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

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

Our Future Home and Future City

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

At last year's MND huddle, Minister Lawrence spoke about the importance of partnership. Last year also marked the 60th anniversary of the Ministry. We can all see how much our living environment has changed through the decades of careful planning by MND and its agencies.

In 2019, the MND has similarly achieved much. Home buyers can now plan better, project sites are now half year ahead of schedule. Balloting time has also shortened. For vulnerable families, more options and support from the new Home Ownership Support Team.

Looking ahead, the MND has not just focused on immediate issues but, like it has always been, visioning far head. There is excitement over the future of our city and our home. The Draft Master Plan 2019 offers a glimpse.

Chairman, let us first look at the Budget allocation for MND. This year, MND's budget will grow by 22.2%, or $4.46 billion. Increase is mainly attributed to the public housing development programme and higher spending for SERS and upgrading. Can the Minister provide some details on the new projects to be funded?

In addition, I note that the CONQUAS score for HDB flats in 2019 saw a drop of 3.5% to 88.5%, compared to 2018. Could the Minister share why there was a drop in the mean CONQUAS, and how MND and BCA intend to promote better quality workmanship? In line with that, can we better promote more local talents in the construction industry?

I, and perhaps many Members of this House, have seen fewer cases of residents appealing for flats. Those who do usually have more complex circumstances. It is therefore a reflection of how our housing policy has improved. But there are still some who need more help or better options. What more can MND do to help home-seekers access their flats quicker?

With the open booking of flats, it has afforded Singaporeans who want quicker options to select and book their flats. Could the Ministry update on the take-up rate so far and what has been the feedback received?

I would like to return now to a topic that I have spoken of often – the monetisation schemes and support for our elderly homeowners. I am especially happy that the Lease Buyback Scheme (LBS) has been extended to all flat types. Last year, MND organised an intense round of outreach across Singapore. Many of these roadshows were led by Minister Lawrence Wong himself. This was to raise awareness on the LBS.

I would first like to ask what has been the sign-up rate for 2019, and if the roadshows have helped to increased understanding and also encouraged more to take it up. Secondly, what more can the Ministry do to make the benefits of LBS and other schemes better known and perhaps more attractive?

Another group that I have spoken about every year has been support for vulnerable families and individuals. I am heartened by the work of the Home Ownership Support Team that Senior Parliamentary Secretary Sun Xueling announced last year. Can the Ministry perhaps share how many have benefited from the targeted help so that they can achieve home ownership?

For singles, the challenge remains that there are many waiting in line. Supply of 2-room flats for singles are still lagging behind demand. Does the Ministry intend to expand on the supply this year?

For unwed parents and divorcees with children, which my colleague Mr Louis Ng has championed for passionately over the years, can the Ministry also share how it intends to better support them?

For elderly Singaporeans who wish to age in place, some have also indicated that they prefer additional services such as "assisted-living" facilities. Minister Lawrence Wong mentioned last year that MND and MOH are in discussion on this. Can the Minister therefore share if there has been progress made and if there are now firmer plans for the Government to undertake such assisted-living projects?

We all know that we are constrained by our physical size in Singapore, but our circumstances have driven us to find innovative and forward-looking solutions to afford us the best use of this limited resource, so that we can maintain a careful balance of responsible and responsive land usage. Amidst a rapidly changing global environment, what are we doing to retain our competitive edge while ensuring that our city remains liveable for our people, even with the changing aspirations?

Our city centre is perhaps our most recognisable and visible skyline. However, it is also the hardest to rejuvenate.

Last year, the CBD Incentive and Strategic Development Incentive Schemes were launched to promote rejuvenation. Can the Ministry provide an update on the progress made to date? I further urge that we continue to ensure that the Central Business District (CBD) and our city centres are not exclusive enclaves, but accessible and open to all Singaporeans.

Another topic that I have been passionate about is how our redevelopment and rejuvenation cannot be at the cost of our heritage. Many of our buildings have been lost over the years in the name of progress and better land use. I applaud the Ministry's efforts in recent years to better protect our built heritage. I would like to urge MND and the National Heritage Board (NHB) to work together to do more to ensure that our heritage as well as the soul of these buildings are not lost.

I return to the Minister's emphasis on partnerships. As we work with professionals and stakeholders to build the future Singapore, our towns, our workplaces, I would like to urge for more community involvement in the plans, so that the very people who live, work and play in these areas have a stake in shaping it.

For estate upgrading, we have seen a successful example in Tampines Central. How will the Ministry better encourage such efforts? The Lively Places Programme, which was a pilot by HDB last year, has seen enthusiastic response. What projects have come out of this initiative? I would like ask the Ministry to expand on this programme throughout all our towns in Singapore.

On a related effort, we are known as a City in a Garden, a vision first expoused by our chief gardener, the late Mr Lee Kuan Yew. Over the last 50 years, we have made much progress in greening Singapore. We have become a Garden City and then A City in a Garden. What are the Ministry's plans for the next bound of he greening of Singapore? How can Singaporeans also be more involved in this effort?

Many of our multi-storey car park roof decks, for example, are often empty. I therefore urge that NParks will consider a more ambitious programme to green those roofs and promote more community projects.

Related to this, of course, is our national efforts to combat climate change. I welcome the announcement of the Green Towns Programme. Though much of this will apply to new developments, I ask that the Building and Construction Authority (BCA) and HDB look at how we can push such innovations and apply them rapidly to our existing towns, as this is where most energy wastage is likely to occur with older infrastructure. Our new flats and commercial buildings should also be designed to take full advantage of natural air flows so as to reduce the need for reliance on air-conditioning. Especially amidst the lessons of this COVID-19 outbreak, natural ventilation is better than air-conditioning in reducing the chance of spread.

In further light of COVID-19 and the slowing economy, many developers that I have spoken to have found it difficult in the last few months. There have been manpower shortages due to slow return of workers, there have been issues with supply chain and equipment, and all-round uncertainty over the economy. I have further heard from the developers that I spoke to that they project a lean year ahead, with delays in construction as well as potential difficulties in selling their completed projects.

I therefore ask the Ministry to consider revamping the Additional Buyer's Stamp Duty (ABSD) temporarily, perhaps to extend the number of years subject to the state of the economy.

I also ask the Ministry to help spur the construction industry, especially for small and medium players, by increasing the number of local rejuvenation projects such as Remaking Our Heartland (ROH), Large-Scale Town-Wide (LSTW) projects, Community Improvement Projects Committee (CIPC) projects.

Mr Chairman, we are not done building Singapore. I agree wholeheartedly with this statement. As we rejuvenate and look towards the future, as we view with excitement the possibilities, we must never lose sight of the purpose of the Ministry of National Development (MND) – to keep to this Government's social contract with Singaporeans, so that every Singaporean will have fair access to affordable homes, accessible workplaces, liveable environments, a future-ready city and ultimately, a better Singapore for all of us and also our future generations. Mr Chairman, I beg to move.

Question proposed.

Residents' Viewpoints and Experiences

The Senior Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministers for Health and Home Affairs (Mr Amrin Amin): Municipal issues concern all residents, and so each resident should have a stake in the shared living environment and be able to contribute their unique viewpoints and experiences to shape it. At the same time, the diversity of residents' perspectives and needs should be taken into account.

Could the Municipal Services Office (MSO) share how it is enabling residents, at the individual level and as a community, to have a say in municipal issues?

Affordable and Accessible Housing

Mr Chong Kee Hiong (Bishan-Toa Payoh): Chairman, since its inception, HDB has played a critical role in ensuring affordable and accessible housing for Singaporeans. It is an institution at the forefront of public housing. No other Government agency in the world can boast that it has provided for over 80% of its people the selection of quality public housing it had, served by comprehensive networks of amenities.

HDB flats are the de facto homes for our newly-weds and many of them will progress to upgrade to bigger units. Those located at town hubs and near Mass Rapid Transit (MRT) stations are especially coveted by home-seekers. However, the waiting time of three to four years for a Built-To-Order (BTO) flat is quite long, particularly so for young families with babies on the way.

Would MND review this and do more to help home buyers access new flats more quickly? In 2019, how many flats were given up by prospective buyers and what were the take-up rates of Sale Of Balance flats? MND launched the open booking of flats last year. How has the take-up been?

It is understandable that HDB has been calibrating the size of flats based on a combination of the size of the family unit and affordability. This has generally resulted in smaller flats being constructed. I have observed at recent Edusave Merit Bursary Awards ceremonies in my constituency that there seems to be more families with more children, that is, three or more. These families usually have a domestic helper or live with grandparents, so extra rooms and more living space are needed. May I request that HDB consider selectively including a higher proportion of bigger units, such as 5-room flats, in new BTO projects in mature estates to support our pro-family policy?

Building Our Future Home and City

Mr Saktiandi Supaat (Bishan-Toa Payoh): Mr Chairman, greening and renewing our housing estates is an important initiative to increase our green cover and promote environmental sustainability. I note that community roof gardening and installation of solar panels are also some of the initiatives that the newer housing estates benefit from. However, we must not neglect the older, mature housing estates. Despite the regular upgrading and maintenance projects, the difference between the older and newer estates can be quite stark due to the availability of community amenities, deployment of technology, amongst others.

Safety of the building structure and living areas of the mature estates and flats are very important to ensure that those living in them are safe and sound environmentally, particularly, our elderly Singaporeans.

What are the plans to rejuvenate our older mature estates to keep them vibrant places to live in, and ensure that they remain safe, green and environmentally sustainable? I hope the Minister will also explore the usage of solar panels in all the roofs of mature HDB estates. As rejuvenating all estates would be a massive project, may I suggest assessing the gaps between the infrastructures in comparison to the newer ones, and prioritising estates with a wider disparity?

Second, can HDB work with the existing Residents' Committees, networks and advisers to set up a constituency-based housing safety team, or HOST, made up of residents, HDB and other partners, to gather timely feedback and statistics, and assess the potential wear-and-tear of internal structures of mature flat units before they become dangerous to occupants? HOST can do regular checks of HDB units by block to see if there is a common flat-wide issue that can be rectified before it worsens and affects other residents' safety.

4.45 pm

Heritage

Mr Teo Ser Luck: Chairman, recently I took a drive back to where I grew up in from when I was a baby until I was about 12 years old. It was in Hougang. We used to call it "Hougang luck kor jiok" in Teochew, which roughly translates to "Hougang six pieces of stone". Basically, when I mentioned that to the elderly folks, there is a certain warmth in that. Because of that, I realised that there are places where I had gone to when I was in Secondary school, such as Farrer Park where we used to play football, which are still being preserved.

Strangely, the place I went back to, which is "Hougang luck gor jiok", where I grew up in, the rental unit above a provision shop is still there. It is just that one stretch of provision shops and some of the shops are still there – very old – but everywhere else has changed. So, that preservation was really meaningful to someone like me. I think, for every town, heritage is the identity and soul of the place.

Would the Ministry consider having that as part of its policy when doing town planning for all the major towns to have a certain heritage to exist for a longer time period?

Rejuvenating our City

Mr Arasu Duraisamy (Nominated Member): Sir, Singapore has done well in greening over the last 50 years. We have become a Garden City and, now, A City in a Garden and, in the near future, City in Nature. Today, greenery is all around us, with parks and gardens close to our homes and workplace, trees along our roads and vertical greenery on some of our buildings.

But as we develop, there will always be increasing trade-offs between greenery and other infrastructure developments. The next phase of our greening journey must address this challenge. Can we continue to grow as a city while remaining green and liveable? Can the Ministry share its plans on addressing the trade-offs between greenery and infrastructure developments?

At a time when our challenges are becoming more complex, partnering Singaporeans across multiple domains to tap on our diverse strengths is vital and our citizens also have a greater desire to contribute, to be heard and to act.

The Government has done an excellent job of engaging communities in building Singapore. For instance, the public was involved in the Draft Master Plan 2019 process through workshops and exhibitions. The community is also increasingly involved in directly shaping and caring for the areas around them, such as residents managing their community gardens via the Community in Bloom programme. But can we do more?

As we make plans to rejuvenate our city and enter into the next phase of our greening journey, we must get the community involved at an early stage. These engagements will help to foster a greater sense of communal bonding, for the public will also feel a stronger sense of ownership in the space that they have helped to build and, thus, there is a higher chance of better utilisation of these rejuvenated spaces, as they are the outcomes of the community's involvement.

Could the Ministry share how the Government intends to involve the community in rejuvenating our city and in greening Singapore?

Keeping Housing Affordable and Accessible

Mr Mohamed Irshad (Nominated Member): Deputy Chairman, this cut is on ensuring that our public housing is affordable and accessible. I note that MND increased the household income ceiling for subsidised flats last year. My questions are supply-related and are as follows.

Firstly, what more can MND do to help home seekers access flats more quickly? Related to this, how has the take-up been for the open booking of flats launched by MND?

Secondly, how can MND better support the housing needs of single unwed parents and their children? Two specific questions:

One, will there be a dedicated section in HDB’s website to address housing queries from single unwed parents? Currently, the website merely states that single unwed parents are eligible and asks these applicants to directly contact HDB.

Two, MND announced last year that HDB would conduct a review of the touchpoints which single unwed parents would encounter. Are there any updates on this review?

Integrating and Designing New BTOs

Mr Png Eng Huat: Sir, it is always exciting to see new BTO developments sprouting up in the middle of an old estate. Such developments will bring in new amenities like rooftop gardens, exercise equipment, playgrounds, eldercare and childcare facilities and eateries to complement the old-world charm of mom-and-pop shops, open void decks and good old-fashioned coffeeshops.

Hougang has welcomed two BTO projects over the years and we will be looking forward to welcoming another one this year. I wish to highlight some design integration issues of such new projects in the hope that future developments will take into consideration these feedback and concerns.

First, I wish to highlight that the void decks of new BTO blocks are no longer functional. Residents living in these new blocks can get lost walking in their own void decks. The number of pillars and walls have literally transformed the new void decks into a maze, forcing residents to use the service road in the estate. This is certainly a safety concern for residents who need to cut across the precinct to get to their destination daily.

Furthermore, due to the maze-like design, void decks, chairs and tables have become hidden in secluded corners in these new BTO blocks. Most of the time, these amenities would end up being misused by noisy drinkers, chain-smokers and rowdy teenagers to hang out in the wee hours of the night, away from prying eyes. Noise and second-hand smoke will ensue and residents will end up suffering as a result.

Next, I wish to highlight that more could be done to better connect the new precincts to the older part of the estate. In the two new BTO precincts in Hougang, the Town Council had to build extra ramps, footpaths and stairs, in addition to the few designated access points, in order to facilitate the safe movement of residents on the ground. Although it is human nature to take shortcuts, the planner should look into providing a more barrier-free integration of the new precinct to the surrounding built-up of areas at the design stage. This will benefit residents on mobility aids or with baby prams, as it is really not easy to navigate the maze-like void deck of new BTO blocks just to use the designated access point.

Sir, town planning is a work-in-progress. It may be a challenge for HDB to design better void deck spaces for now but it is certainly doable to have a truly barrier-free integration of new and old precincts in a mature estate for a start.

The Chairman: Mr Gan Thiam Poh, you can do your three cuts.

BTO

Mr Gan Thiam Poh (Ang Mo Kio): Yes. Chairman, recent Built-To-Order (BTO) sales launches had attracted many flat applicants. But for successful applicants, in fact, the three to four years' waiting time is not short. To facilitate better planning for both individual households and HDB, would the Ministry consider allowing HDB to share information at the beginning of each year about the planned BTOs to be launched in the next one to two years? HDB could also allow applicants to register their interest in advance. In addition, the demand and supply information could be made available in real time, enabling applicants to make informed decisions earlier. All these data will also enable HDB to plan ahead to meet demand.

Resale Flats

Next. If financial assistance is given to first-time buyers, whether they are families or singles, to buy resale flats is quite generous. Firstly, there is the CPF Housing Grant of up to $50,000. If they live with or near their parents or married child, the Proximity Housing Grant of up to $30,000 will be provided. Thirdly, eligible first-timers can tap on up to $80,000 for the Enhanced CPF Housing Grant (EHG).

