage of this to streamline processes and better serve your customers.

But we are not stopping here. Our long-term goal is to facilitate seamless and digitalised property transactions from start-to-finish. To chart the way forward, CEA is chairing a digitalisation workgroup with representatives from both Government and industry. By reducing the hardcopy documents and physical payments, consumers can spend less time on paperwork and queuing up at banks, and property agents, bankers and lawyers can focus on higher value-added services to customers.

As Mr Chong Kee Hiong noted in his speech, good infrastructure is essential in supporting our future economy. We have a rigorous framework to ensure that our buildings are safe. Developments involving structural works undergo checks to ensure that they have been designed and built according to the approved plans and building regulations. Developers are required to engage trained professionals known as Qualified Persons and Accredited Checkers at various stages of the project, from the building design phase, to supervising the construction works on-site, to certifying the works upon project completion. BCA also conducts sampling checks on building plans and targeted inspections on structural works, and will take enforcement action against any party that contravenes the regulations.

Going forward, the various ITMs under the Built Environment sector will strengthen the industry’s capabilities in continuing to build and maintain quality infrastructure. MND will continue to partner our stakeholders as we ride the waves of transformation to a high-tech and a more productive BE sector.

The Chairman: Leader of the House.