Yet, some of these buyers cite various challenges finding a suitable resale flat in mature estates. The reasons include both financial and non-financial ones. Would the Ministry share which are the top five obstacles these first-time buyers encounter and what further assistance, such as grants, can be provided to them?

Lease Buyback Scheme

Next. The Lease Buyback Scheme provides a monetisation option for our elderly while allowing them to continue staying in their homes. This is, indeed, 两全其美, a solution which offers the best of both worlds. I would like to ask the Minister what has been the response to this scheme since its launch, especially with the inclusion of 5-room and bigger flats last year. How many households have actually applied for LBS to date? Currently, how many households per room type are under the scheme? Among these flat owners, how many have to use the proceeds from the lease sale to fully discharge their outstanding mortgage loans? Some seniors are worried about outliving their remaining lease. What assurance could the Ministry provide them? Lastly, how will the Ministry increase awareness of the scheme among our seniors?

HDB Facade Damage and Repair

Mr Pritam Singh (Aljunied): Sir, the HDB's Façade Finishes Repairs Co-Payment Scheme allows Town Councils to claim for co-funding on a 50-50 basis for repairs to HDB block façades finished with materials, such as bricks, tiles, cladding boards and so on.

I seek to enquire under what circumstances the HDB will pay in full for such repairs. In my ward of Eunos in Aljunied GRC, there have been repeat episodes of failing block facades in a specific group of blocks at Jalan Tenaga.

The Professional Engineer appointed by the Town Council whose report is available to the Ministry has suggested that the underlying cause of the failing façade is down to shortcomings during the construction phase of the blocks. These blocks were constructed less than 30 years ago. As the façade of similar blocks in the precinct have failed in an identical or almost identical manner over the last few years, should not the HDB, as building owner, undertake to fully cover and reimburse the costs of the façade damage, repair and pre-emptive investigation of other similarly constructed blocks?

The Chairman: Mr Arasu Duraisamy, you can do both your cuts.

Diverse Housing Needs for Seniors

Mr Arasu Duraisamy: Sir, last year, MND extended the Lease Buyback Scheme to seniors in 5-room and larger flats. The Minister also shared about efforts to raise public awareness of the scheme.

Can the Minister share how has the take-up rate been since the extension of the Lease Buyback Scheme to the larger flats and what are some of the efforts to raise public awareness of this Lease Buyback Scheme?

The Minister also mentioned that MND and MOH would conduct focus group discussions to seek views on the proposed concept for assisted living in public housing and that Assisted Living Typology flats would be launched in Bukit Batok in 2020. Such assisted living flats would be smaller, but they would have more communal and shared spaces for residents to interact with one another.

Can the Minister share the findings from the focus group discussions that MND and MOH conducted?

Can the Minister also share the kind of features these assisted living flats will have and when will they be launched, the number of units that will be made available and who will be eligible to buy these flats?

Supporting Diverse Housing Needs

Second cut. Over the years, MND has made changes to its housing policies to support diverse housing needs of Singaporeans. With these policies, the Ministry has continued to make efforts to better support single unwed parents who are in genuine need of housing. These include enhancements to frontline communications and the willingness to review every request made by unwed parents, among others.

Sir, today, unwed parents can purchase up to a 2-room flat in the non-mature estates from HDB. However, some may need more space, especially when their children are growing older. Can the Ministry consider reviewing access to bigger HDB flats for unwed parents to better meet their housing needs?

MND has, over the years, increased attention to support rental households towards homeownership. This support has contributed to the steady increase in these households becoming homeowners.

At the 2019 COS, MND announced several initiatives, such as the enhancements to the Step-Up CPF Housing Grant of $15,000. This grant was extended to rental families buying a 2-room or 3-room flat in non-mature estates and the introduction of waiver of rent increases for tenants upon their downpayment for the purchase of a flat.

At the same 2019 COS, the Ministry announced plans to improve physical conditions of rental blocks and flats as well – works to improve the ventilation and lighting of older rental blocks to create more openings along corridors; more partitions in 1-room rental flats to enhance privacy between tenants under the Joint Singles Scheme.

Can MND provide an update on the progress of these initiatives?

Housing for Single Unwed Parents

Mr Seah Kian Peng (Marine Parade): Our perception of families has long revolved around the nuclear family unit comprising two parents and children. But not everyone fits into this mould. We should take a lighter touch on personal matters, such as marriage and life decisions, when making policy.

Currently, single parents who are not married are still under the "Singles" category. If they are under 35 years old, they cannot buy apartments. And if they earn more than $1,500, they cannot apply for rental flats. Exceptions are on a case-by-case basis.

The "case-by-case" approach allows us to use discretion but there is a lot of uncertainty for this group. Yes, we want to encourage marriages to remain strong and reduce reliance on state resources. This is prudent.

But can we shift our paradigms and include single unwed parents in the composition of what a "family nucleus" is.

The need is real. I would like to ask how the Ministry can better support the housing needs of single unwed parents and their children.

Waiving Mutual Consent Requirement

Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang (Nee Soon): Last year, I met Gina (not her real name) who is a divorcee. She originally had sole care and control of her son but it was eventually changed to shared care and control.

She has successfully applied for an HDB flat when she had sole care and control but it was later rejected at the key collection stage as the care and control was changed to a shared one. She was unable to obtain mutual consent from her ex-husband even though he was already staying in a private property and did not need an HDB flat.

It has been years since the divorce and, due to various other circumstances, she is still renting a place to stay in. Her ex-husband continues to stay in the private property.

I feel this is terribly unfair. I thank MND for reaching out to help her and I hope MND will consider waiving the requirement for ex-spousal consent on who can list the children as occupiers in an HDB flat application if the ex-spouse has already purchased a private property or an HDB flat following the divorce.

The Chairman: Mr Ong Teng Koon, you can take both your cuts.

5.00 pm

Electric Vehicles

Mr Ong Teng Koon (Marsiling-Yew Tee): Thank you, Mr Chairman. Mr Chairman, to promote the take-up of Electric Vehicles (EVs), I would like to ask the Minster whether he will consider opening up the carparks that are maintained by URA and HDB to more than one operator so that they may install EV chargers and whether such EV chargers can be opened up to the general public for their use, instead of only restricting it to the operators' own EVs.

Many residents have asked me if they can park their normal conventional cars in the EV lots and they have asked me why BlueSG gets to park in the prime lots right in front of their flats. So, I would like to ask the Minister whether he can consider or he can educate us on how he intends to will allocate prime real estate between supporting EVs and the needs of residents who might have elderly folks or young children.

Lift Upgrading Programme

Sir, on the issue of the lift upgrading programme, I would like to highlight two blocks in my constituency, Block 115 and 119 of Marsiling Rise for the Minister's consideration. I have appealed for Lift Upgrading Programme (LUP) for these blocks for many years and I have raised this issue in Parliament since 2012.

The profile of these blocks: the residents are greying, there are many elderly residents, some of them are wheelchair bound, many have mobility issues. To them, having a lift is an existential need, it is not a good to have. They become very vexatious when they see that public money is being spent on a nice garden as part of the Neighbourhood Renewal Programme (NRP) but not the lift that they have been asking for many years as part of the LUP.

HDB has cited the need for financial prudence in order to maintain cost effectiveness. But I feel that financial prudence should be about not overspending above a projected cost, a certain limit. It cannot be, but HDB has been telling me this and it is not about putting an arbitrary limit on the costs without taking into account our residents' well-being.

I hope there can be a resolution to this issue soon, that the Minister can help my residents at Block 115 and 119 of Marsiling Rise to get lifts. I hope that more than a 150 blocks in the rest of Singapore, the residents will get lifts soon, because I believe that that we need to ensure that everyone gets high quality living regardless of when his flat was built or where his flat was built.

Mr Png Eng Huat: Sir, the $5 billion Lift Upgrading Programme (LUP) has ended and there are about 150 existing HDB blocks without direct lift access remaining. Some of us in this House had asked for periodic updates about the fate of the remaining blocks without LUP. I have also asked HDB to look into segregating these blocks into two categories: those with technical constraints and those with cost considerations. I urge the Ministry to share these numbers.

The replies from HDB have been consistent, that is, HDB will continue to study and look for cost effective solutions to extend LUP to these blocks and Singaporeans in urgent need of direct lift access due to medical conditions or mobility issues can approach HDB for possible alternative housing arrangement.

Sir, the wait for a definitive answer for residents living in these non-LUP blocks has to come to a finality soon. These residents have been caught in between the wait for good news or to move out for the longest time. And any housing agent would tell you that it would be tough to offload a flat without direct lift access unless the owner is prepared to take a hit on the market valuation or selling price.

I have asked in this House for HDB to let these residents decide if they are willing to pay a little more for direct lift access since funding per flat has to be fair and equitable. The Ministry had informed this House that the cost of implementing direct lift access for some blocks is not marginal, with some of the costs as good as building a new flat.

Sir, I would like to ask again for the Ministry to further segregate some of these costs as I believe some blocks may only need an additional lift shaft such as Block 363 at Hougang Ave 5. Let these residents decide on the share of the marginal cost.

Finally, for lift upgrading that is going to cost as much as building a new flat, would HDB consider offering the Selective En bloc Redevelopment Scheme to these precincts to resolve this issue then?

The Chairman: Mr Gan Thiam Poh, you can do both your cuts.

Mr Gan Thiam Poh: Chairman, as echoed by hon Member of the Parliament, in fact, out of these 150 HDB blocks, I have a fair share in my constituency that were not able to get this LUP. I just want to find out, since then, has HDB been able to find new solutions to implement LUP for at least some of these blocks or install some interim devices which can help to transfer residents with mobility issues from their floor to the next floor which has lift access? The residents told me they like to age in place and they prefer to stay there.

I would also like to ask how many households in need of direct lift access due to medical or mobility reasons had approached HDB for housing assistance to date? How many of them have been able to move to suitable flats with the assistance of HDB?

Home Ownership for Rental Households

Last year, the Ministry set up the Home Ownership Support Team (HST) to guide and support eligible households living in HDB rental flats to move towards home ownership. HST had set the target of helping 1,000 rental households within four or five years of its launch. Is it on track so far? How many families have actually bought their flats with HST's assistance to date?

Due to the numerous hardships experienced by these families, would the Ministry consider providing additional grants or more flexible mortgage payment conditions for them? In addition, can HDB provide further assistance to encourage them to become homeowners by accepting the HDB rentals they have paid cumulatively as the downpayment for their own HDB flat subsequently?

Rental Flats

Mr Lim Biow Chuan (Mountbatten): Sir, in a recent survey conducted by Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy, it was estimated that there were about 1,000 homeless people in Singapore. About 40% of the homeless people interviewed stated that they had housing registered under their name and 15% said they had public rental flats.

Last year, I had called on the Government to consider a change in its policies to allow some elderly singles to rent a flat alone on a case-by-case basis. If we do not make adjustment to our policies, where do these elderly singles go? Should we force them to stay with a co-tenant that they do not know? If we do, the risk is that they may quarrel frequently over minor issues. Or they may end up with health issues if either of the tenant suffers from some illness.

There are some seniors who are estranged from their families. They approach me at Meet-the-People Session and say they desperately need a rental flat. When I ask them why are they not staying with their families; the bitterness in the relationship shows in their face.

I have also met seniors who had married a foreign spouse. They cannot rent a flat with a foreign spouse. Then, what do we do for people like them?

I accept HDB's intention of not wanting seniors to live by themselves so that they can help look after one another. I think in a "CNA Insider" documentary, there was a story about a senior, 65 years old, who died alone. However, this current policy may have led to some sleeping on the streets or void decks. The situation is untenable and I would urge HDB that we should do more to help these vulnerable seniors. I ask HDB to consider reviewing this policy.

HDB Rental Housing

Dr Lily Neo (Jalan Besar): In order to ensure prudent use of our limited land and fiscal resources, MND enforces the rule of the Joint Singles Scheme (JSS). But conflict between co-tenants is a problem more than reported. Many suffer in silence. It is difficult for complete strangers compelled to stay together. Many live miserably with frequent quarrels and even fights. The Community Mediation does not work for them for many reasons. These affect the well-being of many co-tenants, also cause depression in some and others resorting to become rough sleepers.

Does MND screen potential tenants to be free from mental illnesses or medical conditions before putting them together? If not, can there be such assessments for all potential tenants put in place? Can HDB offer more partitioned rental flats under JSS to provide more privacy? Can HDB provide newer models of HDB rental flats with better use of space and cost as well as giving privacy to tenants?

Those that seek rental flats are usually the disadvantaged and more vulnerable members of our society that our Government can assist with more of their housing needs.

I want to urge our Government to review JSS, which had been in existent for the last 30 years. Singapore has progressed in the last 30 years and it is time for Singapore to be more gracious towards the most disadvantaged group in our society, in providing them the basic need of roofs over their heads. It is time to tweak this policy for humane reasons.

Will MND allow flexibility for rental flats tenants to opt for single tenancy, especially for those with no family members to share with, while also giving tenants the flexibility to share with co-tenants for companionship and mutual support if they so choose.

There are many needy families with children living in HDB rental flats. Many of them have lived in rental housing for more than six years and some more than 10 years. Thus, there are signs of entrenchment. What are the schemes in place and the success rate of such schemes, to assist them in looking for better options in their housing needs and to help them get out of their predicaments?

Overcrowding – Public Rental Flat Scheme

Ms Anthea Ong (Nominated Member): Sir, HDB has an occupancy cap for renting out flats and commercial property: a maximum of six occupants in 4- and 3-bedroom HDB flats and four occupants in any smaller flats.

These standards do not apply to the Public Rental Scheme. Under this scheme, only 1- or 2-bedroom flats are available. 2-bedroom flats are available only to families of three or more, with some income. If a family is not earning any income, they are only eligible for a 1-bedroom flat, regardless of the number of family members in that family. This results in families of five or six squeezing into a 1-bedroom flat, or even families of more than 10 in 2-bedroom flats.

Research demonstrates that overcrowding has a deep and adverse impact on both adults and children. There are significant associations between the number of persons per room and an index of psychological health. Family ties erode: the parent's authority over the child diminishes as they are unable to accommodate the child's needs; adult family members prefer to stay outside their home till late; conflict occurs more frequently in the home; children do not have enough space to play, rest and study, which directly impacts their academic performance and overall development.

In light of the above, I have three questions specifically for the Ministry. What is the reason for there not being an occupancy cap for homes under the Public Rental Scheme? How is the act of placing children in 1- or 2-room HDB flats with three to 10 other people in line with Singapore's obligation to primarily consider the best interests of the child under the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child? Will the Ministry consider allocating 3-room flats and above to families of five and over under the Public Rental Scheme?

Independent Living for Persons with Disabilities

Miss Cheryl Chan Wei Ling (Fengshan): Chairman, we sometimes wonder why we do not frequently come across people with disabilities and special needs in our community. They surely exist even if they are not the majority in our population. I would imagine like everyone else, they too need a place to live, learn, relax, move about freely and socialise. I believe this may be the wish of some them, but they do face challenges of not being able to do so in a carefree manner.

First, their family. People with disabilities and special needs often require the care of a guardian who can assist with their daily needs. It is natural for their family members to be protective to reduce the likelihood of them being mistreated by strangers who are not aware of their special needs' conditions. To minimise awkward situations, people with special needs are often confined to their home, school or places where they can be fully accompanied.

Second, mental barriers and confidence in own abilities. With lesser exposure to the broader community, there are fewer opportunities for people with special needs to experience and understand how to manage social interactions or overcome some living issues. This has an impact on their self-confidence and their willingness to break the silence in seeking help.

Third, the existing public amenities in the process of being modified to accommodate people with special needs are largely not fully equipped as it was not designed with them in mind at the early stage.

Earlier in the Budget debate, I have raised the need to rally society to be inclusive from young. But, beside the soft aspects, I would like to ask MND what efforts are taken in our living environment to enable people with disabilities and special needs to socialise and engage in the community.

I suggest the following: One, intentional efforts to adapt designs in our common spaces like the neighbourhood playground, the gardens, to enable their outreach in the community and with designated relief areas for people with special needs to have their private moments.

Two, to create the digital apps with information on venues and services that are friendly to people with special needs.

Three, to collaborate or create travel journey tools that shows real live routes which are barrier-free access, wheelchair accessible and leads to reachable areas that are not dead ends.

Further, I want to know whether there are plans to review areas that can improve people with special needs' daily assisted living in the public housing. Familiarity with surroundings and having the right aids in place amongst their living compound are of utmost importance for them. I hope we can look into using design and technology to ease their burden on the long run.

5.15 pm

For example within their home, there can be adjustable household fixtures that are designed to accommodate different physical conditions, hoist to facilitate movements in the toilet and bedroom, voice activated or push controls to automate management of the living environment, sensors within the home that are linked to service care centres or family members and robotic enabled devices that can aid daily activities.

Many people with special needs have hopes and goals in life just like any of us. Some of these can be achieved through thoughtful designs aided by technology. We can certainly help to close the gaps in their development journey and enable them to scale new heights, live more independently and fit with greater ease at our shared public spaces.

Transforming the Construction Industry

Er Dr Lee Bee Wah (Nee Soon): Sir, before I proceed, I would like to declare my interest as a PE and my involvement in property development and construction.

Many contractors told me that they feel discriminated against in recent field contract awards. In the LTA Jurong Regional Line Projects, for example, four out of seven contracts were awarded to foreign contractors. Another example, LTA awarded N112 tender to a foreign contractor, even though our local contractor submitted the lowest quote. The lowest tenderer is an established homegrown contractor. Why pay $6 million more to a foreign contractor whose company is registered in the Virgin Islands? We have about 140 A1 local contractors who have all built up very strong capabilities. If we do not even support our own contractors, who else will support them? Can we consistently apply the policy of "Buy Singapore First"?

Contractors also shared that they always face payment delays, and hence cause cash flow problems. Some of the causes are:

(a) Variation Orders (VO) – the valuation and certification of VOs can drag on for years before they are finally settled;

(b) Liquidated Damages (LD) – contractors are imposed LD even before claims for Extension of Time (EOT) and VOs are assessed; and

(c) Under-certified payment – it could be due to our "kiasuism" culture, so, the work done on site is often under certified.

While it is commendable that the Government has taken a long-term view to reducing Singapore's reliance on foreign labour, it should place more emphasis on the quotas of those sectors that Singaporeans would like to work in, which are certainly not in construction or shipyard.

With emphasis on Design for Manufacturing and Assembly (DFMA) and Prefabricated Prefinished Volumetric Construction (PPVC), we need more S Pass workers than ever before, as they are more skillful. Another problem is that Singapore is no longer attractive to some foreign skilled carpenters and tilers. They choose to go elsewhere. Perhaps BCA can help to investigate the reasons and implement measures to solve this issue. For example, are they finding it too tedious or too expensive to sit for the Core Trade Skills test? With the current push for DFMA and PPVC, are these tests still relevant?

As the COVID-19 situation continues to evolve, the construction industry is facing the full impact of labour shortage, material delays, threat of site lock down and so on, delaying progress of projects. Can the Government do more to help the construction industry? For example, waive the workers' levy during this difficult period.

We also believe that some of the Government policies can be re-examined. The current crisis could be an opportune time to review and tweak the ABSD regime to make it more equitable and effective as the current regime is not calibrated, to some extent, it is a one size fits all. This is not a call for an easing of the cooling measure but an appeal for a temporary relief for the real estate industry to cope with the current situation. The following two changes could be considered: first, a re-instatement of the Practical Completion Period (PCP) to six years. Contractors need more time to complete the projects; and secondly, an extension of the five-year ABSD deadline to say six years. Alternatively, the ABSD penalty to be pro-rated based on the number of unsold units, similar to the QC principle.

In anticipation of the high likelihood in project delays, BCA is urging developers not to penalise contractors. How is this possible if developers are bounded by the five-year ABSD remission deadline which is very punitive?

At the same time, the sale of residential units has slowed down sharply, almost to a stop. I hope MND can understand the challenges faced by property and construction industry and lend a helping hand. Let us show solidarity and Singapore together spirit.

Building Works

Ms Sylvia Lim (Aljunied): Sir, under the Building Control Act, proposals for building works will need to be submitted to the Building and Construction Authority (BCA) for approval. I understand that the Act will soon be amended to expand the types of projects that require BCA approval, to include major alteration or replacement works to fixed installations.

In assessing whether or not to approve such works, the BCA will examine the certifications and other paperwork of qualified persons (QPs) engaged by the project owners. To what extent does BCA itself verify the soundness of these certifications?

The incident of the PIE Viaduct Collapse in 2017 is illustrative. In that incident, one person was killed and 10 others injured. To date, various professionals associated with the project have been charged and convicted in court. The QP admitted to having engineers with inappropriate experience, failing to check design assumptions and being aware of errors in calculations by the engineers. An accredited checker for the viaduct admitted that he had failed to check the designs or perform calculations for the corbels.

In a Parliamentary answer in July 2018, MND elaborated on its standard procedures when dealing with building projects. The Ministry stated that at the plan submission stage, the BCA performs a sampling check of the plans and design calculations of selected key structural elements, to ascertain that the QP and the Accredited Checker had carried out the design and checks in accordance with building control legislative requirements. MND further stated that at the construction stage, BCA would conduct targeted inspections on structural works.

As these checks by the agencies would presumably have been done on the PIE viaduct project as well, does the collapse of the structure and the facts found by the court indicate any loophole that needs to be plugged? Is there a need for agencies to play a larger role in regulating building projects to ensure public safety?

PMETs in Construction Sector

Mr Ong Teng Koon: Mr Chairman, the BuildSG Transformation Fund has catalysed many productivity innovation projects last year. In the construction sector, there was a focus on offsite prefabrication to improve productivity.

I would like to ask the Minister, how does Singapore compare with other countries in terms of manpower efficiency in our construction sector, and if there are initiatives and schemes to encourage our construction industry to be the best in class.

Sir, with the reduction of S Pass sub-DRC, I would like to ask the Minister if this would affect the local PMET's job. Many of our local PMETs typically take on supervisory roles of the foreign workers. Now, if they have no more foreign workers to supervise, will they still have a job?

Thirdly, I would like to ask the Minister if there are new job opportunities for PMETs in the construction sector. With growth areas such as Design for Manufacturing and Assembly (DfMA) and Integrated Digital Delivery (IDD), are there more programmes for PMETs who can transit into these jobs?

Jobs for Locals in Construction Industry

Mr Gan Thiam Poh: Chairman, our construction sector has difficulty employing Singaporeans to fill many of its jobs, from the most humble manual work to PMET positions. The main challenges are the unattractive salaries, long work hours and difficult work conditions.

However, the current COVID-19 outbreak teaches us the importance of having a good pool of local expertise for self-sufficiency. It is very important that we maintain a critical size of local capabilities for all job scopes at all levels. We should not be too reliant on PRs and foreigners.

I would like to ask the Ministry what it has done and plan to do to encourage Singaporeans to join the construction industry. Will it work with the Ministry of Manpower to implement the Progressive Wage Model (PWM) for construction jobs to ensure good salaries and career outcomes? How is the progress for the Professional Conversion Programmes (PCP) for PMETs in the construction industry?

Good Jobs in Built Environment Cluster

Mr Saktiandi Supaat (Bishan-Toa Payoh): Mr Chairman, the Built Environment cluster, comprising industries such as the Security, Construction, Environmental Services, Real Estate and Smart Facilities Management, is one of the newest growth sectors. With the significantly increased demand in related services, particularly smart facilities, environment and security in recent years, it is a sector burgeoning with opportunities and is a potential exportable service we can provide to the world. How is the Ministry creating good jobs in this cluster and supporting locals to take up these jobs?

Singapore companies across the build environment value chain also collaborate on a complete solution for international infrastructure projects. What skill sets would be needed for this sector and how can we encourage greater interest for mid-career switches to this sector?

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

Improving the BCA Green Mark Scheme

Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang: Sir, the BCA Green Mark Scheme is a good policy that we should build on. Young PAP and climate activists have proposed that the scheme be reviewed and updated with a more weight given to reducing energy consumption and shifting dependence to greener sources.

The School of Design and Environment Block Four (SDE 4) at NUS is a good example. It has net-zero energy consumption. It uses a hybrid cooling system that combines the use of air-conditioning and ceiling fans to provide thermal comfort to building occupants. YP and climate activists have proposed that such features be propagated to new buildings.

I understand that there already is a Green Mark for Zero Energy buildings. But we should also raise standards for the other Green Mark schemes. Buildings should be held to a higher standard before we can call them "green". Will MND consider raising the Green Mark standards for (a) new Government buildings; (b) all commercial buildings; and (c) all private and public residential buildings to encourage sustained reductions in overall energy consumption? Next.

Increasing Size of Dogs in HDB Flats

I am glad that NParks have now a 10% increase in height limit for local mixed breed dogs to be re-home under Project ADORE. The weight of the dog will also be removed as a criterion. This good news. There is about 20% more local mixed breed dogs can be re-homed at HDB flats each year. But we can do more. Can MND provide the rationale for not removing the height criterion as well? Many more dogs can finally find a forever home if we remove the height criterion.

I understand that MND's concern is that the smaller dogs are generally considered to be more easily carried and controlled, especially in confined spaces such as lifts. However, size is not a good proxy of the behaviour or temperament of a dog. Researchers have found that larger dogs are perceived as more obedient, less anxious and less aggressive compared to smaller dogs. As the saying goes, "It's not the size of the dog in the fight, it's the size of the fight in the dog."

As part of the pilot, will MND consider removing the height criterion so that more dogs can be re-homed?

Allowing Cats to be Kept in HDB Flats

Lastly, it does not make sense that someone who lives in a condo is allowed to keep a pet cat while someone who lives in a HDB flat is not allowed. Why? HDB has stated that "[Cats] are generally difficult to contain within the flat. When allowed to roam indiscriminately, they tend to shed fur and defecate or urinate in public areas, and also make caterwauling sounds, which can inconvenience your neighbours."

Surely, these concerns apply to people staying in condos as well. Some condo units are even smaller than HDB flats. It also does not make sense that one is allowed to keep a dog, and now a big dog, but not a cat, not even a little kitten. Dogs can also shed fur and defecate or urinate in public areas. What is more, they bark.

HDB's concerns can be easily addressed. We can ensure that pet cats do not roam indiscriminately and are sterilised. Sterilised cats do not make caterwauling sounds. I have seen firsthand how all these simple measures can be taken and people can keep cats in their flats without affecting their neighbours.

So many people are already keeping cats in their flats. Will the Ministry consider taking the step to officially allow people staying in HDB flats to keep cats?

Cats in HDB Flats

Assoc Prof Daniel Goh Pei Siong (Non-Constituency Member): Chairman, Sir, earlier this year, I asked the Minister whether it is timely to consider removing the ban on keeping pet cats in HDB flats and to regulate pet cat keeping to minimise disamenities for neighbours. Minister replied no, citing reasons of irresponsible pet ownership causing inconvenience to neighbours and unhappiness.

I find this line of reasoning inconsistent, as this is applicable to all pets and pet owners. But the ban is only specifically on cats.

Domestic cats are unlikely to cause the dis-amenities that Minister cited. Studies have shown that cats spend 25% of their waking hours cleaning themselves; their natural instinct is to cover up and hide their waste, which can be done in a litter box. Sterilised cats are unlikely to caterwaul and even if they do, some of the reasons could be to alert their owners to outside activity, or they may be in pain or feeling stressed, which are similar reasons why dogs bark too.

5.30 pm

The ban is outdated. Today, many younger families and families of all ethnic groups are pet cat owners. Regulating pet cat ownership in HDB flats will be more beneficial than a ban as it may give many stray cats a loving home and allow cat lovers to take care of their cats at home with peace of mind. Regulation can include ensuring domestic cats remain indoors, microchipped and sterilised and a framework to encourage community acceptance and having mediation channels for disputes.

I read with interest the latest news that the dog size limits for HDB have been relaxed so as to allow more local mixed-breed dogs to be rehomed in HDB flats under Project ADORE. I hope cats, no less adorable to many Singaporeans, may be included.

Adopting IUCN Red List for Pet Trade

Mr Yee Chia Hsing (Chua Chu Kang): Chairman, I would like to draw attention to the pet birds trade in Singapore. Back in November 2017, I filed a parliamentary question to ask the MND about the frequency that AVA reviews the reference list of birds available for sale as pets to ensure that species which are becoming endangered or threatened are not sold here.

Minister Lawrence Wong replied that the list is based on the requirements of the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES). CITES amends its list once every three years and covers species for which it is illegal to trade.

So, in adopting the CITES list, we are saying we will not do anything which is illegal. Frankly, Chairman, I believe that this is too low a benchmark for us to adopt. I would like to suggest that NParks, which took over the animal welfare function of AVA, adopts the IUCN Red List maintained by the International Union for Conservation of Nature.

Moreover, CITES covers high profile larger animal for which extinction is possible. Many tropical bird species, such as the white-rumped shama, which are threatened and may not be on the CITES list but are included in the IUCN Red List. The CITES list is also not as comprehensive when compared to the IUCN Red List especially in covering smaller species such as tropical birds.

Chairman, the tropical pet bird trade is a multi-million dollar trade which threatens native species. The situation is so bad that in many forests in nearby countries, some song birds are already extinct.

On the same topic, I would also like to propose an increase in the amount of fines for the illegal smuggling and trade of pet birds. In August last year, a Malaysian attempted to smuggle in a record 815 birds into Singapore. Some of these birds can trade for a few thousand dollars each so the maximum fine of $10,000 is relatively low compared to the potential profits. Assuming a "street value" of $500 per bird, the total value of birds from this smuggling attempt was more than $400,000. The fine only forms 2.5% of the total value, which is hardly a deterrence for smugglers.

Chairman, I really hope that Singapore can show leadership in the conservation of native species and not do what is just the minimum. The right place for a bird is on a tree branch and not a cage Hopefully, when our grandchildren walk through a forest, there will still be birds chirping and it would not be a silent forest.

Coordination between Municipal Services Office (MSO) and Agencies

The Senior Parliamentary Secretary for the Ministers for Culture, Community and Youth and Transport (Mr Baey Yam Keng): Mr Chairman, the Municipal Services Office (MSO) was set up to coordinate between agencies and Town Councils to improve the delivery of municipal services.

One key initiative has been the set-up of OneService app. I have tried it a few times and found it easy to use and more importantly, effective. Behind the convenience at my fingertip, I am sure there is a lot of work done behind the scene to make sure the right agency receives the feedback and takes necessary action in time. On behalf of the public, I thank the good men and women at MSO.

Some municipal issues are complex and require various agencies to work hand-in-hand. Sometimes, other non-governmental stakeholders are involved. Let me use the example of community cats.

In Tampines, we do have many cases relating to community cats that have been difficult to resolve. These could be cats roaming at corridors, defecating, scratching cars, caterwauling, irresponsible cat feeding and so on. Some residents are bothered by what the cats do, some are just afraid of cats, while others just do not like them. On the other hand, there are many cat lovers who spend their own money to buy cat food and go around the estate feeding them every night.

To many residents, they just turn to the Town Council to solve such issues on the ground. The Town Council has to work with HDB which regulates that cats are not allowed to be kept within flats, and NEA, which can go after cat feeders who leave the cat food as litter. However, the current practice has also been to work with the Cat Welfare Society (CWS) as a first call.

I have met some staff and volunteers at CWS. They are all very passionate and dedicated people who love and care for cats. They have deep knowledge of how cats behave. At our last meeting, they recommended sonic repellents to help deter cats from venturing into certain areas. Tampines Town Council has bought some and we will be trying them out.

However, CWS has very thin resources and are not able to follow up fully on all cases. They also do not have authority over cat lovers, cat feeders or pet owners, some of whom may not be very cooperative. So, in some cases, CWS has admitted that they would not be able to do anything.

Sir, instead of letting a voluntary group bear the responsibility, should a Government agency take ownership? Would it be HDB, NEA or maybe AVS or maybe NParks? For such issues, could the MSO play the role to coordinate and help set up a sustainable working system to handle such cases?

MSO's Technology Improvements

Mr Ong Teng Koon: Chairman, the work of MSO as part of the Smart Nation Movement has tangibly improved the lives of many Singaporeans. Improvements through the Municipal Services Productivity Fund include Parking.sg, and this has increased convenience to drivers and reduce litter and waste generated by paper coupons. And many drivers given the feedback that they appreciate the refunds being to them if they end their parking sessions early.

Sir, it was good to hear last year that the Municipal Services Productivity Fund was going to be extended with more funds for more agencies to tap into. One such project was the use of drones by the Singapore Land Authority (SLA) for the early detection of maintenance issues, and also a trial deployment of compactor litter bins by NEA for more efficient waste collection.

I would like to ask the Minister to share an update on the progress of these projects and if there are any other technology-enabled services that the Municipal Services Productivity Fund is currently looking at.

I would also like to ask the Minister whether she can consider the use of smart locks that can be remotely controlled. These could be used in our shared common spaces like badminton courts and basketball courts. While some residents enjoy the use of these facilities, I have also got many residents who will complain to me because of the dis-amenities late into the night.

I would like to ask if we could leverage on technology to better manage our common space.

The Chairman: Minister Grace Fu.

The Minister for Culture, Community and Youth (Ms Grace Fu Hai Yien): Chairman, as our country battles the COVID-19 outbreak, I would first start by conveying our appreciation towards all cleaners and workers in municipal services for working hard to keep COVID-19 at bay.

Municipal issues concern all of us as residents and, as Mr Baey Yam Keng said, can be complex and involve multiple parties to resolve. We have made good progress coordinating across Government agencies, Town Councils and other non-government stakeholders, to offer residents services that are prompt, practical and personal.

With the OneService app, residents can access services on-the-go. We now have more than 200,000 app users who, collectively, submitted over 460,000 feedback cases. The use of Artificial Intelligence or AI, enables our integrated systems to route most of these cases automatically to the right agency for prompt action, with 89% accuracy. This saves about 175 man-days a month, freeing up resources for agencies to focus on rectifying ground issues.

To address complex issues, MSO first clarifies the roles of stakeholders involved. Ninety percent of cases involving multiple stakeholders found the case owner within seven days, and since 2015, the average time taken has fallen from eight-and-a-half to six days. MSO then works with stakeholders to develop collaborations that tap on their respective areas of expertise. Mr Baey cited cat-related nuisance. NParks is the first point-of-contact for the public for animal-related feedback. We are tightening the collaboration to manage this and monitoring to ensure that case resolution times and outcomes improve.

Addressing residents' concerns about complex issues often goes beyond coordination, so we emphasise services that carry greater personal engagement. I recall a case where residents at Pending Road were troubled by unpleasant smells from a nearby flat. HDB found the flat severely hoarded and infested with pests. HDB worked with Holland-Bukit Panjang Town Council, MSF, PA, IMH, Thye Hua Kwan and Covenant Evangelical Free Church to address the case holistically. They worked over weekends to clean the flat, obtained financial aid for repairs and provided emotional and counselling support – all to afford long-term self-care to the flat owner and a sustainable solution to other residents.

This is the empathy and resident-centric service we champion. Today, nearly 60% of our OneService app cases have post poll ratings of 4- and 5-stars. We aim to raise this to 70% by end-2020. MSO will go further, beyond coordinating, to forge meaningful connections with, and among residents.

Mr Ong Teng Koon asked about MSO's progress in harnessing technology to deliver service improvements to residents. The projects undertaken by SLA and NEA under the Municipal Services Productivity Fund are progressing well. In 2019, we awarded funding for HDB and PUB to trial a smart lock system that Mr Ong has asked, that automates access to maintenance areas in HDB estates, such as rooftops. We will explore the potential for this system to be adapted to other spaces, together with other solutions, such as encouraging residents to be more considerate, as Mr Ong has requested, to address the root cause of community noise.

We are making other technological improvements to better connect residents to services that meet their needs.

First, we are integrating services from agencies and Town Councils into the OneService app, to develop the "Book Facilities" feature for residents to have a single, simple touchpoint to find and book community spaces, such as function rooms, barbecue pits and sports facilities. In addition, we will introduce new reporting categories, such as "smoking" and "high-rise littering", for residents to highlight specific concerns for investigation.

Second, we are improving accessibility to services, by bringing our mainstay reporting function to where residents are. With OneService Lite, which involves QR codes posted at places where residents frequent, such as HDB lift landings, users can easily report a case by scanning the QR codes in just two taps, without having to pre-install the OneService app. Soon, residents can also submit cases via popular social messaging apps like WhatsApp and Telegram, guided by an AI-powered chatbot.

Third, we are constantly innovating to kick-start future-ready solutions. Since January, we have been trialling Municipal 360. Routine feedback submitted through the OneService app will be routed directly to agencies' contractors for speedier resolution. Residents will be updated with photographs of work done directly by the municipal worker.

Last November, MSO hosted the OneService-Industry eXchange for public and private organisations to share ideas and co-develop solutions for municipal operations. With more collaboration and experimentation, residents can look forward to smarter, more customised service improvements.

5.45 pm

Even as we expand technological connectivity, we want to connect residents with each other to co-create a better living environment for all. We agree with Mr Amrin's suggestion to consider the diverse views of residents. Certainly, as part of SG Together, we will enable each and every one to have a say and exercise collective choices that will impact their living environment.

For a start, we have included new OneService app features to activate our community to make the changes they want to see. Residents will be able to poll on local improvement works through "What Say You?" surveys and use the "Community Challenge" feature to take bite-size, meaningful actions that help address issues that concern them.

We must also augment hardware with "heartware", by nurturing more community participation and partnership. During a pilot in Yio Chu Kang to reduce high-rise littering and pigeon issues, the dedication of the Residents' Committee community leaders to educate residents personally was critical in tackling the root cause – human behaviour. Post-pilot, we saw an 80% reduction in related feedback. We have formalised a programme to equip community leaders and Town Councils in all towns with advice and resources to tackle these issues.

We welcome residents to come on board in a variety of ways – as individuals, to inject their unique perspectives, and as a community, to build consensus amid diverse views. For example, MSO is partnering MCCY in the "Love Our 'Hood" initiative that test-beds various resident participation models to co-create solutions for municipal issues in their neighbourhoods. Through these projects, we will develop resources that other community groups can use when launching future ground-up initiatives.

To sum up, there are many good ideas, diverse talents and new solution possibilities across the community, industry and agencies. We want to harness these to achieve our common goal of improving our living environment, the SG Together way. In 2020, we will remain steadfast in our goal to deliver connected services for a connected community.

Mr Chairman: Mr Desmond Lee.

The Second Minister for National Development (Mr Desmond Lee): Chairman, we want to build a Singapore where the next generation can enjoy a better life than the one before. That is why my colleague Minister Lawrence Wong had said some time ago that "we are not done building Singapore." This spirit also motivates our push to make Singapore a City in Nature and our efforts to transform our city centre. So, I will focus on these two aspects today.

Sir, the lush urban greenery we have today is the outcome of dedicated and sustained efforts where successive generations of Singaporeans have been planting trees, year after year, over the past 60 years. Today, we are a City in a Garden and, according to an MIT study, one of the world's greenest cities.

Mr Arasu Duraisamy asked about the Government's plans for the next bound of greening Singapore. We want to transform Singapore into a City in Nature to provide Singaporeans with a better quality of life while co-existing with flora and fauna on this island. Indeed, with climate change, more extreme weather conditions and increased urbanisation, we must do more on this front.

With your permission, Chairman, may I just display some slides on the screen to better elaborate what I am going to say?

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

Mr Desmond Lee: Sir, our key strategy is to enhance and extend our natural capital across the island. Let me outline four key moves over the next 10 years.

First, we will extend our nature park network. Today, we have more than 350 hectares of nature parks, which act as complementary habitats and buffers to our nature reserves to protect them from the impact of urbanisation. This is important as the nature reserves are the richest sources of our natural capital. They contain our primary and secondary rainforests and core habitats for our native biodiversity and wildlife.

In all, we will dedicate another 200 hectares of nature parks by 2030. This is two-and-a-half times the size of the Singapore Botanic Gardens. Singaporeans can look forward to more places, such as the Rifle Range Nature Park for nature-based recreation, such as hiking and bird watching in future.

Khatib Bongsu is a rich mangrove and mudflat habitat on the north-eastern coast of Singapore. I have kayaked there with NParks and our nature community volunteers a number of years ago. It is one of the few good mangrove habitats left in Singapore and I am happy to announce that NParks will also be establishing a 40-hectare nature park there.

Next, we will intensify nature and the greenery in our gardens and parks.

First, we will incorporate natural designs and plantings in our new and redeveloped parks. You can expect to see a greater variety of vegetation that resembles the look and feel of natural forests and also benefit from the positive effects of nature on your health and well-being. You can look forward to the addition of another 140 hectares of such parks and gardens over the next five years.

Second, we will naturalise more waterways and water bodies in our gardens and parks. We have done this in Bishan-Ang Mo Kio Park and Lakeside Garden, where we transformed concrete canals into natural rivers. We will incorporate such designs in all our coastal and riverine parks. This will also help to protect against sea-level rise and flooding.

Lastly, we will conserve important native plants and animal species. Some of our world's most unique biodiversity call our tropical island home. Singaporeans would have encountered rare native species, such as the Singapore Kopsia, on the left, and tiger orchid, on the right, and this is because of our restoration efforts. In fact, the tiger orchid is the largest orchid in the world. It can weigh a few tonnes each.

We will partner nature groups and the community to carry out recovery plans for over 70 more animal and plant species and enhance 30 hectares of forest, marine and coastal habitats by 2030.

Sir, our third strategy is to restore nature into our urban areas to bring greenery closer to our everyday lives, so that Singaporeans benefit from greenery at their doorstep. We aim to nearly double the skyrise greenery footprint in our buildings and infrastructure to 200 hectares by 2030. We will focus on greening our industrial estates. These are amongst some of the hottest areas on the island – hottest in terms of temperature. Over the next 10 years, we will plant 100,000 more trees in industrial estates, such as the Tuas Industrial Estate and Seletar Aerospace Park. These efforts will cool the environment, improve air quality and beautify the surroundings in those industrial estates.

Lastly, we will strengthen the connectivity between our green spaces. It is not enough to intensify greenery in isolated pockets. So, we will plant native trees and plants in a multi-tiered structure and create green corridors along roads called Nature Ways.

These can be further integrated with pedestrian and cycling paths to form lush and natural park connectors. In fact, we have been planting Nature Ways since 2013 and, by 2030, we aim to have 300 km of Nature Ways and 500 km of park connectors. With these, all households will be within a 10-minute walk from a park and, over the long term, where feasible, we aim to make every road a Nature Way.

During a recent dialogue with friends from the nature community, they shared that the work of greening Singapore cannot be done by MND alone and they are quite right. The transformation of Singapore into a City in Nature – a qualitative change – requires close collaboration with other agencies and we will infuse this into our planning and development systems.

But Government efforts alone will not be sufficient. Various Members also asked how Singaporeans can be more involved in the greening of Singapore. We want a whole new generation of Singaporeans to carry on this responsibility to keep planting and nurturing trees for the benefit of future Singaporeans.

Mr Lee Kuan Yew sowed the seeds of Singapore's greening movement with the planting of a Mempat Tree in 1963 at a time when the Government was also grappling with serious challenges of unemployment, public health, illiteracy and so on. But greening, to our pioneers, was serious business back then, and it remains a key priority of national development right till today.

A few years ago, I organised a Nature Way planting in Jurong West. I was standing next to an elderly lady, who was there with her grandson, and they were participating with neighbours and friends in planting the Nature Way. It was along one of the roads. After they had shovelled soil around their sapling, I could not help but overhear this elderly lady asking someone to help her take a photograph of her and her grandson next to the sapling. She told her grandson in Mandarin, "Boy, let us take a photo. Remember where we planted this tree. Next time, when Ah Ma is gone, come and visit the tree with your family. It will surely be a lot taller by then. You can remember me by that tree."

This story stuck deep in me about how our greenery can bind Singaporeans and families in Singapore together, and how one generation takes it upon itself to plant trees for the next generation to enjoy. Literally planting trees for the next generation but also figuratively taking responsibility for the long term, not just for ourselves, but for the future.

We want this DNA to run deep in our future generations. So, we will continue this legacy with a new movement – the One Million Trees movement.

Today, we plant around the order of 50,000 trees a year. We will double the pace and plant one million trees over the next 10 years. We will do so along our roads, in our parks, estates and green areas, and along some of our coastal areas, we will plant mangrove trees. We may lose some streetscape greenery due to developmental needs, but we will plant back what is lost and more.

I recently met with a number of partners, who are passionate about greening, to discuss how this One Million Trees movement can galvanise the length and breadth of Singapore, and bring on-board a broad spectrum of Singapore, especially the next generation, to have a stake in greening Singapore, to have a stake in making sure this place remains liveable, not just for themselves but for the next generation.

We will involve schools, communities, corporate organisations and many more. In fact, more than 200 stakeholders have already pledged their support to plant more than 120,000 trees. This includes companies on Jurong Island, Keppel Corporation, the National University of Singapore, OCBC, Shimizu Corporation, United Parcel Service (UPS) and many other community groups, organisations and individuals. I am encouraged to see that everyone is doing their part to keep Singapore green.

We also want Singaporeans to be more actively involved in the design, development and programming of our parks. Over the next five years, Singaporeans can join in the designing, building and management of 50 new and redeveloped parks, as my colleague Minister Lawrence Wong had announced recently. This includes signage design or promoting park etiquette, and partnering our gardeners to do landscape planting. It is one thing for a park to be built near you; it is another for a park to be built near you in which you have had a hand in designing, conceptualising, building and literally knocking the nails into some of the furniture for the park and planting the trees. It also gives a sense of ownership, custodianship and stewardship of the green spaces around you.

We will also step up efforts to build awareness amongst Singaporeans so that we can live harmoniously with nature. To have 48,000 NParks volunteers working closely and passionately with us today is something we are very proud of, and we hope to grow this number to some 70,000 over the next 10 years. We invite you to join in our efforts, forge closer bonds with fellow Singaporeans and strengthen our sense of ownership of our environment.

Sir, even as we enhance the quality of our green spaces, we will energise and rejuvenate our city.

Various Members asked about on-going efforts to rejuvenate our CBD and the city and progress of MND's work over the year.

We aspire to be amongst the leading cities in the world, where people want to live, work and visit. We have introduced the CBD Incentive Scheme for this purpose. A successful CBD must have a good mix of office spaces, a lively street life, with diverse offerings. To encourage the development of different neighbourhoods in the CBD, we introduced incentives for the conversion of older office buildings into residences and hotels. Interest and take-up have been encouraging and URA planners are working with interested building owners on this.

6.00 pm

We have also introduced the Strategic Development Incentive Scheme to encourage commercial building owners to partner neighbours to comprehensively redevelop a few plots, where transformation is not limited to one building but a whole area along the street or precinct for the public to enjoy.

URA is in dialogue with several building owners who are keen with potential to rejuvenate different parts of our city.

But a leading city is nothing without its people and its soul – not just about buildings and shops, but one that reflects the Singaporean attitude of innovation, openness, daring and verve. Deputy Prime Minister Heng spoke about the spirit of partnership at the launch of the Singapore Together movement last year. At MND we embrace it and will do more to partner Singaporeans. Members have asked how we intend to do so.

We have private sector partners from 10 precincts all across Singapore on the pilot Business Improvement District programme (BID). The pilot BID programmes are making good progress. These stakeholders seek to take a people-centred approach in creating spaces that will draw people into them. For example, we saw The Lawn next to The Sail and Marina Bay Financial Centre being activated for the first time during the Marina Bay Singapore Countdown, and so expect many more such new initiatives in the coming year and months.

Community feedback was key throughout the Draft Master Plan 2019 process. This is another example of how Singaporeans get involved in rejuvenating our city. We exhibited the plan in March 2019 after rounds of consultation, and gazetted it eight months later. We assessed each public feedback thoroughly, and incorporated ideas and suggestions where appropriate. I am confident that the plan has been made better because of our collective efforts and because Singaporeans cared and participated.

Members asked about heritage and conservation of buildings to maintain the character of a city. As a city-state, we have to meet the national physical needs while retaining links to our past, retaining links to our national collective memory. And to-date, after a 30-year journey, we have conserved close to 7,200 buildings across our island, with some in the heartlands. Recent additions include the former Bukit Timah Fire Station, former Railway Station Staff Quarters and SCGS campus at Emerald Hill. In our conservation efforts, partnerships are key. And in the case of SCGS, a group of alumnae worked with stakeholders and the public to garner support for conservation.

We also engage industry partners and the stakeholders in determining which building to conserve, and how we can sustain the built heritage of places.

Sir, in the next bound of greening Singapore and energising our city, it is partnerships that are key – the commitment by Singaporeans across all walks of life to work together with us to imagine the next Singapore, to work hand-in-hand to keep our city green, to keep our city lively and buzzing.

Apart from partnerships, we also have to thank many of our colleagues and officers who work assiduously behind the scenes to make this a reality. For example, the aborists, conservationists, botanists, scientists in NParks and Gardens by the Bay who dream of a yet more green Singapore and the city planners and innovators who think of ways to energise community partnerships in order to make our city that much more vibrant and exciting. We look forward to continued partnership with Members of this House as well. [Applause.]

The Chairman: Mr Zaqy Mohamad.

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

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

The Minister of State for National Development (Mr Zaqy Mohamad): As we continue to remake our city, we must ensure that our firms and our workers in the Built Environment sector keep pace with technological advancements, improve their capabilities and seize upcoming opportunities.

In 2017, we developed the Construction Industry Transformation Map or ITM, with the industry, the unions, and IHLs.

We have made good progress in our three ITM transformation areas, namely, Design for Manufacturing and Assembly (DfMA), Integrated Digital Delivery (IDD) and Green Buildings. Allow me to elaborate.

Firstly, we are fundamentally changing the way that we build through DfMA. DfMA allows us to move on-site construction work into a more controlled working environment off-site, to prefabricate building components for on-site assembly. This way, construction becomes faster, cleaner, quieter, and of higher quality.

For example, Teambuild, a local builder, achieved close to 37% site productivity gains for its Valley Spring @Yishun, a HDB BTO project by adopting Prefabricated Pre-finished Volumetric Construction (PPVC). Here, you can see a module being lifted, to be assembled just like Lego blocks, with the furnishings already fitted inside. This enabled Teambuild significant time savings, and we hope to drive greater adoption in the near future.

We are on track to meet our DfMA adoption target of 40% this year, and we aim to achieve an even higher rate of 70% by 2025. Now, this is an ambitious target but I think that we can achieve this by working together with the industry. We aim to make DfMA our default way of building.

Mr Ong Teng Koon asked how our construction productivity compares with other countries. Site productivity data is not available for all countries. However, our site productivity has improved by over 17% in the last decade, which is significant.

To boost DfMA adoption, we enhanced our Buildability Framework last year, raising standards for larger residential developments and allowing outcome-based solutions to encourage building designs that can be constructed more productively.

We will further enhance the framework this year, by progressively requiring higher buildability standards for other development types, including commercial and institutional buildings. We will also re-structure the framework to encourage the industry to incorporate DfMA technology into the structural, architectural and Mechanical, Electrical and Plumbing designs for buildings.

The public sector will also continue to generate lead demand for DfMA. To this end, we will set aside $120 million under the Public Sector Construction Productivity Fund for more public sector projects to adopt DfMA, for projects launched by 2021.

Next on IDD. The digitalisation of the construction process will facilitate wider deployment of DfMA technologies. Building Information Modelling, or BIM technology, will allow our architects and engineers to design and build in a virtual setting first. This improves the accuracy of construction plans and reduces abortive works downstream. Now IDD takes this further, by leveraging technology to facilitate better collaboration amongst project parties across the building life-cycle, to coordinate production and supply chains, to build more efficiently, to improve building quality and to optimise operations and maintenance.

For example, Guan Ho, a home-grown construction firm, has been using digital technology to track building components as they are fabricated, delivered and installed at Punggol Town Hub. This has reduced time spent on project management by up to 30%. We want more local firms to use IDD to build smarter and more efficiently.

To help our local SMEs with IDD, BCA, IMDA and SkillsFuture Singapore have developed the Construction and Facilities Management Industry Digital Plan. We will set aside $19 million to fund SMEs to adopt digital solutions that complement basic BIM software. SMEs will be guided to assess their level of digital readiness, and identify digital solutions that can benefit businesses. For example, site management platforms to plan and monitor construction activities, and facilities management software for operations and maintenance. SMEs can receive up to 70% funding for pre-approved solutions. SMEs can also use the Digital Roadmap on Training to identify digitalisation courses for employees.

Moving on to green buildings. Our industry transformation efforts are not limited to improving productivity. As Deputy Prime Minister emphasised during the Budget, we must remake our city to meet the challenges of climate change. Buildings account for over 20% of our emissions. Green buildings are hence an important part of Singapore’s climate change mitigation strategy. Since the launch of BCA’s Green Mark scheme in 2005, we have greened more than 40% of our buildings by GFA. We are on track to meet our target of 80% by 2030. We also launched the Super Low Energy buildings programme in 2018, which goes beyond Green Mark Platinum standards.

To share an example – Keppel Land and BCA are working together to transform the Keppel Bay Tower into a Super Low Energy building. The building uses innovative technologies, including a high-efficiency air distribution system and autonomous lighting control, to reduce energy consumption by about 20%. This is a good example of how existing buildings can achieve Super Low Energy standards. Keppel Bay Tower will be the first commercial building fully powered by renewable energy.

We can do more. Over the next few months, BCA will co-create the Singapore Green Building Masterplan 2020 with our stakeholders, as we push the boundaries for Green Buildings.

We are considering a few initiatives. First, to push for more energy efficient buildings, we intend to raise the minimum energy performance standards. This will lower emissions, and also benefit building owners over the building life-cycle. Concurrently, we will review our Green Mark certification standards, as highlighted by Mr Louis Ng. BCA will engage stakeholders to develop shared aspirations for sustainability standards in the Built Environment, and we need to work out how to get there in partnership.

Next, we want to enable greater transparency in building energy performance. Today, close to 80% of commercial building owners voluntarily opt to disclose their buildings' names and addresses along with their energy performance data, which is published by BCA annually. We intend to identify all buildings when publishing the data henceforth, so that the best performing buildings will serve as role models to encourage others to improve their own energy efficiency. We will share more details by this year.

We call on stakeholders to co-create the Singapore Green Building Masterplan 2020 with us over the next few months.

Beyond improving firms’ capabilities, transforming the construction sector is also about creating more opportunities for our people, as Mr Gan Thiam Poh, Mr Saktiandi Supaat and Mr Ong Teng Koon mentioned.

The adoption of new technologies and digitalisation has created new, higher-skilled jobs in better working environments in the construction sector, and generally they will command higher salaries. For example, with DfMA, we will need more production managers, quality assurance personnel, and logistics and supply chain planners at automated production facilities. Tech-savvy local PMETs can also take on exciting jobs such as digital delivery specialists along with the others in the IDD value chain that I mentioned earlier.

Our sector should be anchored by a skilled and competent local workforce and our firms must also do their part. The share of local PMETs in construction has fallen over the past decade, even though our total local PMET population has increased.

To rebalance the share of local PMETs in construction, Deputy Prime Minister has announced a reduction in the construction S Pass sub-DRC from 20% currently to 18% in January 2021, and subsequently to 15% in January 2023.

To help firms build up a strong local core, we are strengthening measures to ensure an adequate pipeline of skilled local PMETs for the industry. BCA and IHLs continually update the curricula of Built Environment courses to meet the industry's evolving needs. BCA also co-sponsors scholarship and sponsorship programmes with the industry to attract students to pursue relevant courses in our IHLs.

We will also progressively introduce new Professional Conversion Programmes or PCPs, to prepare mid-career entrants to join the sector. For example, a PMET from manufacturing could be re-skilled as a production manager in a DfMA facility. Hence, we will develop PCPs for prefabrication job roles. Teambuild is developing a firm-level PCP, which will be open for applications later this year.

I have also heard feedback about the shortage of BIM modellers, but firms have not been keen to take in mid-career converts before they are trained. Under the current BIM PCP, participants are trained in BIM while concurrently undergoing on-the-job-training with their firms. But some firms prefer BIM modellers who can contribute immediately upon hiring. To address this, we will allow participants to complete their full-time training first, before continuing with on-the-job training with their firms. So, on a full-time basis; they could be ready within three months instead of six or 12 months if they were doing it part-time. We hope that more firms will take up the enhanced BIM PCP, which will start later this year. For the participants, they will receive an allowance of up to 80% of their drawn salary is, during their full-time training.

To Er Dr Lee Bee Wah's and Mr Ong Teng Koon's points on the S Pass sub-DRC cuts, our transformation efforts have created attractive jobs for locals. The S Pass tightening helps level the playing field, and will allow more Polytechnic and ITE graduates to access these jobs, including supervisory roles. Our local PMETs will still be able to take on supervisory roles, so long as they are open to re-skilling themselves.

6.15 pm

As we push ahead with our transformation efforts, we aim to create more of these attractive jobs that I shared earlier, for our local PMETs. I encourage firms to take advantage of our good pipeline of infrastructure projects in the years ahead and attract more local PMETs to join our sector.

A good example is Kimly Construction. Since 2015, Kimly has sponsored 15 undergraduates with BCA, and introduced them to fulfilling careers in the Built Environment sector. Kimly has also groomed three mid-career BIM modellers under the BIM PCP since 2018. Kimly paced out the on-the-job-training for these employees to smoothen their transition into the firm, and they are now keen to pick up even more advanced BIM skills, such as 4D/5D BIM simulation.

We have also developed a Skills Framework (SFw) for the Built Environment sector, to map out skillsets required at various levels for key job roles in the construction and facilities management sectors, and their career progression pathways. More details will be announced later this year.

Moving on to other cuts. Ms Sylvia Lim asked about ensuring the safety of building works.

For any development, the Qualified Person or QP has a duty to ensure that building and structural plans comply with the building control regulations. In addition, all major building works must be independently reviewed by an Accredited Checker or AC to ensure that the key structural elements are adequately designed.

While the responsibility of ensuring structural safety rests with the QP and AC, BCA conducts sampling checks for each plan submission. Where BCA finds non-compliance with legislative requirements, BCA will take enforcement action. Penalties could include a fine, or imprisonment, or both.

BCA regularly reviews the Building Control regime to ensure that it is sufficiently robust. BCA has introduced additional requirements since 2017, after the Tampines viaduct incident that Ms Lim mentioned, to raise our standards of building safety. BCA now requires the QPs and builders of higher risk projects to provide additional detailed assessments on the stability of the structure.

Together with the Institution of Engineers Singapore or IES, and the Association of Consulting Engineers Singapore or ACES, BCA has issued two circulars in 2019 to provide QPs and ACs with guidelines and good practices for plan submissions and supervision. This will help QPs and ACs to improve the quality of their design calculations and ensure that all key structural elements of the project are identified, as well as improve the quality of the QPs' supervision. So, measures have been in place since then and we hope that this will improve the safety record of builders, moving forward.

Er Dr Lee also spoke about supporting local contractors. Singapore cannot discriminate against foreign firms, in line with our WTO obligations. Indeed, we have been helping local firms to build capabilities as well as strengthen their competitiveness. One way we have done so is by parcelling large Government projects, such as MRT lines, into smaller contracts, so that our local firms are able to take up projects while the Government mitigates its risk.

In recent years, I am also pleased to see more local firms winning large infrastructure projects. For example, Woh Hup won a $1 billion contract to develop an Integrated Business Park at Punggol Digital District. Straits Construction, another local builder, was part of a joint venture that won the $537 million contract for the Singapore Institute of Technology.

Er Dr Lee also spoke about payment delays due to Variation Orders, or VOs. BCA and MOF have encouraged GPEs to process VOs progressively and expeditiously, to ensure timely payments to contractors.

We empathise with the current situation and will certainly help where needed. For example, agencies can process VOs based on indicative scope and costs. At the same time, contractors should include the necessary documentation to support speedy processing of claims. More recently, we have revised the Security of Payment Act or SOPA, which aims to also help claims for private sector projects.

If Er Dr Lee can share more details with us, including the treatment of Liquidated Damages (LDs) and progress payments, BCA will look into these specific cases.

Let me conclude by addressing concerns from the construction sector arising from COVID-19. BCA has advised government agencies to take a sympathetic view when considering Extension of Time or EOT requests, for project delays due to COVID-19. We have also sought REDAS' support for private sector developers to do likewise. We will continue to monitor the situation. If delays are prolonged, we will consider whether additional measures are necessary.

To ease cashflow concerns from delays due to COVID-19, main contractors can also submit progress payment claims fortnightly instead of monthly, for public sector projects. So, we are trying to help firms with their cashflow too.

For on-going PPVC projects affected by delays to the supply of construction materials from China, BCA has adopted a facilitative approach so far. We have allowed 13 projects to install partially completed PPVC modules on-site first, and install the finishing works subsequently when the delayed materials arrive. So, we have also provided some flexibility in some of our projects.

Some firms with more PRC workers may also face manpower pressure in the short term due to COVID-19. These firms may consider hiring workers from other firms with excess foreign manpower. Firms can search for eligible workers for transfer via the Foreign Construction Workers Directory System or FCWDS, online.

Built Environment firms can also tap on the support packages announced by Deputy Prime Minister earlier, such as the SME Working Capital Loan under the Enhanced Enterprise Financing Scheme, and the Jobs Support Scheme.

Er Dr Lee also suggested measures to help developers and contractors cope with COVID-19. On foreign worker levies, the Minister for Manpower already said during the Budget debate last week that we are waiving levies for employers with eligible foreign workers serving quarantine leave of absence or stay home notices.

However, we have not done so for all foreign workers in general. As much as we want to help the sector or businesses deal with the short-term fall-out, this should not negate longer term efforts for companies to restructure and become less reliant on foreign manpower. Levy waivers would run counter to these objectives.

Er Dr Lee and Mr Alex Yam also asked about the Project Completion Period and the ABSD remission timelines. The Government is monitoring the construction industry and the property market closely. We will adjust our policies as necessary to ensure a stable and sustainable property market. We have selectively allowed extensions of the completion period for individual projects because of extenuating circumstances, and would be prepared to consider doing so on a case-by-case basis.

But to assure the industry, we have seen just a few appeals, so it is not a big impact thus far. We will continue to monitor the situation and see how it goes.

Even as we deal with the immediate challenges posed by COVID-19, we should not lose sight of our longer term transformation agenda. I strongly encourage firms to tap on the schemes available under our $780 million BuildSG Transformation Fund, so that we can all emerge stronger and better prepared for the future.

In closing, we have made good progress, but there is certainly much more that we can do. We will accelerate our efforts to build more productively, create more opportunities for our firms and good jobs for our people.

The Chairman: Ms Sun Xueling.

The Senior Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for National Development (Ms Sun Xueling): Mr Chairman, I would like to begin by thanking all Members who have spoken up about animal health and welfare. Kindly allow me to share how we will continue to work closely with the community on these issues.

First, one of our key strategies is to reduce the stray animal population and re-home as many as possible, where they will have shelter, food, and adequate care.

I am happy to say that we have made good progress with the Trap-Neuter-Release-Manage (TNRM) programme. Launched in partnership with 11 Animal Welfare Groups (AWGs), it involves catching and sterilising stray dogs, or Singapore Specials, as we call them, to sustainably and humanely manage their population. We will then rehome as many of the sterilised dogs as possible, while the remaining dogs will be released at suitable locations to live out their lives naturally.

Since the programme was launched, NParks and the AWGs have worked closely with the community as well as land owners on the ground to trap about 1,000 dogs. Thus far, we have managed to rehome or foster over half of the dogs trapped under TNRM, and we hope to rehome even more Singapore Specials in the coming years.

Eight years ago, we worked with our AWG partners to launch Project ADORE to do this. Given the good progress, NParks has recently reviewed the size limits for Project ADORE. I thank Mr Louis Ng for his proposal to further re-look the height limit for Project ADORE. NParks will work closely with our AWG partners to successfully implement the latest revision first before we review the project again. It bears mentioning that Project ADORE has been successful largely because of careful, sensitive and gradual implementation. NParks has to balance the objective of rehoming more dogs with the concerns that some residents have over larger dogs in HDB flats.

In addition, I would like to share that public feedback on stray dogs has decreased by more than 50% since the launch of TNRM. This is the result of the hard work by our AWGs and NParks officers in terms of outreach on the ground.

The second thrust of our work is on increased education and outreach efforts. NParks, in collaboration with our AWGs and pet businesses, launched the Pets’ Day Out series in August 2019. It has provided NParks more opportunities to reach out to and educate pet owners or those interested to own pets.

We will continue to identify other suitable platforms, such as community events, to reach out to diverse audience groups and garner stronger support from the community.

Third, NParks embarked on a review to raise standards in the pet sector. As part of the review, NParks has engaged key stakeholders and the wider public through focus group discussions as well as an online survey.

There was general consensus that more needs to be done to raise the standards of pet breeders and boarders to safeguard the health and welfare of the animals involved. Based on the feedback received, NParks intends to take a balanced, risk-based approach to regulating these businesses. Currently, only commercial breeders and boarders on farmland are licensed.

For a start, NParks will focus on improving practices at existing commercial breeding facilities on farmland as the breeding sector deals with young and pregnant animals that require specialised care. This will be done by strengthening the licence conditions in areas such as housing and management, healthcare, and traceability of the animals.

Concurrently, NParks will step up its enforcement efforts against those who operate a commercial breeding facility without a licence, outside of farmland.

NParks also intends to license commercial pet boarding facilities based on the scale of their operations, which will depend on factors such as the number of animals handled and the frequency of transactions. Those who help board animals for family and friends, or do it infrequently, will not be subject to licensing.

Regardless, all pet service providers, including pet boarders and breeders, have a duty of care towards the animals they handle and they should abide by the Code of Animal Welfare for the Pet Industry. Beyond the Code of Animal Welfare, NParks can take enforcement action against pet service providers under the Animals and Birds Act for failing in this duty of care, or for animal cruelty. NParks will work through the revised regulatory framework with stakeholders and share more details later this year.

Mr Yee Chia Hsing spoke about using the IUCN Red List to regulate the pet bird trade. Let me clarify that the IUCN list is already part of our considerations. This is because we regulate wildlife trade according to the requirements of the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES), which uses IUCN conservation status as one of the criteria for categorising species.

Furthermore, the penalties for illegal smuggling under the Animals and Birds Act apply per animal or bird, and not per shipment. This means that a smuggler may be liable on conviction to a fine of up to $10,000 or 12 months’ jail or both for each smuggled bird, which should be a sufficient deterrent.

6.30 pm

NParks' public consultations on the pet sector review also surfaced the need to enhance the traceability of animals. A robust animal traceability system is critical in protecting public and animal health. In the event a pet is diagnosed with an infectious disease, especially one which can be transmitted to humans, such as rabies, it is important to be able to trace its whereabouts and health status.

Pet licensing is one of the measures that enables NParks to do so quickly. To make it more convenient for pet owners, NParks will introduce a one-time licensing for sterilised dogs by the end of the year. With one-time licensing, owners of sterilised dogs only need to apply to NParks for a licence once, instead of having to repeatedly renew their licence upon expiry. The licence, with a one-time fee of $35, will be valid throughout the life of the dog. This means that if you sterilise your dog and opt for a one-time licence instead of an annual licence, you could save over $800 in licence fees over 10 years. We hope that this will encourage more owners to sterilise and license their pet dogs. For existing owners with three-year licences for sterilised dogs, you will be happy to hear that your licences will automatically be changed to a one-time licence.

As part of its pet sector review, NParks is also looking into measures to enhance cat traceability to protect public health.

We are also looking into raising the standards of the veterinary industry. Our veterinarians play an important role in providing animals with high standards of care and ensuring animal health. They also play a critical role in safeguarding public health as they can help detect the outbreak of diseases that may be transmitted to humans. NParks will begin engaging key stakeholders on this issue in April this year.

These are just some of the areas that we have been working on in a relatively short span of time. And there are many other areas that the community has raised, which we are continuing to study and finding ways to balance the needs of the community. For instance, the issue of cat ownership in HDB flats, which Assoc Prof Daniel Goh and Mr Louis Ng have raised.

We recognise that there are residents who are cat lovers and who would like to keep cats in their flats. We are continuing to have conversations around how to best strike a balance between residents who are pet lovers, those who are not and those who are concerned about disamenities. HDB will work with NParks to take a holistic and balanced approach in reviewing and updating its pet ownership policies.

Let me now speak about our efforts to help low-income and rental households.

Last year, I shared about our plans to improve the natural lighting and ventilation in older rental blocks, by removing some flats on each floor to create more openings along the corridors.

This year, HDB will commence the improvement works at Chai Chee and Telok Blangah. At these four blocks, all tenants who are living in the units identified for removal can relocate within the same block, if they prefer. HDB and local social organisations are closely supporting their transition. HDB will study where else they can implement similar improvements in future, considering feedback from residents.

Mr Lim Biow Chuan and Dr Lily Neo asked about reviewing the Joint Singles Scheme (JSS). Most JSS tenants are prepared to share a flat. More than 90% of flat-sharing tenants surveyed did not experience conflicts or difficulties living with their flatmate. Nevertheless, HDB will facilitate requests from tenants who wish to transfer to another flat with a different flatmate. For those with extenuating circumstances or medical grounds, HDB is also prepared to consider their requests to rent alone.

Further, HDB has also been installing partitions in 1-room rental flats for JSS tenants, to provide more privacy for each individual. Some of these are also installed such that there are internal doors to each sleeping area.

HDB currently has about 1,100 rental flats with partitions. About half of these are vacant and available to JSS households.

While most of the flats were fitted with partitions while vacant, about 50 flats had partitions installed in-situ, at the request of tenants who are already living there. This in-situ installation was a new offer we rolled out last year. Interested tenants can contact their local HDB branch to request for partitions.

Apart from physical enhancements, we have also enhanced the support for tenants to become homeowners.

Last year, I announced that HDB will waive any subsequent rent increase for tenants who have made a downpayment for a new flat.

Since the implementation of this waiver on 1 June 2019, close to 200 rental households have benefited. The median amount of rent saved by these families is about $150 per month, which they can put towards their upcoming new home, or other needs.

On Mr Gan Thiam Poh's suggestion to treat the rent paid as instalments for a future flat purchase, we have not done so as it is similar to giving the tenant a housing grant, which we already do through various schemes. Grants are also more equitable as the amount of subsidy would not vary with the tenants' length of stay in rental housing. Our rental rates are tiered progressively based on income, to ensure that subsidies are allocated fairly, and targeted at those who need them most.

To mitigate the cliff effect at each tier, on a case-by-case basis, HDB waives the rent increase at tenancy renewal if it is a significant part of the household's increase in income. In the last three years, about 5,500 households have benefited from these waivers, which are intended to encourage households to continue increasing their income.

Beyond providing financial help, we have also intensified our efforts in other ways. We formed the Home ownership Support Team (HST) last year, to work closely with families towards home ownership. The team is advising nearly 280 families and will guide them through when they are ready for home ownership.

In the last three years, about 3,200 rental households have moved into their own homes. Another 2,000 have booked a flat and are awaiting the completion of their new homes.

While these numbers may not seem large, the progress has been steady over the last few years. As the Malay saying goes, "sikit-sikit, lama-lama jadi bukit." This means "bit by bit, and over time, a little becomes a lot". Every family is important to us and we will continue to support our tenants towards home ownership.

The Chairman: Minister Lawrence Wong.

The Minister for National Development (Mr Lawrence Wong): Mr Chairman, as we tackle the on-going COVID-19 outbreak and its economic fallout, we are reminded once again of how small and vulnerable Singapore is and how exposed we are to external forces beyond our control.

But I am confident that Singaporeans will rise to the occasion. We are a resilient people, we have always faced tough odds, and we have confronted many difficult challenges before, in our nation's short history. And each time, the Government and the citizens rally together; we deal with the issues head-on; and we emerge stronger and surer of what we can achieve together.

Take housing as an example. Sixty years ago, this was one of the most pressing issues on the Government’s agenda. We had a major housing crisis. Many Singaporeans lived in overcrowded slums, and the living conditions were appalling. The British could not solve the problem. They said it was not possible to build so many flats in such a short period of time. But we proved them wrong.

HDB was formed in 1960. It quickly ramped up the building of flats and addressed the acute housing shortage.

My family is a beneficiary – my grandfather was a fisherman who lived in a kampong in Tanjong Rhu in the 1950s, and later when his children grew up and married, many were able to move out and purchase their own HDB flats, like my parents who got their flat in Marine Parade in the 1970s. Likewise, many in my generation have benefited and now, I see the next generation, my nieces and nephews, getting married and purchasing their own HDB flats. One just managed to get a flat in Bidadari and he is very happy.

Singaporeans all over the island will be able to share similar stories. Through home ownership, we have a tangible stake in our country and a share in our nation's progress. Through public housing, we all grow up together, regardless of backgrounds, and we forge a stronger sense of community and common identity.

Today, HDB flats are an integral part of our Singaporean way of life. There are now more than one million HDB flats, home to about 80% of our resident households. And of these, nine in 10 own their homes.

Enabling home ownership through HDB has been one of our most successful social policies. Many have called it one of the most successful public housing programmes enacted anywhere in the world.

For this we have to thank generations of MND and HDB officers, past and present, who have worked hard to make all this happen. So, we have much to be grateful for when we look back at what we have achieved together. But we must never be complacent, and that is why we are always looking for ways to make HDB living even better. So, let me touch on three areas.

First, it is our evergreen mission to keep public housing affordable and accessible, so that every Singaporean household can have a home to call their own. That is why we continue to sell HDB flats at heavily subsidised prices and provide generous housing grants on top of that. In particular, with the Enhanced CPF Housing Grant (EHG) introduced last year, first-timer families can enjoy a grant of up to $80,000 for a new flat. If they buy a resale flat, they can get up to double the amount, or $160,000, in grants.

These considerable subsidies keep HDB flats affordable. Today, HDB flat prices remain at less than five times of median household income. You cannot find such affordable housing in any other major city in the world. The ratio, the house price to income ratio, is nearly 10 times in London, Los Angeles and Sydney. In Hong Kong, it is more than 20 times.

Our affordability benchmark goes beyond the median income. Take the example of a first-timer couple with monthly income of $5,000, which is near the 30^th percentile of resident household income. They can buy a 4-room flat in a non-mature estate at a subsidised price of $330,000 and they will receive $45,000 in grants. So, inclusive of grants, the flat will cost less than five times their annual income.

The grants can be used to pay the down-payment. So, effectively, they need zero upfront cash. Then, they take a 25-year housing loan and their monthly mortgage is paid largely with their CPF savings, with little or zero cash outlay.

That is our basic commitment to every generation of Singaporeans. It is a housing commitment not just to the higher or middle income groups but we will also ensure that lower income Singaporeans benefit. Like the example I gave just now, even first-timers at the 30th percentile of household income, can purchase a new 4-room flat in a non-mature estate and service their housing loan with zero or very little cash outlay.

So, for the vast majority of first-timers, the Singapore dream of being able to own your own home remains secure. We will make sure of that both now and in the future.

Of course, we also want to have more affordable flats in the mature estates and a wider range of flat options to choose from, and Mr Gan Thiam Poh and Mr Chong Kee Hiong both spoke about this. But it is more challenging to do so in mature estates, due to the limited space for new flats in these estates. In some prime locations, the prices of resale HDB flats are beyond the reach of many young couples just starting out in life.

And if this trend continues, it will mean that certain public housing estates can potentially become exclusive areas that only a few can afford and then this will lead to greater social stratification. So, we do have to do something about this. We cannot resolve this issue through our existing model of HDB flats.

And that is why I have shared earlier that MND is working on a new model for BTO flats in prime locations. The basic idea is to sell these flats at more affordable prices, but the flats will come with tighter conditions imposed. This is a major change which we are studying and thinking through very carefully, as it will also have an impact on the resale market. We will continue to review it and we will share more details in the coming year when we are ready.

Besides affordability, we will also help Singaporeans to access their flats more quickly. Several Members like Mr Chong Kee Hiong and Mr Mohamed Irshad spoke about this.

6.45 pm

We will continually review and improve our sales processes to achieve this. For new BTO flats, we give priority for those looking for their first home. That is why virtually all first-timer families have been successful within their first three tries for a BTO flat in a non-mature estate. We have also introduced BTO flats with shorter waiting times of two to three years, because we bring forward the construction.

Since last year, we have started sharing information on upcoming BTO sites six months in advance instead of just three months. We will try to do more, as suggested by Mr Gan Thiam Poh, but I am afraid it is not so easy to project forward for more than six months. It will be challenging to share this information too far in advance because there may well be unexpected changes along the way.

Some households may need a flat more urgently. That is why we also offer balance flats for sale, many of which are completed or near completion. Today, we have the Sale of Balance Flats (SBF) and, if there are still unselected flats after the SBF, we pool all of them together and we release them through what we call the Re-Offer of Balance Flats (ROF) exercises.

The initial take-up of the ROF flats has been positive. But we have received feedback and requests for the ROF to be done more frequently instead of just twice a year. So, last year, we tried putting out some of these unselected flats on an open booking system for people to apply all year round.

Now that we have some experience with this open booking system, we are ready to extend it further. So, we will do away with the standalone ROF exercises and, instead, the unselected SBF flats, after the SBF exercise, will be pooled and offered directly for open booking right away, without going through another round of balloting. This will enable home-seekers with urgent needs to access flats more quickly.

Effectively, with this change, there will be three main ways of applying for an HDB flat. With your permission, Mr Chairman, may I display some slides on the screen?

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

Mr Lawrence Wong: So, you can go for BTO flats – new flats which will be released four times a year, you can apply for a balance flat which will be put out twice a year, or you can go for open booking and apply online at almost any time of the year. So, that is our first priority to ensure affordability and accessibility of flats.

Second, we also support the diverse housing needs of different segments of Singaporeans. For needy households without other housing options or family support, we continue to provide them with public rental housing. Over the years, HDB has steadily increased the public rental supply. The waiting time is now less than two months for applicants who are not particular about location. For those who want specific locations, the waiting time may be longer, depending on availability of units in that particular area.

Several Members, including Ms Anthea Ong, Mr Lim Biow Chuan and Dr Lily Neo, asked for bigger rental units and dedicated units for single tenants, and Senior Parliamentary Secretary Sun Xueling has also explained our thinking on this matter. We would, in fact, very much like to accommodate all of these requests. The key constraint we have is one of land supply.

We have to ensure that demand for both new rental and new sold flats in Singapore can be met on a sustainable basis, not just today, but over the coming decade and beyond. That is actually getting harder and harder to do as our island gets more built up. So, we do need to take a pragmatic approach.

For single tenants, as Senior Parliamentary Secretary Sun has said just now, most are prepared to share and are able to live in a rental flat together. For the few with medical conditions, we are prepared to consider their requests on an exceptional basis and allow them to stay in a rental flat by themselves.

For families, especially with children, the majority already live in our 2-room rental flats and, for very large families, we do our best to accommodate them. For example, for multi-nuclear families, we can offer them two rental units in the same block. On a case-by-case basis, we will be prepared to offer larger families a 3-room rental flat.

Ms Anthea Ong made the point about occupancy caps and I should clarify that these are caps imposed on HDB owners renting out their flats and the tenants who are renting these flats. The occupancy caps do not apply to family members living together, be it in their own flat or a public rental flat.

At the same time, we will continue to support public rental tenants towards home ownership. Several Members also spoke about this, including Mr Gan Thiam Poh, Mr Arasu Duraisamy and Dr Lily Neo. We have announced several measures on this last year and the Senior Parliamentary Secretary has shared the progress on these initiatives.

For divorcees, we understand and recognise that their housing transitions can be stressful. To ease this process, we now allow divorcees to apply for flats earlier, once their Interim Judgment has settled matters concerning the children and matrimonial flat. But some concerns still remain. For example, Mr Louis Ng spoke about divorcees who are awarded shared care and control of a single child but are unable to agree on who can list the child in their flat application. We understand that such agreement is not always possible, especially if the divorce was acrimonious. When this happens, HDB will be prepared to consider waiving the mutual agreement requirement, if there is clear evidence that one party has already moved on.

Another group is unwed parents. Several Members also spoke about this, including Mr Seah Kian Peng, Mr Arasu Duraisamy and Mr Mohamed Irshad. We do want to ensure that their children have a stable home to grow up in. So, we will assist all unwed parents who approach HDB with their housing needs. For such cases, HDB will assess their situation holistically because their circumstances vary.

Some Members did raise the point that such a case-by-case approach may cause more uncertainty amongst the applicants because they do not know whether their applications will be successful. So, let me clarify the approach that HDB takes. Essentially, there are two broad approaches.

First, for those who are in stable employment and who can afford to buy a flat, then HDB will allow them to buy a flat – not just a new 2-room flat but also a larger 3-room flat in a non-mature estate. Next, for those who have insufficient finances and need a place to stay, then we will continue to consider them for public rental if this is in their child's best interests, taking into account inputs from social workers, if necessary.

Yet another group that we support is our seniors. Many of them have their own homes but they are concerned about retirement savings. So, we will try to help them unlock the value of their flat if they need to in several ways. They can rent out their flat or spare bedrooms, they can right-size to a smaller flat, or they can sell a part of their lease to HDB under the Lease Buyback Scheme (LBS).

We recognise that more needs to be done to help Singaporeans understand these different options, especially LBS, because it is relatively new and also because we have just recently extended the scheme to 5-room and larger flats, something that Mr Alex Yam, Mr Gan Thiam Poh and Mr Arasu Duraisamy highlighted. That is why we have been stepping up our public dialogues and engagements and I am glad to note that LBS take-up has doubled from 800 households in 2018 to 1,600 last year.

Through these engagements, we also receive feedback and ideas on how our schemes can be improved. One feedback is that the schemes can be quite complex and we can simplify them further. This is particularly the case for the Silver Housing Bonus (SHB), which comes with several conditions. So, having studied the matter, we have decided to simplify and enhance the SHB in three ways.

First, we will remove the requirement that seniors must sell a larger flat and buy a smaller flat. Regardless of the type of flat they sell, seniors can apply for the SHB as long as they buy a 3-room or smaller flat and get some proceeds from the move. So, effectively, someone staying in a 3-room flat in a mature estate who wishes to move to a 3-room flat in a non-mature estate, and can get some proceeds from that move, will still be eligible for an SHB. A lateral move but because they are moving from a mature estate to a non-mature estate, they can unlock some proceeds and they will still be eligible for SHB.

Next, to receive the SHB, seniors must top up some proceeds from their move into their CPF Retirement Account. This is to ensure that they have adequate savings for retirement. The top-up required today depends on their net sales proceeds and we will simplify this such that seniors only need to top up the first $60,000 of their proceeds.

Thirdly, we will increase the maximum cash bonus by 50%, from $20,000 to $30,000. So, seniors will receive $1 in cash bonus for every $2 topped up to their CPF Retirement Account. So, if you have sales proceeds, you top up $60,000, you will get $30,000 in Silver Housing Bonus.

In line with this increase, we will also increase the maximum Lease Buyback Scheme (LBS) bonus across all flat types. This means that owners of 3-room or smaller, 4-room, and 5-room or larger flats will get a larger bonus. The maximum cash bonus will be $30,000, $15,000 and $7,500 respectively.

We are also looking at alternative housing options for seniors. Last year, we shared that MND is working with MOH to pilot assisted living, which allows seniors to buy a flat along with care services. Mr Arasu Duraisamy asked about the status of this project.

Both Ministries have held several focus group discussions on the assisted living models. They were generally very well received by seniors, particularly singles and those whose children have moved out. Seniors were especially attracted to the idea of community living.

We have incorporated the feedback into our pilot. For example, this new pilot that we will be rolling out will have large communal spaces on every floor, not just on the void deck, but on every floor, where residents can gather and interact. The flats will be sized at 32 sqm, with senior-friendly features like larger bathrooms and a layout that can be easily configured for mobility needs.

We will launch the pilot with about 160 units in Bukit Batok in May this year. More details will be shared in the coming weeks, including the sales conditions, indicative flat prices and the payment options.

We also want to make public housing more inclusive, especially for persons with disabilities and mobility issues, something which Miss Cheryl Chan highlighted. We have made progress in this area in creating barrier-free access for all our HDB estates, but certainly more can be done. As Miss Cheryl Chan said, technology may well open up new possibilities. We thank her for her ideas and the Government will continue to study this issue.

One area when it comes to barrier-free access is having lift access on every floor. Several Members have asked about this – Mr Gan Thiam Poh, Mr Ong Teng Koon, and Mr Png Eng Huat. As Members are aware, there are still about 150 blocks that are not eligible for the Lift Upgrading Programme (LUP).

To set things in context, we have managed to provide direct lift access for flats in the vast majority of HDB blocks. We have done so by using innovative technical solutions and by exercising flexibility for some blocks even when they exceed the cost cap of $30,000 per household. But for the remaining 150 blocks, for some of them, LUP is just not technically feasible, regardless of the cost. For many others, the costs are very high. So, it is not just about having some flexibility above the cost cap but we are talking about costs that can be more than $200,000 per household in some cases. As Mr Png Eng Huat said – enough to buy another HDB flat.

So, we will continue to explore new technical methods to bring down the LUP cost, but it will not be so easy to make progress on this front. In the meantime, we know that some residents may urgently need direct lift access due to medical or mobility issues. And really, it is more cost-effective to help them move to another flat. Mr Png Eng Huat asked for SERS. I do not think we need to SERS the entire block. But what we will do is to offer a new Lift access Housing Grant of up to $30,000 to help those with medical or mobility issues buy a new or resale HDB flat with direct lift access. So, if anyone is in need and they need direct lift access, they do not want to wait, and the grant is available for them to move to a new place which will have direct lift access.

A third priority for us is to continue to rejuvenate our HDB towns and keep them vibrant for generations to come, and we have many upgrading programmes. Let me start at the block-level.

7.00 pm

Town Councils are generally responsible for regular and cyclical maintenance of common property, including building façades, and the Government supports the Town Councils for such work, so that the costs are not just borne by the Town Councils from their collections of service and conservancy charges (S&CCs).

For example, MND has provided additional grants to help Town Councils with their operating needs and long-term capital expenditure requirements, including for lift maintenance and lift replacement.

On the issue of façade repairs, which Mr Pritam Singh asked about, HDB will bear half of the costs. But if the damages are clearly due to design or construction issues, HDB will cover 100% of the costs. On the specific case that Mr Pritam Singh asked about, we will get back to him quite soon, based on the PE's assessment of what the damages were due to.

Beyond the work of the Town Councils, there is Government upgrading through the Home Improvement Programme (HIP). We have finished selecting all flats built up to 1986 for Home Improvement. We are now ready to move on to the flats built between 1987 and 1997. There are 230,000 of such flats. This year, we will start with almost one quarter of that or 55,000 flats. We are starting with a bigger number to also help support the construction industry during this period. Town Councils have submitted their nominations for this next phase of HIP, and we will inform the Town Councils of the selected projects later this week and then work can get started as soon as we can. We are prioritising the selection by age, so that the older flats go first, and most flats should be able to get the upgrading when they are about 30 years old.

It will take around 10 years to finish the HIP for this series of blocks built between 1987 and 1997. At around that time, our oldest HDB blocks will be about 60 years old and, if our Budget permits then, as we have said, we will initiate the second round of HIP, or HIPII, for these older flats. So, we will, almost every year be continuing with upgrading works.

Besides block-level programmes, at the precinct-level, we will refresh older precincts with new amenities through the on-going Neighbourhood Renewal Programme (NRP) and we will be selecting 20 NRP projects for implementation this year. In the past, we used to do about 14. Again, we have raised it to 20 projects, partly to support the construction sector.

If there are new in-fill developments within an old precinct, then HDB, as the developer, will also provide for facilities to link up the old and new precincts, which is something that Mr Png has asked for. He expressed some disappointment with HDB design. I should say that HDB blocks are designed by a range of architects, not all by HDB. Many are designed by private sector architects. There are some by HDB. The architects take great pride in their work. We will let them know how Mr Png feels about their void decks which are maze-like and confusing. But I am sure they will want to take in feedback and continue to work on these designs to do better.

Finally, at the town-level, we will renew existing towns through the Remaking Our Heartland programme (ROH). We have selected nine towns and estates for ROH so far. This year, we will select another four towns for ROH. They are Bukit Merah, Queenstown, Choa Chu Kang and Ang Mo Kio. The remaking works that can be explored include refreshing of the town and neighbourhood centres, and enhancing of greenery and community spaces in parks or even areas under viaducts.

And we will do all of this refreshing and rejuvenating while strengthening the distinctive heritage and identity of our individual housing estates, something which Mr Teo Ser Luck and many others have highlighted. We will want to preserve and even strengthen their distinctive heritage and identity, even as we put in new features and rejuvenate these towns. We will also engage and work with residents closely in this endeavour so that we can remake our heartlands together.

HIP, NRP and ROH are our key upgrading programmes which we will continue to press forward with. At some point, as our flats and estates get older, we will need to more systematically redevelop and renew these older estates. That is why we have said that we will be introducing a new programme called the Voluntary Early Redevelopment Scheme (VERS). We expect to roll out the first VERS project sometime after 2030. This is a major programme and we will need to work through the details. We will take some time to do so and we will share that with Singaporeans when we are ready.

In the meantime, we will make our towns greener and more sustainable. Several Members have asked about our plans for this. Tengah, our newest and greenest HDB town, offers a glimpse of what we can do and aim to do. Tengah will be equipped with the latest sustainable features, including a centralised cooling system. It will have dedicated walking and cycling paths and lots of community green spaces.

So, as we push the boundaries in our new towns, we will do likewise in our older towns. That is why we will be launching the new HDB Green Towns programme. It is a 10-year plan to make existing HDB towns more environmentally sustainable and more liveable.

Let me highlight some of the key initiatives under this programme:

First, we will work with Town Councils to introduce smart LED lighting in all our HDB estates. Using sensors, the system dims to provide just enough ambient lighting when common areas are unoccupied, then brightens again before residents enter an area. It is motion sensors but they are enhanced motion sensors, much better than what you have seen so far. It uses up to 60% less energy than normal LED lighting.

We will also harness more renewable energy to power common services in HDB estates. We are already installing solar panels on the rooftops of close to 50% of HDB blocks. You do not seen that very often because very few people see HDB blocks from the sky. But half of our HDB blocks today will have HDB panels on their rooftops. We will increase this to 70% by 2030. We will also deploy more efficient solar panels and aim to more than double the total solar power capacity on HDB rooftops, from 220 megawatt-peak (MWp) today to 540 MWp by 2030. So, this will provide clean energy for our common services in our HDB estates and, in turn, benefit our residents.

Second, we will recycle rain water and mitigate flood risks. To do that, we will pilot a new underground water detention system. Rainwater collected can be used for non-potable purposes, like washing of the void decks and watering of plants.

Third, to help cool our HDB estates, we will deploy a new type of paint, called "cool paint", that can reduce the heat absorbed by buildings. Our preliminary studies suggest that such "cool paint" may be able to reduce ambient temperatures in HDB estates by up to two degrees. So, we will test this across several neighbourhoods to confirm its effectiveness before rolling it out across all estates.

Finally, we will also work with Town Councils and the community to convert the top decks of suitable multi-storey carparks into urban farms, community gardens or rooftop greenery. This increases green cover and provides more green spaces for all the residents to enjoy.

With the Green Towns programme, we aim to reduce energy consumption in HDB towns by 15% from today’s levels. This is a major effort and the Government, Town Councils and our residents will all need to do our part. Only then can we build greener and more sustainable HDB towns for our next generation.

Our efforts to green Singapore do not stop with our HDB towns. We will also push ahead with our efforts to build our future city.

One of Singapore’s defining features is our lush greenery and we will be doubling down on our greening strategy, as Second Minister Desmond Lee has elaborated just now.

Our green strategy also covers our urban infrastructure and buildings. We have made good progress in greening our buildings and we will continue to accelerate this effort, as Minister of State Zaqy explained.

Transport infrastructure is also key. We have set bold targets to move towards cleaner vehicles, including electric vehicles. On our part, MND will expand the necessary charging infrastructure. We will work with private companies to introduce more charging points at selected public carparks, taking into account the geographical spread of EV chargers, carpark usage, space availability for electrical upgrades and estate upgrading plans. Mr Ong asked for some details on this but we are still working through the detailed plans and we will share more in the coming months.

There are many other exciting areas where technology can make a difference in our urban transformation and improve our quality of life. That is why we are committing close to $1 billion in Urban Solutions and Sustainability research to build a more liveable, sustainable and resilient city.

We will also continue with our longer term plans to rebuild and remake our city for the future. Over the next 10 to 15 years, we will continue developing new growth centres outside the city centre to enhance Singapore’s economic infrastructure. We have plans in the East, in the West and in the North-East around Changi Airport; in the West around Jurong Innovation District and Jurong Lake District; and in the North with the Punggol Digital District as well as Sungei Kadut. In the longer term, beyond the next 10 to 15 years, we have major sites for redevelopment, as Members would be aware, including the Paya Lebar Airbase when the military airbase moves out and the Greater Southern Waterfront. These are ambitious, major long-term plans which will take several decades to realise. So, it is an opportunity for all of us to start imagining what a future Singapore can be and to work towards realising it.

Of course, we all recognise that the best-laid plans of Man do not always come to pass. The future is not preordained. There will be unexpected challenges along the way. At the start of this year, no one could have predicted that we would be dealing with a virus outbreak today and that this virus outbreak would be potentially escalating into a global problem. It reminds me of what our founding Prime Minister, Mr Lee Kuan Yew, used to say. He said this twice, on two occasions during his birthday dinners. He said, and I quote: "Only a people who are willing to face up to their problems and be prepared to work with their leaders to overcome unexpected hardships with courage and resolution deserve to thrive and prosper."

And that is why the theme of the Budget this year is "Unity". With a united purpose, we can overcome our current challenges. We can continue to plan for tomorrow and we can continue to work together to build a better city and home.

The Chairman: Clarifications. Er Dr Lee Bee Wah.

Er Dr Lee Bee Wah: Thank you, Sir. I am glad to hear from the Minister that, this round, there will be many more homes selected for HIP and, certainly, the older part of Nee Soon South built in 1987 should be among the first batch.

I have five supplementary questions for Minister of State Zaqy Mohamad and one question for Minister Grace Fu.

The first question: just now Minister of State Zaqy Mohamad mentioned that there should be no discrimination against foreign contractors. That one we fully understand. But I think the Minister of State has missed my point. I said local contractors felt that they were being discriminated against, not the foreign contractor. Why? Because they submitted the lowest tender, they did not get the job, they had been doing LTA projects. So, why do we pay $6 million to a foreign contractor which is registered in Virgin Islands and BCA, being the agency championing —

The Chairman: Er Dr Lee Bee Wah, I think you should make your clarification rather than repeat your speech.

Er Dr Lee Bee Wah: Okay. So, the first question is, can the Minister of State look into the discrimination of the local contractor. Second question, I mentioned about the contractor saying that the carpenters and tilers are no longer coming to Singapore. Can BCA look into this so that they can continue to have workers? And the third question is that, it is good that BCA has asked developers to help contractors, but then developers they have tight practical completion period and ABSD to comply with. Instead of just case-by-case basis that BCA will consider, is it possible to review these for this period so that they do not feel so much stress during this period.

7.15 pm

And the fourth question, ABSD, can it be pro-rated? Currently, even if one unit is not sold, you have to pay up to 25% of the land cost.

And the last question, I would like to ask how many Polytechnic graduates currently join the construction sector. Because if I understood Minister of State correctly, he mentioned that they will be groomed to replace as S Pass holders. But as far as we understood, many of them, immediately upon graduation, they go overseas or head to a local University to get a degree instead of entering the workforce.

My question to Minister Grace Fu is that, it seems that there is a very efficient, high rate of solving the problems reported to MSO. I would like to know how is this being monitored. The feedback that I got from residents is that MSO is very keen to close the case very fast. And I tried that myself. So, in January, I took one photograph. I sent to MSO. Straightaway, they replied me, "Thank you for your report to MSO. We will revert to the relevant work unit". They consider that closed. I asked them a question, "Can you take a photograph when the work is done so that I know that it is closed." And then, no further reply. So, I think many of my residents have similar experience. That is why the feedback to me that MSO is very keen to close the case though the end result is not what we want.

Mr Zaqy Mohamad: I am honoured to get five questions from Er Dr Lee Bee Wah.

First, I just want to assure Er Dr Lee Bee Wah that the tender methods we use today follow the Price-Quality Method or PQM, so, it is not always guaranteed that the lowest price wins. It has to be on merit, based on the quality matrices. Unfortunately, specific to the tender, I cannot comment on LTA's evaluation because I do not have access to that particular tender. But rest assured, our approach has been about building our local firms' capabilities and giving them that chance. As I have said, you have seen more and more local firms accessing larger projects either on their own or through joint ventures. That is where you also pick up new capabilities, new skills and new technologies that you can use and apply to meet the kind of requirements that we have. For some of these projects, such as LTA tenders, I do understand. Some of these involving trains do have specific requirements. So, there could be certain technical requirements that were evaluated.

But do not give up. Certainly, these are areas in which you have seen more and more local firms coming through; and certainly, we are giving more opportunities.

If I could just share that between 2017 and 2019, local firms have been awarded a higher proportion of contracts, in terms of the smaller contracts between $3 million and $85 million. You can see about 90% of such contracted awarded to local firms. This enables local firms to build their track record.

And you can also see that more are also being awarded larger public sector contracts over $85 million too. A decade ago, we used to have only a 40% proportion. Today, local firms have about 50% proportion. These are larger projects above $85 million. So, to some extent, we have seen progress. And I think it is good to see more local firms, as I have mentioned in my examples earlier, being able to take on these opportunities.

On carpenters and tilers, we looked into this. It is not easy to get foreign workers sometimes, especially with some skill-sets because it is not just about our environment here but also the environment there. Contractors tell me too, that in the past they could get ready access to Chinese workers; but as China develops, they are paying their workers more over there, and there is less impetus for them to come here. When more and more countries develop, there will be opportunities out there. Our carpenters and tilers are typically from Malaysia, and you will probably find younger Malaysians being more educated too. So, supply may come down.To some extent, it is more than just our local environment that causes some of these dynamics.

The Member asked earlier on about the Project Completion period. As I have mentioned, we will monitor this. So far, there are just a few appeals. Let us talk to the industry again and see how we can manage this better. And certainly for now, it is on case-by-case basis but we will continue to monitor the situation.

On pro-rating the ABSD, or the extension of remission timelines today, I think we can still discuss and negotiate. We understand the current situation. To some extent, we do not have to shift the whole mechanism or the whole system. But I think right now, the approach that we are taking is really on a case-by-case basis. If developers have difficulty meeting their ABSD obligations, we will take it on a case-by-case basis. Let us monitor and see how best we can help developers and builders cope with the current COVID-19 situation.

It is not in our interest to make life difficult for our developers and builders. It is a growing sector and we do have long-term pipelines of projects that are being rolled out, not just in the public sector but also in the private sector. We want our local companies to be able to address them. We will help them as much as we can.

On Polytechnic graduates, I do not have the numbers. Perhaps the Member would like to file a Parliamentary Question because what she is asking for is specific in terms of pipeline and graduates. So, maybe file a Parliamentary Question in due course.

Ms Grace Fu Hai Yien: Mr Chairman, I would like to address Er Dr Lee Bee Wah's question. I thank her for the question. MSO does monitor the time taken to close the case because it is our objective to ensure that we deliver good Public Service, good public municipal services in an effective and timely way. We look at the time taken and we pay particular attention to cases that take longer than usual.

Having said that, we do not stipulate the service standards for each of the agencies because the nature of cases can be different. Some cases can be cleared quite easily. If there is litter that is not cleaned, someone can clean it up quite quickly. But if there is a request for public lighting to be installed, then obviously, the cases would take longer.

We do recognise that even though service standards are not prescribed, public officers, knowing that MSO is watching, tend to want to do the right thing and try to close the cases as quickly as possible. In many of these cases, it is about giving a better reply. In cases where it is expected to take longer, such as doing maintenance in time, when we are doing a cyclical maintenance in three months' time or six months' time, we do want to go back and give the appropriate answer to the resident. If we give the appropriate reply, I think we can manage the expectations of the residents better.

With that in mind, we have stipulated, what we call a post-case poll. If you have received a reply from agencies but you are not satisfied with the reply, or if you do not think that your case or feedback has been satisfactorily addressed, you can indicate it through the poll rating and you can also follow up with subsequent submission on the same issue.

We are paying attention to how we are closing the cases and we want to see that not only do we do it efficiently, we are also doing it effectively and from the residents' point of view, we are addressing their concern appropriately.

Debate in Committee of Supply resumed.

Mr Yee Chia Hsing: Chairman, I would like to thank the Senior Parliamentary Secretary for her answer. In terms of the regulation of the pet animal trade, I feel that the past few years have focused a lot on the cats and the dogs, but the pet bird trade has largely been forgotten. The same pet bird shop looks exactly the same as 30 years ago.

In terms of traceability, I think for pet birds, currently, there is possibly no traceability which is why someone is confident that they can distribute 800 birds by illegally smuggling them in. I hope that the Senior Parliamentary Secretary can step up enforcement of the pet bird as well.

The Chairman: Ms Sun.

Ms Sun Xueling: I am sorry. I am not quite sure if that was a question or a point.

Mr Yee Chia Hsing: It is actually a request that NParks do not forget about the pet bird trade when stepping up the enforcement on the regulations.

Ms Sun Xueling: Yes. Indeed, NParks has not forgotten about birds. That is why, with the efforts of ICA together with NParks, they had seized the shipment of 815 birds that the Member mentioned. And I would just like to share that if you look at the number of illegal bird smuggling cases, it has been coming down over the years. In 2016, it was eight cases; in 2019, it was two cases, one of which was cited by Mr Yee. So, I just like to give him the assurance that we have not forgotten about birds.

The Chairman: Mr Louis Ng.

Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang: Thank you, Sir. I am very happy that the person that is sitting on the chair I used to sit on also now asks animal-related questions.

But if I could bring the topic back to cats. Can I just ask Senior Parliamentary Secretary that the current rule is that you are not allowed to keep a cat in a HDB flat. So, how and when does HDB enforce this ruling, because a lot of the residents I see, most of the time is because they complained against a neighbour and the neighbour, then realises, "Oh. You have a cat there. Now, I complain about the cat." And the cat becomes a sort of collateral and then, they are forced to remove the cat.

Let me repeat – when does HDB enforce the current rule of a resident not allowed to keep a cat in an HDB flat.

The second clarification is back to the divorcees with shared care and control. I am very thankful that we will exercise flexibility for those where one party has already has private housing. But could I ask further whether we can waive the mutual consent if both parties that have shared care and control are low income, meaning that both cannot really afford to buy from the open market and would need subsidised HDB flats?

The Chairman: Ms Sun.

Ms Sun Xueling: I thank the Member for his question. The HDB will investigate if the feedback is related to pet-related disamenities, and it is not that a cat is a collateral in bad relations between neighbours. HDB will investigate that the feedback is related to pet-related disamenities. And if really there is irresponsible cat ownership and this is found to be the reason, then HDB would advise the owner accordingly with the assistance of relevant agencies where necessary.

The Chairman: Mr Ong Teng Koon. Sorry. Minister Lawrence Wong.

Mr Lawrence Wong: Mr Chairman, the short answer is yes, we are very reasonable people and we want the best for the child. So, in a case where indeed, both have divorced, they have one child, it is shared care and control and each individual wants subsidised housing, today, the rule does not allow the child's name to be together with both parents. But if they both need subsidised housing, on a case-by-case basis, if they are indeed lower income, they cannot afford to buy a home themselves, we will look at these cases and we will see what we can do to extend flexibility to them.

The Chairman: Mr Ong Teng Koon.

Mr Ong Teng Koon: Mr Chairman. I wish to thank the Minister, on behalf of the residents of Blocks 115 and 119 of Marsiling Rise for his kind and compassionate consideration of the situation with the introduction of the Lift Access Grant. I wish to ask the Minister whether such grant will be available to flat owners who have purchased the flat prior to the announcement today or will be available to subsequent owners as well. And if the granting of the Lift Access Grant will automatically enable them to buy a flat from the HDB or would they have to buy from the resale market? Can they sell the flat to the HDB or must they sell to the resale market; in which case, will future owners also be eligible for this grant?

Mr Lawrence Wong: Mr Chairman, the grant will be made available to all HDB owners with immediate effect, once this has been announced. So, anyone who owns a HDB flat, regardless of whether you are first-timer, second-timer, nth-timer, but you are the owner of a flat and your flat does not lift access, and you have mobility issues, that is the condition. Then, we will help you get a new flat or a resale flat where there is lift access. And the grant will be extended to that owner to facilitate that transaction.

How to go about doing it? There are various ways. If the person wants a flat very urgently, then getting it from the resale market makes a lot of sense. If they want a new BTO flat nearby and if there are balance flats, HDB could consider allocating one, if there is a balance flat. But that depends on whether there is availability of such a balance flat nearby. So, it depends.

On the sale of their present flat, we will require them to sell the flat before making the new transaction. We will try our best to help them but, in the first instance, it is the responsibility of the homeowner to engage an agent and look at whether or not they can sell the flat in order to make the purchase, whether it is new or resale. If they do face difficulties, then I will ask them to approach the HDB branch and we will see whether we can find ways to help them.

The Chairman: Dr Lily Neo.

7.30 pm

Dr Lily Neo: Thank you, Mr Chairman. Earlier in my speech, I asked whether there are assessments by HDB for applicants of Joint Singles Scheme (JSS) to ensure that they are free from mental illnesses and medical conditions before compelling them to stay together. May I ask Minister Wong whether he will look into the JSS for those who have no family members to share with. Because I also noticed that HDB always gives applicants a list of names for them to call themselves to choose their own tenants to share with. And that is really very difficult.

So, as Minister Wong earlier said, we have been improving our HDB policies to facilitate Singaporeans in their housing needs. JSS has been around for the last 30 years. So, why can we not tweak this to facilitate just the most vulnerable group in our society? Would he consider?

Mr Lawrence Wong: Mr Chairman, I thank Dr Neo for the suggestion. In fact, it has been tweaked, it has been evolving. JSS today is different from what it used to be, because now we have partitions, we provide more privacy, we give flexibility and anyone that comes with medical conditions with a reason that they need to stay alone, we are prepared to consider, we are prepared to be flexible and allow them to stay on their own. So, it is not a blanket no. We do provide flexibility for those with medical conditions and with exceptional circumstances to stay on their own.

The reason why we cannot depart from this and say, "Everyone live on their own now", is the real constraint which I mentioned earlier. If we are going to double, triple the number of rental units that we have in order to accommodate them, because every JSS tenant wants to split up, we do not have land. That is a real constraint. So, there is no land available to build more. We have got to build new flats, we have got to build new rental flats.

I hope Members understand. We are not trying to be hard-hearted about this. There is just not enough space to build so many more new housing units. We try to optimise where we can and as the Senior Parliamentary Secretary said just now, when we did a survey of JSS tenants, the majority of them do get along and are okay. We are dealing with a minority and we can manage that if they do not get along, if there are medical conditions. If they do not get along in the first instance, let us try to find ways to pair you up with somebody else. If you have medical conditions, then we will look at your case, and we will consider allowing you to stay on your own, if there is a need to.

The Chairman: Mr Louis Ng, I will allow your question if it is not about cats. You have already asked a question about cats.

Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang: It is about cats.

The Chairman: Okay, it better be a new one.

Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang: It is a confirmation, actually. I just want to confirm with the Senior Parliamentary Secretary that when HDB receives a complaint, they go down and investigate. If the cat is not causing any disamenities, the resident will not be asked to remove the cat. Am I correct to say that?

Ms Sun Xueling: Yes, you are correct to say that.

The Chairman: Er Dr Lee Bee Wah, your last question. You have asked six already.

Er Dr Lee Bee Wah: It is not about cats, Sir. I would like to ask the Minister of State two questions. Just now the Minister of State mentioned that due to the change in their own country, that is why the carpenters and the tilers are not coming. That could be part of the reason but what we heard from the industry is that they are not coming to Singapore but they go to some other countries. That is why I urge BCA to study and see what is the reason they do not come to Singapore, so that we do not suffer if we do not tackle this problem now.

The next question is about cutting of the S Pass. We need the S Pass holders for DfMA, for PPVC, more so because they are more skillful. If the Polytechnic graduates do not join the industry, by cutting the S Pass, really, will give our construction industry a double-whammy. I hope you will really look into this.

Mr Zaqy Mohamad: Just to make it clear to the Member as well, I did say we will study this. I was just saying, some examples provided were that the supply is also changing, as well as demographics. But of course, if they go to other countries, then, basically, it could also mean that we do not pay well enough and other countries are also paying better. There are different reasons, but I do agree – let us not come to conclusions. Let us do our study, which I said we will do.

The second one on the S Pass reduction, certainly we have put in place various programmes, as I shared earlier. Apart from the IHLs, we are also putting on stream PCPs. As we have shared in many of our speeches earlier, even MOM in the Budget, that the Government is putting a bit of focus into mature workers to see how we can transform and move along. As I have also shared, in terms of those coming from the manufacturing sector, for example, they can move to DfMA. There are different skills required beyond just the Polytechnic graduates; mid-careers can also shift into such sectors.

We do see some slowdown in certain sectors such as process and marine, but these are areas in which we can also look to see how some of the workers can be moved into construction as we build. What I hope is that we continue to attract our Polytechnic and ITE graduates. Yes, some of the Polytechnic graduates may move on to University and ITE graduates move to Diploma too. We need to continually build that pathway for them, so that a career in construction also becomes more attractive.

We are looking at all levels, not just on the IDD, BIM or DfMA side. Even for the lift too, we have put in the PWM to ensure that our steady stream of workers coming through from ITE also get better-paying jobs, so that they do not either get substituted by cheaper foreign labour or have to go elsewhere for better-paying jobs.

These are some of the efforts that we are putting in place, whether it is PCP, BIM, attracting mid-careers, as well as those coming in from the University, Polytechnics and ITEs. It is a whole slew of measures.

At the same time, we recognise that there are some jobs at the work permit level that we need to continually depend on our foreign workforce for. Therefore, you do not see us cutting the whole Dependency Ratio Ceiling (DRC), it is just the sub-DRC. The grunt work of construction is still being provided for, so that we continue to grow and build our infrastructure.

Mr Alex Yam: Chairman, I thank the 22 fellow Members who filed a diverse range of cuts, and Minister Lawrence, Second Minister Desmond Lee and Minister Grace, Minister of State Zaqy and Senior Parliamentary Secretary Sun Xueling for their comprehensive replies. We are reasonable people, so I beg leave to withdraw my amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

The sum of $3,009,534,100 for Head T ordered to stand part of the Main Estimates.

The sum of $9,992,249,700 for Head T ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates.