Committee of Supply – Head W (Ministry of Transport)

Head W (cont) –

Resumption of Debate on Question [11 April 2016],

"That the total sum to be allocated for Head W of the Estimates be reduced by $100." – [Mr Sitoh Yih Pin].

Question again proposed.

The Minister for Transport (Mr Khaw Boon Wan): Mdm Chair, let me first express my deepest condolences to the families of Mr Nasrulhudin Najumudin and Mr Muhammad Asyraf Ahmad Buhari. They lost their lives while working for SMRT on 22 March 2016. The thoughts and prayers of the entire transport family are with their families.

The tragedy was a massive blow to all of us. SMRT has completed its internal investigation and its findings are being reviewed by independent experts. LTA is conducting its own investigation. Statutory investigations by the Police and the Ministry of Manpower (MOM) are on-going. There will be a Coroner's Inquiry in due course. Within the legal constraints, I will share what I can.

Our priorities are to establish the cause of the incident and prevent a recurrence. The investigations will ascertain whether the problem was inadequate safety procedures, or if there were human lapses in the execution of such procedures. If the investigations reveal human errors, those responsible will be held to account.

Workplace safety is the responsibility of the operator. When an industrial accident happens, MOM will usually issue a stop-work order and only allow work to resume when investigations are completed. But rail operations and maintenance have to go on. So, even as investigations are on-going, MOM, in consultation with LTA, found it prudent to issue interim safety orders to SMRT to ensure the safety of railway workers and commuters. LTA has shared the same instructions with SBST for compliance.

In addition, SMRT has set up a safety review committee with experts drawn from international transport operators. I have directed LTA to also work with SMRT to thoroughly review its safety-related procedures. Our common objective is to prevent such an accident from occurring again.

Mdm Chair, transport not only affects our productivity but also our living environment, social fabric and our quality of life. It is dynamic, constantly evolving as it shapes our life and, in turn, we re-shape it to make our life better. I appreciate the comments of Mr Sitoh Yih Pin and Mr Zaqy Mohamad on the future of transport in Singapore.

Let me share my take on this subject. I see four major drivers behind our transport's continuing evolution. First, emergence of new technology, such as driverless vehicles, with wide implications on many existing jobs. Second, introduction of new business models, such as the sharing economy and its current manifestation through Uber and Grab, which benefit commuters but are disrupting the incumbents. Third, continuing greying of our population and the need to ensure that our city is silver-friendly while promoting active ageing to add healthy years to our life. Fourth: greater urgency to protect our environment through reducing our carbon footprint.

These driving forces are already changing our transport sector in significant ways. We do not yet know how exactly the future will pan out but we can be sure that transport in, say, 2030 will be very different from today.

We use "a car-lite Singapore" to describe this future, but we know it is inadequate to characterise it as just about roads and cars. Transport 2030 is much more; it is also about active mobility, high quality first-and-last-mile connectivity, smart and on-demand point-to-point transport options, greater pedestrianisation, more opportunities to appreciate on foot our rich city heritage and greenery, and very much more.

It will be an exciting future. Singapore's transformation in the past 50 years has given us a solid foundation to make a quantum leap forward. Changes will be incremental but, over 15 years, we shall collectively experience a quantum leap. Actually, 2030 is not far off. Our SG50 babies will only be in Secondary school by then.

Unlike our generation, learning to drive may well be a thing of the past, let alone owning four wheels. The Japanese have already begun to observe their young's loss of interest in cars. They even coined a Japanese phrase for this phenomenon: "kuruma banare", meaning "demotorisation".

Indeed, why is there a need to own a car when you can easily summon up a driverless pod with a few strokes on your mobilephone? Private cars will likely start to go the way of horse carriages, if not in 15 years, definitely in 20 or 25 years' time. So, I agree with Mr Sitoh and Mr Zaqy Mohamad that we need to prepare Singapore, Singaporeans and our industries for this brave new world. We need to start making adjustments and mental preparations now.

Over the current term of Government, the Ministry of Transport (MOT) will progressively put forward the legislative and policy pieces to prepare us for this exciting transformation. We need to discuss what to do and which to do first. For this first Committee of Supply of mine as Minister for Transport, I wish to cover three areas.

First, how to enhance accessibility for commuters in particular, how to make it hassle-free for commuters to move from their homes to the nearest train station or bus stop? We crystallise this as First-and-Last-Mile Connectivity. We have taken some initial steps but these are not enough. Our First-and-Last-Mile Connectivity must make a quantum leap, to be among the best in the world.

Currently, many other cities, like Amsterdam and Copenhagen, do a better job than us. We must close the gap and be better, particularly because we live in the tropics with hotter and wetter weather. Senior Minister of State Josephine Teo will outline our approach on First-and-Last-Mile Connectivity and, within that framework, she will respond to the recent recommendations of Parliamentary Secretary Muhammad Faishal Ibrahim's Active Mobility Advisory Panel (AMAP).

Second, how to enhance point-to-point transport options for commuters? The sharing economy and, in particular, new business models like Grab and Uber, are benefiting commuters globally. But they are disrupting existing business models of taxi-operators, with impact on taxi-drivers, Uber, in particular, is causing havoc in many cities. Many countries have taken the wrong turn by banning Uber. We should not obstruct innovation, especially when it benefits commuters. We should be mindful of the disruption to incumbents and help incumbents make the correct adjustments. We should seek to achieve win-win for both the disrupters and the incumbents, with commuter welfare as the underpinning principle. It can be done. Later, Senior Minister of State Ng Chee Meng will outline our approach to this development.

Third, how to achieve excellence in public transport, especially in rail? This is a crucial piece if we are to become car-lite. As pointed out by Mr Sitoh and Mr Zaqy Mohamad, our current car-dominant transport model is not sustainable, given our land constraints. It needs to be replaced by one that has, as its foundation, an excellent public transport system which is reliable, convenient and smart.

Central to this vision is a reliable rail network. This has been one of my top priorities. I heard Mr Dennis Tan's comments on train faults and breakdowns. Our train workers are doubling their efforts. I meet them regularly, above-ground and underground. They, too, want our MRT to be the best. They are putting in their best. I thank them and I cheer them on. Please give them your support, too. We certainly should not unwittingly demoralise them.

Six months into the job, my sense is that we are making some improvements. Last year, trains on the MRT network travelled an average of 133,000 train-km between delays of more than five minutes. This is what we call "mean kilometre before failure" (MKBF), a common reliability measure widely used globally. The figure of 133,000 km is way below Hong Kong Mass Transit Railway's MKBF of 300,000 km. But it is a significant improvement of about 40% from 2014 of 93,000 km. So, in two years, we have improved from 93,000 km to 133,000 km. But 133,000 km is still below Hong Kong's 300,000 km. We want to catch up with Hong Kong and we will. We target 200,000 km this year. Performance so far has given us optimism.

Yes, our MRT did experience disruptions exceeding 30 minutes, on 14 occasions last year. This was more than Hong Kong's 12 disruptions in a year. Not as good and we are also working hard on this. I monitor this closely and I have some progress to report. The Downtown Line (DTL) has crossed 171 days of continuous service without any major disruption: 171 days, almost half a year, without any major incident. This is not a trivial achievement. For us in this trade, we know how difficult it is to achieve such a target. Half a year.

The other MRT lines are working hard to catch up. The North-South Line (NSL) has crossed the 93-day mark. This is our oldest line, nearly 30 years of age and, if there is no incident in the next seven days, NSL will cross the 100 days' mark next week. If they succeed, their success will be especially inspiring for our team, given its age.

Young or old, each time a line crosses a significant milestone, I visit the maintenance staff to thank them personally and to cheer them on; go for the next milestone. Even when they fail to cross a milestone, like the North East Line (NEL) which experienced a disruption two months ago, on the very day when they were about to cross the 100-day mark, I visited them to tell them that we appreciated their efforts, regardless. We lick our wounds, reset the clock, we press on, we work even harder. Today, NEL has crossed the 68-day mark and I look forward to welcoming them to the "100-day Club" next month.

What is our strategy to improve rail reliability? First, the operators are ramping up their engineering and maintenance resources. We are moving towards preventive maintenance – that is, we monitor the conditions of the assets and do the necessary maintenance before any issues arise. This requires the operators to deploy condition monitoring tools on the trains and on the tracks.

11.45 am

Some have already been deployed – the linear variable differential transformer (LVDT) to monitor the condition of the third rail, as well as the wheel impact load detector (WILD) to monitor the train wheels. This year, we expect to deploy even more sensors – a catenary eye system (CES) using infra-red to monitor the power system for NEL, and a rolling stock condition monitoring system (RSCMS) to collect information regarding the train systems on NSL and East-West Line(EWL). These are all very costly investments, but they are necessary.

Second, we are investing about a billion dollars in hardware replacement and upgrading. We are aggressively renewing the infrastructure of our rail network. Within two years, we would have completely replaced the sleepers and the third rail on NSL and EWL, and also upgraded their signalling system.

Third, we are forging a closer team, between LTA the designer and the train operators. We address each incident as a collective responsibility – no finger pointing, share openly and solve the problems speedily. We are tightening regulations and stepping up audits on the maintenance processes, augmenting resources where necessary to get the job done.

Fourth, we are learning from the best. LTA has set up technical advisory panels, such as for our power systems, and has overseas operators on the panels to share their expertise and experience. We are learning and benefiting from their insights. We are grateful for their generosity in sharing and advising us.

Fifth, we are reskilling and up-skilling our engineering and maintenance crew. We need a quantum leap both in the numbers and in the capabilities of our rail industry, both to up our existing maintenance standards and to cope with a rapidly expanding network. I am glad to see the Chartered Rail Engineers Scheme gaining momentum. We are setting up the Singapore Rail Academy to quicken this process. The Academy will work with the rail operators and the Institutes of Higher Learning to deepen rail engineering capabilities through training, as well as for accreditation and certification of training programmes and competencies.

In due course, we hope the Academy will also conduct R&D to contribute to the design of new systems which are easier to build, maintain and operate. Prof Cham Tao Soon has come forward, volunteered his service to spearhead this initiative. He and Mr Tan Gee Paw have been a valuable help to us. They know engineering and they are risking their reputation built up over decades of excellent work in the Civil Service. They are doing national service for the larger good. I am grateful to them and to many other seasoned engineers who have come forward to volunteer their services. We all want an MRT system which all Singaporeans can be proud of.

Even as we work hard to improve reliability, we are, in parallel, working to expand the rail capacity. Actually, the right order of things is to stabilise the system first, before expanding it. But we also have to address peak period crowding and improve connectivity. That is why we are, in parallel, adding new trains to all lines, shortening headways on NSL and EWL, extending EWL westward, DTL eastward, NEL northward, not to mention building the new Thomson-East Coast Line, while planning the new Jurong Region Line and Cross-Island Line.

I hope Members appreciate the severe pressure on the shoulders and the stress on our engineers. I can see it in their faces, though they never voice it. They are an honest, hardworking and resilient lot; they take their responsibilities seriously and stoically. These are tough guys, but I think some tender loving care from Singaporeans would be very much appreciated.

Before I leave this subject, let me add three more points. First, expanding capacity can impact reliability. Adding more trains and running them more frequently exert a heavy load on the power system during peak hours. While the additional load is within the original design capacity of the existing system, we are severely reducing the design buffer. As engineers, we know the importance of a comfortable buffer, to deal with unforeseen events, for instance, a sudden surge in demand on the rail network. I think Mr Sitoh alluded to this yesterday when he said, "Are we biting off more than we can chew?" I think we are, but what to do?

The solution is to upgrade the power system and build new substations. And this is what we are doing. But such an extensive upgrade on a live system will take a few years to complete. Meanwhile, we are taking a risk that it may cause more disruptions. We are deploying condition monitoring tools and techniques to help mitigate such risks, but we know the risks cannot be fully eliminated. So, please be forgiving should you experience a disruption during this very critical transition period.

Second, I want to reiterate an earlier observation. We are stepping up maintenance, we are doing major replacement works and we are expanding the system capacity. Normally, these activities should be done sequentially and in that order, but we are not. We are doing all three simultaneously. All these are happening on the ground, on a live rail system, with a small window of only three engineering hours a day. Ideally, we should provide longer continuous engineering hours and this means shorter revenue service hours. I hope commuters will allow us to open some of the MRT lines a bit later in the morning, or close them a bit earlier at night. An extra hour or two per day will make a lot of difference to our engineering and maintenance staff and help them perform better. We can run some buses to provide an alternative.

Third, we will be changing the signalling system of the NSL and EWL. This is a major engineering task. Experts from London Underground and the Taipei Metro shared with us their past experience in re-signalling which was not at all pleasant. It took them many months to get it right, with many delays and disruptions.

For example, London Underground went through two years of public unhappiness! This subject is now adding to what is keeping us awake at night. As Members may know, we will be changing the signalling system of NSL this year, followed by the EWL next year. We will do our best to try to achieve a flawless execution and we are keeping our fingers crossed. I seek Singaporeans' understanding and moral support.

The rail network is the backbone of our public transport system. We have invested more than $30 billion over the last 15 years and we will be investing even more in the next 15. Besides new lines, we are upgrading existing lines, as described earlier. These works cover trains, tracks, signalling systems and also MRT stations. For example, work will start later this year to upgrade 17 MRT stations, including Er Dr Lee Bee Wah's Khatib station. Following the upgrade, Er Dr Lee's residents will have more standing room and more elderly-friendly seats at the platform. We will also look at expanding bicycle parking. LTA will also look into her other suggestions as we continue refreshing our older stations.

Besides trains, our rail network must be complemented by a good and reliable bus network. We have made significant progress in recent years to increase capacity, improve reliability and enhance service levels. We have introduced new bus services and all bus services will run at shorter intervals. Transition to the bus contracting model is also progressing smoothly. LTA will be calling the third tender package very soon.

Under the Bus Service Enhancement Programme (BSEP), we have added 800 buses, and will add another 200 by the end of next year. But as noted by Mr Melvin Yong, we also need a few thousand more bus captains to join the industry. He made several suggestions. Senior Minister of State Josephine Teo chairs the Public Transport Tripartite Committee (PTTC), which seeks to professionalise the bus industry, so as to attract more Singaporeans into the sector. The Committee will share details of their efforts in the next few months.

Mr Ong Teng Koon asked about the use of electric buses. It is a promising idea, though the current economics still do not make it viable. But I share his optimism that technological progress and especially in bus battery, will make electric buses viable in due course. Therefore, we are closely watching this development. Another promising idea is self-driving vehicles, as noted by Mr Png Eng Huat. Self-driving technology is not yet ready for mass deployment and may be 10-15 years away, depending on the pace of public acceptance. But it is just a matter of time before such vehicles can be deployed on public roads, whether for private or public transport.

As I outlined earlier, a fleet of self-driving vehicles plying the neighbourhood will greatly enhance our first-and-last mile connectivity. We are doing several trials and want Singapore to be amongst the leaders in such concepts. Yesterday, Mr Zaqy Mohamad mentioned nuTonomy. It is making a "big bet on Singapore", according to its COO. They hope to see Singapore amongst the world's first to commercially deploy self-driving vehicles. If they or their rivals succeed, it will impact existing taxi drivers. That is why we need to help incumbents prepare to cope with these changes.

Mdm Chair, when Founding Prime Minister, Mr Lee Kuan Yew officiated the opening of the MRT system in 1988, he said, "We only have a limited amount of land on which to house our people, build factories, hospitals, roads, schools and train the SAF. Therefore, we decided to give top priority to investments in public transport and to put private transport in second place. This means that we must put the MRT to optimal use and the bus services must dovetail and complement the MRT. We must also keep improving the bus and taxi services and keep the growth of cars to moderate levels." This principle has guided our transport strategy ever since.

At SG51, it is even clearer that a car-dominant model cannot underpin Singapore's next phase of development. We need to facilitate new transport technology, change mind-sets and go car-lite. Our public transport must make a quantum leap. We will, therefore, be relentless in pursuing rail excellence, improving our bus service and instituting a future-friendly regulatory and policy framework. We must allow various forms of point-to-point mobility to flourish in Singapore.

At the same time, we must rethink and adjust existing car and car parking policies. We already house one million vehicles. Our vehicle population is nearing its peak. Many other cities are making adjustments. London, Paris and many Japanese cities have introduced car-free days and reduced car parking norms. These are measures to help reset their motorists' attitude towards cars. We should gradually adjust, too.

12.00 noon

In addition, we want Singaporeans to come to cherish public transport as an indispensable part of their daily lives. The recent Bus Carnival was attended by 140,000 Singaporeans. LTA will continue to forge among Singaporeans this sense of ownership and pride in our public buses. And I will make sure that this pride extends to our MRT, too. We cannot achieve this overnight. We need some more time but we will get there, during this term of Government. Of this, I am confident.

Mr Lim Biow Chuan (Mountbatten): Mdm Chair, can I cover both cuts?

The Chairman: Yes, you have two cuts. Please take them together.

Better Public Transport Connection

Mr Lim Biow Chuan: To promote a car-lite Singapore, the Government should provide better public transport for residents so that they can get to office and back home without the need to drive.

Currently, despite the high costs of driving to work, many people still grit their teeth, bear the ERP charges and bear the expensive parking charges because they have limited options of getting to office and back home.

One option is to provide better connectivity from the private estates to the nearest MRT stations. Within my constituency, I have many residents living in the condominiums at Meyer, Amber, Haig Road and Tanjong Rhu. Many of them drive to work daily. If they have a better option of a bus service to the nearest MRT station, I am confident that many of these drivers will leave their cars behind and take public transport to work.

During my dialogues with residents, many of them have requested for a shuttle bus service to bring them to the nearest MRT station during the morning and evening peak hours. Their feedback is that the train station is not that far off, about 1.5 to two kilometres away, but the weather in Singapore is too hot and too humid for them to walk too long a distance to the nearest MRT station. Imagine if we are able to persuade 20% to 30% of these drivers to leave their cars behind and take public transport to work because it is just as convenient and less expensive than their cars.

With the new bus model system, would LTA consider running shuttle buses during peak hours from MRT stations to and from the private estates? If the bus journey is a round-trip service, this would take a bus only about 15 to 20 minutes to make one round trip and pick up the next batch of commuters. This will strongly encourage commuters who used to drive, to leave their cars at home and use public transport as a choice mode of travel. So, Minister, this will alleviate road congestion during peak hours and will be environmentally friendlier.

May I also appeal to the Minister for LTA to also consider a pilot project to provide bicycles for rental at some private estates to allow residents to cycle to the MRT station? Any cyclist can pick up a bicycle near their home, ride to the nearest MRT station and park the bicycle there. In the evening, they can pick up any bicycle and ride home and park at the bicycle station near their homes. This will be akin to the bicycle rental scheme available in cities like London, Paris and Taipei. If these cities can do so, I believe Singapore can do so, too. May I urge MOT to consider this scheme?

Improving Access for Elderly

Elderly residents are more vulnerable when travelling along public roads. As there are more and more elderly citizens, LTA should design the public roads and supporting amenities to facilitate travel for these elderly residents.

There should be more lifts for pedestrian overhead bridges, and where such lifts are not feasible, signalised crossing should be provided. If there is proper coordination and implementation of the green wave for vehicles, traffic speeds will not be adversely affected as all traffic lights along the same stretch of road would be green or red at the same time.

I had, over the past few years, appealed to MOT for a lift to be built at the pedestrian overhead bridge at the Tanjong Rhu area to allow the elderly residents to cross the road safely. Because Tanjong Rhu is an old estate, it has a high proportion of elderly residents. It does pain me to see the elderly struggling to climb the high pedestrian overhead bridge as they head towards the market. Although there is a ramp, none of the elderly wants to use it because it is too long a distance to climb and, hence, has become a white elephant.

Hence, I appeal to the compassion of MOT and LTA officers to reconsider having a lift at the pedestrian overhead bridge or, alternatively, to consider a signalised traffic crossing. If the signalised crossing is aligned to the traffic lights at the next main road junction, it will not impede traffic flow since the green wave conditions will allow traffic to flow smoothly at the same time.

The interest of the elderly residents should always be paramount when reviewing policies and I know that the Minister for Transport thinks in the same manner.

Public Transport for Persons with Disabilities

Mr Leon Perera (Non-Constituency Member): Mdm Chairperson, our public transport system will not be truly public until it is fully friendly to Singaporeans with disabilities and I would like to make a few suggestions in this regard.

Firstly, do we have enough lifts at our MRT and LRT stations? Currently, there is at most one lift per path. These lifts are typically small and accommodate up to two wheeled mobility devices. With an ageing population, there will be more pressure on these lifts. A single lift also means a single point of failure. The priority queue system by itself cannot address all these points. Can MOT look into building at least two lifts for all stations as a long-term goal?

Secondly, on taxis. SMRT, Comfort and other firms now provide some taxis that can ferry wheelchairs. However, the fare they charge is generally at least $50 per trip. This is a burden to wheelchair users with modest means who need to travel regularly to locations less accessible by public transport.

While transport allowance schemes are in place and some VWOs have programmes in place to address this, these are not always available to those in need. Could MOT work with taxi companies to find ways to address the needs of this group, a group which will grow as the population ages?

Lastly, can we do more to ensure safety for wheelchair users on our public buses? The current practice on buses is just to place the wheelchair rear-facing, back against the vertical wall and apply the brakes. This will not ensure the safety of both the wheelchair user and, other passengers who might be injured by a flying wheelchair, so to speak, should an accident occur. There is a worldwide standard known as the Wheelchair Tie-Down and Occupant Restraint System (WTORS). WTORS defines different securement systems including the four-point tie-down system.

Vehicles provided by some VWOs to ferry wheelchair users already use the four-point tie-down system today. I propose that our public buses be required to conform to international standards to ensure safety. Some of the new buses on display have a seat belt system to improve safety but this is still below international safety standards like WTORS.

Covered Walkways

Mr Ang Wei Neng (Jurong): Mdm Chair, I am heartened by the Minister's determination to make the First-and-Last Mile Connectivity in our transport system the best in the world, especially with the sheltered walkways. Singaporeans welcome the additional sheltered walkways. However, my residents and myself have identified some gaps between the shelters which make the walk less pleasant. I hope the Minister can help to plug the gaps.

Firstly, different hospitals enjoy different levels of protection from sheltered walkways. While I am glad that the Minister, in response to my Parliamentary Question last month, agreed to build a covered walkway from Little India MRT station to KK Women's and Children's Hospital, what about Changi General Hospital? Simei MRT station is only about 500 metres away from the Changi General Hospital but there is no covered walkway linking the two. This is also the case at Khoo Teck Puat Hospital, which is about 800 metres away from Yishun MRT station on a straight line basis.

Are there plans to connect these hospitals to MRT stations with sheltered walkways? I hope MOT has a comprehensive plan to build covered walkways for existing public hospitals. I know that new hospitals are all linked to the nearest MRT station by covered walkways. Elderly patients or those who are ill and need to make frequent visits to the hospitals without cars, as well as hospital staff, will greatly appreciate being able to travel to hospitals in comfort instead of having to brave the rain or broiling sun.

Secondly, because of how the Public Service demarcates areas of responsibilities, no one takes care of building shelters on walking pathways between HDB blocks and amenities, such as schools. These are the neglected zones. HDB does not want to do it because the pedestrian paths are under the jurisdiction of LTA. LTA is also unwilling to because it is only mandated to build sheltered walkways that connect amenities and schools to bus stops and MRT stations and not HDB blocks.

I would like to cite Jurong Primary School as an example where LTA has kindly built a sheltered walkway from the school to the nearest bus stop. However, from the school to the nearest HDB block at Block 310, Jurong East Street 32, is unsheltered, despite repeated requests from my residents. So, if it rains, children from the schools taking public buses will be dry while children walking home via Block 310 will get wet.

I am sure many constituencies also face similar problems. I hope that LTA can take a holistic view when building sheltered walkways, to think about the needs of the residents in totality and not in terms of which zones they are overseeing.

Thirdly, I hope that LTA can encourage building owners to build their own covered walkways to link with those built by LTA. Again, these are also neglected zones which do not fall under anybody's jurisdiction. One example which constitutes a poor last-mile connection is the Civil Service Club at Bukit Batok. I want to state upfront this Civil Service Club at Bukit Batok is not under the jurisdiction of Bukit Batok. It is under the jurisdiction of Bukit Gombak. I am not raising this issue because of the impending Bukit Gombak by-election, I must declare that.

LTA has kindly built a sheltered walkway 150 metres away from the nearest bus stop to the side gate of this Club. But from the side gate, there is a short gap of about 10-20 metres, not covered, before it reaches the sheltered staircase leading to the main building. For some reason, the Civil Service Club is not covering this path with a shelter. In the event of a heavy downpour, a pedestrian can stay nice and dry for 150 metres and will get drenched before he reaches the Club. We have marginally missed the last-mile connection and wasted the benefits of the 150-metre shelter. Once again, I hope LTA will work with the respective building owners to enhance the last-mile connectivity.

Local Connectivity

Mr Lee Yi Shyan (East Coast): Mdm Chair, the Ministry is investing heavily in enhancing our public transport infrastructure. By 2030, there will be an MRT station within a five-minute walk from any location in the central area and eight in 10 households will be within a 10-minute walk of a station. By then, three out of four commuters will travel by public transport daily.

Building transport infrastructure is a long-term undertaking. I applaud the Ministry's focus on the long-term needs of Singapore even as it beefs up our current capacity.

Compared to other leading cities in the world, however, we do not seem to have as comprehensive a last-mile connectivity as other cities do. So, in the spirit of contributing to a world-class transport system, let me mention a few examples.

In Canada, they have built an underground city named RESO right in downtown Montreal. RESO consists of 32 km of tunnels spreading over a 12-sq km area. By comparison, our Orchard Road shopping belt is only 2.2 km long. The underground city includes 60 residential and commercial complexes linking hotels, shopping malls, banks, corporate headquarters, museums, university buildings, seven metro stations, two commuter train stations and the Bell Centre hockey arena. This is equivalent to an indoor stadium of 21,000 seats.

There are more than 120 exterior access points to this underground city. Nearly 500,000 people use the underground city per day, especially to escape Montreal's harsh winters.

In another Canadian city, Toronto, there is an elaborate Downtown Underground Pedestrian Walkway called PATH. It claims to be the world's largest, continuous underground shopping complex with 30 km of shopping arcades.

PATH has approximately 1,200 shops and services, employing 5,000 people. Commuters can access more than 50 buildings and office towers, 20 parking garages, six subway stations, two major departmental stores, eight major hotels and a railway terminal. Commuters can also get to some of Toronto's major tourist attractions, such as the Hockey Hall, Roy Thomson Hall, the Air Canada Centre, Rogers Centre and the CN Tower.

Closer home, Japanese cities show how underground space development can be maximised. According to Japan Times, Tokyo has approximately 63,000 underground areas, 40% of which are underground paths, subway systems and shopping complexes. The eight largest underground shopping areas in the capital add up to about 214,000 square meters – about the same as having five Tokyo Stadiums buried underground.

12.15 pm

One could walk from the Otemachi station to Higashi-ginza station, all via underground over a 4.05-kilometre walkway. This is about the walking distance between our Newton station and City Hall station in Singapore.

For those of us who have travelled to Hong Kong and Taipei, we also see similar underground walkway infrastructure which render the cities walkable.

In Singapore, most of our efforts to improve last-mile connectivity have been focused on sheltered linkways. For instance, in 2013, MOT announced the "Walk2Ride" initiative to build 200 km worth of linkways throughout the island. More recently, MOT has reaffirmed its vision to enhance our last-mile connectivity to promote "walking, cycling, and riding public transport" as a way of life.

Beyond sheltered linkways, we have heard little about our plans to build more underground spaces and walkways, especially in the City Core areas. Building owners often cite cost and technical challenges as key deterrents. Some also believe that the laws governing subterranean development can be further enhanced to catalyse new investments.

Would the Ministry, in consideration of the larger and long-term good for Singapore and as the lead agency responsible for last-mile connectivity, champion Singapore's underground space developments, especially in the City Core area? Would the Ministry provide an update on how the newly-amended State Land Act and Land Acquisition Act would facilitate such a lead role MOT might play?

Finally, I would also add that MOT's investments in last-mile infrastructure would have a profound and positive impact on Singaporeans' health and well-being. Walking more on a daily basis could help many average Singaporeans to reduce the risk of obesity, diabetes and other heart-related diseases.

Safety of Pedestrians on Footpaths

Miss Cheng Li Hui (Tampines): In its recommendations to the Ministry last month, AMAP recommended that cyclists and users of personal mobility devices (PMDs) be allowed on footpaths. While this recommendation will certainly help to reduce the risks that cyclists face on the road, the risk for pedestrians also increases.

In reality, a number of cyclists are already riding on footpaths and there are many accounts of cyclists and users of PMDs who do not give way to pedestrians nor stop when approaching bus stops or crowded areas like neighbourhood centres and markets. While residents understand the need to legalise PMDs on footpaths, I hope that we can continue to educate our cyclists on good practices, such as dismounting in crowded places.

Madam, I support cycling as a green and healthy mode of transport but I feel that they should be allotted a dedicated lane where there might be high cycling and pedestrian traffic, such as the last mile to the MRT stations. It would take additional planning and investments to do this but I do think it will be money well-spent. Pedestrians, especially the elderly and young children, should not be put at risk for the convenience of cyclists and users of PMDs.

I would also like to ask the Ministry how it intends to enforce speed limits, which the Panel recommended at 15 kilometres per hour (km/hr) on footpaths and 25 km/hr on cycling and shared paths.

Change of Rules for Bicycles

Mr Dennis Tan Lip Fong (Non-Constituency Member): Mdm Chairperson, recently, AMAP made its recommendations regarding the use of bicycles and mobility devices. It recommended that bicycles and PMDs should be allowed on footpaths. Although it is not presently allowed, we often see bicycles on footpaths. If introduced, steps should be taken to ensure that cyclists use the footpaths in accordance with any new rules and also with good practices, such as giving way and keeping left.

I agree with the recommendations for speed limits, use of helmet and use of standard bicycle lights. Bicycle lights are important safety devices, especially in the evenings. It is often difficult for motorists to spot a cyclist riding at night without any lights until one is almost caught up with the cyclist. Whether it is bicycle lights, use of helmet or cycling on footpaths and any new measures which the Ministry should choose to adopt, I feel that if there is no effective public education and effective enforcement, especially early on after the introduction of the new measures, such measures will never be adopted by many cyclists. I would also like to suggest that for reasons of safety, there should be a rule for keeping left, whether on footpaths, connectors or on the roads.

Next, personal mobility aids (PMAs). An example of PMA is the motorised device used by the elderly or people with some form of mobility constraints. But for the suggested ban on the use of PMAs on roads to work effectively and reasonably, there must be user-friendly pavements along every road; otherwise, such a ban will not be practical or fair. PMDs include electric skate scooters and kick scooters. Such scooters are regularly seen on the roads now. Again, public education, coupled with effective enforcement, will be important.

On electric bicycles (e-bikes), I agree with the Panel's recommendations regarding maximum weight of 20 kg, maximum speed of 25 km/h and the devices' width. In fact, with these safety measures, it may be suitable to let e-bikes to be used on park connectors. We can often see people with illegally modified e-bikes on the roads or connectors. Presently, the onus is on the manufacturers to apply to the LTA for their e-bikes to be authorised by the LTA. However, unauthorised e-bikes are still available for sale. Many e-bikes which are in use are not authorised models. Would the Ministry consider only allowing authorised e-bikes to be sold in Singapore?

In respect of the existing unauthorised e-bikes which may technically comply with the new proposed rules, may I suggest that the Ministry consider, at least on a one-off basis, to allow owners of such e-bikes to apply directly for authorisation and registration? It would be harsh to expect them to stop the use of their bikes when they can comply with the new rules. On the issue of registration of e-bikes, I think this is a good method of ensuring bike owners use their e-bikes responsibly.

The Panel has also recommended against allowing e-bikes which are powered by throttle. I have received feedback that throttle may be more suitable for some users, such as the elderly, as they do not need some strength to paddle and kick in the electric power required in current authorised models. Control of speed by throttle is also more precise. As long as the maximum speed of the bike is limited, the throttle does not make the bike unsafe. Currently, PMAs, or even PMDs like e-scooters, are powered by technology which is similar to throttle. But, unlike e-bikes, safety may not be an issue.

In conclusion, the Panel has made many good recommendations. However, whatever measures adopted may only work if there is sufficient public education and effective enforcement, especially at the onset. There must be sufficient resources and the willingness for all authorities responsible for enforcing the use of bicycles on roads, cycling paths, footpaths and connectors to make the proposed new cycling rules work.

Last but not least, may I compliment the good efforts and determination of members of the Panel led by Parliamentary Secretary Assoc Prof Muhammad Faishal Ibrahim. The ball is now in the Ministry's court.

Separate Paths for Bicycles

Mr Gan Thiam Poh (Ang Mo Kio): Mdm Chair, when I read about AMAP's recommendations to MOT in March, I was very worried about the recommendation that cyclists and users of PMDs share footpaths with pedestrians. I have heard of many cases of residents who had bad experiences with errant cyclists.

Of course, I support cycling as a healthy activity and an environmentally responsible way of getting around. Unfortunately, it is difficult to enforce responsible cycling behaviour and it is almost impossible to get errant cyclists to take on responsibility for their victims, unlike in traffic accidents. They are not licensed. Neither are their bicycles. They do not even take the Highway Code. There is no recourse for the victim and also no proper legal framework for insurance claims or resolution of disputes.

Vulnerable pedestrians, such as the elderly and young children, will face a higher risk from cyclists once they start sharing footpaths. I urge the Ministry to reconsider building separate dedicated paths for bicycles − in Mandarin − "请三思".

Enforcement of Bicycle Rules

Mr Pritam Singh (Aljunied): Mdm Chairperson, three years ago, I spoke on increasing cycling and pedestrian safety in this House. I rise to make the same call in light of the recommendations of AMAP and the frequency of feedback from residents, especially elderly residents, about accidents and near-accidents between cyclists and pedestrians on footpaths, zebra crossings and pedestrian crossings and even bus stops.

I would like to ask the Ministry, as it assesses the recommendations of AMAP, to also look at how such rules can be enforced in light of the demographic shifts taking place in our society, with more elderly and senior citizens using walkways and footpaths.

Just a few weeks ago, I stood near the junction of Bedok Reservoir Road and Jalan Eunos to assess the flow and egress of residents' vehicles from Bedok Reservoir Road and their complaints of cyclists who dashed across the zebra crossing to catch the flashing "Green Man" across the Jalan Eunos pedestrian crossing. In the hour or so I was at the junction, not a single cyclist, either a foreign worker, Singaporean or PR, stopped to dismount from their bicycle. Rather, there were quite a few glares from drivers towards cyclists and vice versa. Members may also have had residents complaining about cyclists who zipped by just as they were disembarking from buses at bus stops.

Mdm Chairperson, while a code of conduct to alter behaviour is a start, I am concerned that it will not go far enough even with an intense educational effort that would be required to compel a fundamental change of behaviour on the part of errant cyclists. I believe it must be compulsory for cyclists who use footpaths and pedestrian crossings or who are near bus stops to dismount from their bicycles and walk across these areas which are more prone to accidents and heavy pedestrian traffic.

In practice, the Ministry could consider how the stop line works for drivers in the US. Regardless whether there is traffic or not, every driver stops at the stop line or risks a fine. Likewise, we should implement a dismount-and-push rule for cyclists at critical areas and enforce it. In view of our crowded shared spaces during peak hours, such a clear rule is likely to make our footpaths, bus stops and pedestrian crossings safer, especially for our elderly.

Cycling

Mr Ang Wei Neng: Mdm Chair, many Singaporeans that I spoke to supported most of the recommendations of AMAP. However, the devil lies in the details. In particular, who will be enforcing the rules and code of conduct governing the use of PMDs and bicycles on footpaths and cycling paths? Will MOT engage traffic wardens or even residents to enforce the rules and the codes of conduct? What will be the penalty if cyclists or persons using PMDs do not follow the rules?

Next, I would like to turn my attention to e-bikes. I wholeheartedly support the registration of e-bikes. It is important that retailers only sell LTA's approved e-bikes and facilitate the registration of e-bikes as they are sold. I trust that LTA will set up a system to make registration of e-bikes a seamless process. LTA may also want to consider mandating the e-bike user to pass an abridged Highway Code for the safety of e-bike users, pedestrians and other road users.

What about existing e-bikes? How would LTA mandate existing e-bike users to register? Would they be given a timeframe to register? What are the enforcement measures to deter e-bike users from using the pedestrian pathways or bicycle paths?

While the recommendations of AMAP are good, there remain many unanswered questions. I hope that the Senior Minister of State for Transport Mrs Josephine Teo will share with us the details of its implementation.

Tightening Rules for Electric Bicycles

Mr Ang Hin Kee (Ang Mo Kio): Mdm chair, the use of PMDs is fast gaining popularity in Singapore. AMAP has issued a list of recommendations on the rules and code of conduct expected of cyclists and PMD users. I agree that it is more important that they behave in a safe and considerate manner rather than focus on having more enforcement.

It was recommended that e-bikes should be allowed on cycling paths and shared paths, but at a speed limit. E-bikes are also allowed on roads. The Panel also recommends that the Government consider registering e-bikes to facilitate identification and enforcement against errant riders.

However, illegally modified e-bikes may have more powerful motors and some even have throttles installed. Some may even go up to the same speed as motorcycles. As such, they are a potential danger on the roads and shared paths.

12.30 pm

Consequently, it is proposed that we increase the fine for first-time offenders using or selling non-compliant e-bikes. Repeat offenders may be charged in Court and have their e-bikes seized. Likewise, retailers found to continue selling non-compliant e-bikes or workshop operators modifying them illegally will be charged in Court.

The number of offences involving the use of non-compliant e-bikes has increased significantly to over 1,000 notices in 2015. We also hear of incidents involving e-bikes and other vehicles on the roads, or with pedestrians. Besides educating e-bike users to exercise caution, there should also be stricter enforcement on illegal modifications and sale of unapproved models.

I hope that when LTA engages retailers and workshops to update them on the changes in the technical requirements and penalties for not conforming, they should also consider involving them in educating buyers on safe riding.

Furthermore, in their education and enforcement efforts, LTA should also cover e-bike rental operators or delivery companies who issue employees the use of company owned e-bikes, even though these may not be as prevalent at this point in time. I hope that we also anticipate and address situations where dormitory owners may rent out e-bikes for their residents or other commercial users —

The Chairman: Mr Ang, please conclude your speech, your time is up.

Mr Ang Hin Kee: Furthermore, will we also consider banning e-bikes on the expressway?

The Minister of State for Transport (Mrs Josephine Teo): Mdm Chair, I thank the Members for their comments and suggestions.

I will expand on a key theme in MOT's COS debate this year – that of enhancing accessibility for commuters, in particular, our plans to make it hassle-free for commuters to move from their homes to the nearest train station or bus stop. As Minister Khaw described earlier, we crystallise these efforts as First-and-Last-Mile Connectivity (FLMC).

Members of the House would already be aware of MOT's plans to double our rail network and add more than 100 new MRT stations across the island in the next 15 years. This will bring our MRT network much closer to where Singaporeans work and live. In around five years, no matter where you are in the city area, a train station will only be five minutes away. By 2030, eight in 10 residents all over Singapore will be within a 10-minute walk of a train station.

The expanded rail network will be much more beneficial if we also improve their accessibility to commuters. We share the same belief, as members like Mr Sitoh Yih Pin and Mr Ang Wei Neng, that there has been progress on FLMC and more is achievable.

Our goal is for Singapore to make a quantum leap, to be among the best in the world. To get to where we envision Singapore, we must close the gap with cities like Amsterdam and Copenhagen and aim to do better, particularly because we live in the tropics with hotter, wetter, more humid weather.

I will outline our approach on FLMC and, within that framework, respond to the recent recommendations of Parliamentary Secretary Muhammad Faishal's AMAP.

In the last five years, the Government has committed nearly $1 billion to improve FLMC for commuters. In the next few years, every resident will be able to reap the benefits of the upcoming FLMC improvements in their neighbourhoods. We want everyone, including the less mobile like our seniors and persons with disabilities, to be able to get to their nearby MRT station or bus interchange comfortably, conveniently and safely, whether it is by walking, cycling or using PMD.

Walking will become more comfortable. By 2018, every MRT and LRT station will be connected by sheltered walkways to nearby schools, healthcare facilities and public amenities. FLMC considerations are fully integrated into the design and construction of new stations. For example: (a) DTL 2 stations will be served by 13 km of sheltered walkways; and (b) DTL 3 stations will go slightly further; they will be served by 16 km of sheltered walkways.

There are 56 km of sheltered walkways today. So, if you add those 56 km to what DTLs 2 and 3 will have – we are talking about 85 km – that is one end of Singapore to the other and back. Existing stations will be fitted out under LTA's Walk2Ride programme.

So far, we already have sheltered walkways for about 40% of all MRT stations across Singapore and more will follow. Beyond the immediate vicinity of train stations, LTA will work with other stakeholders to make our towns more walkable.

For example, HDB and Town Councils co-share the responsibility of improving the walking experience within towns with LTA. They will follow up on suggestions like those of Mr Ang Wei Neng, for more covered walkways to link HDB blocks to nearby amenities.

Mr Ang also suggested that LTA build covered walkways from MRT stations to nearby hospitals, in particular, Changi General Hospital and Khoo Teck Puat Hospital. As Members know, under our Walk2Ride framework, LTA gives priority to connecting hospitals within 400 metres of MRT stations. And why 400 metres? Because this is a distance most commuters are willing to cover on foot.

The planned walkway from Changi General Hospital to Simei MRT station will be completed by 2017. However, Khoo Teck Puat Hospital is about 700 metres away from Yishun MRT station, and a little bit more, if we consider the actual walking route. At such a distance, commuters tend to prefer a bus transfer. Nonetheless, we will study the feasibility of a sheltered walkway later. Meanwhile, the free shuttle buses, as well as public feeder buses, will continue to serve commuters.

There will be more direct routes and options for walking. Both Mr Ang and Mr Sitoh have noted that some walkways can be circuitous and add many minutes to the walk. I agree with them fully that more direct routes will make walking a more attractive option for commuters.

Now, sometimes, large plots of privately-owned land and buildings can get in the way of a more direct walking route. But thanks to the support of our colleagues in MND and URA, private developers will be required to submit a Walking and Cycling Plan when they apply for URA's planning approval. Essentially, this plan will require developers to propose how they would design their buildings to provide safe and convenient access and infrastructure for pedestrians, as well as cyclists. LTA and URA will share more details shortly.

Mr Ang also asked whether we could encourage building owners to build or link up their covered walkways to those built by the Government. LTA already does so, although it remains the building owners' prerogative to decide.

Similarly, we are trying to connect our expanding transport network to more buildings via underground links, as suggested by Mr Lee Yi Shyan. I must thank Mr Lee for sharing many interesting examples with us and also for reminding Members of the health benefits of walking.

In fact, our plans include elevated off-road pedestrian walkways, such as those linking the twin towers of Ng Teng Fong Hospital to the nearby Jurong East station and adjacent shopping malls. I recently took a short but enjoyable walk there. I think it is called J-Walk, but it is entirely legal.

The linkways make very good sense, given our local weather, and we should have more. Minister Lawrence Wong has recently explained the approach which MND and MOT will jointly implement, which most likely involves further legislative change.

URA is the lead agency working with LTA and there is already an underground masterplan which includes the central area underground pedestrian network.

Let me now move on to talking about an inclusive transport system for the less mobile. They are an important group of commuters that we must take care of, either because they are less mobile by age or disability. Mr Lim Biow Chuan and Mr Leon Perera spoke about their needs, as did Ms Chia Yong Yong during the Budget debate.

Today, all MRT stations and bus interchanges offer barrier-free access. Almost all bus stops and buses are barrier-free as well.

As part of the Government's Action Plan for Successful Ageing, LTA is putting in more seats at new MRT stations for seniors to rest. And, indeed, we are considering equipping new stations with two sets of lifts each – that is something that Mr Leon Perera asked about. LTA will also build signalised pedestrian crossings, rather than overhead bridges or underpasses, where possible, as the elderly and persons with disabilities do find it physically less taxing to use signalised pedestrian crossings.

LTA is looking at different standards for wheelchair users, including Wheelchair Tie-down and Occupant Restraint Systems (WTORS). Where there are overhead bridges, the Government has a programme to install lifts at frequently-used ones, so that the less mobile can still cross the roads with minimal difficulty.

LTA is currently installing lifts at 41 overhead bridges, prioritising the bridges near places frequented by the elderly or disabled. This includes transport hubs, healthcare institutions, welfare homes, homes for the aged and schools for special needs children. We will expand this programme to about 50 more bridges.

I am sympathetic to Mr Lim Biow Chuan's appeals for a lift to be built at a specific overhead bridge and I commend his diligence as the Member of Parliament. As Mr Lim knows, the overhead bridge is already fitted with a ramp. Given our need to provide barrier-free access to as many bridges as possible, we have to focus on bridges that do not yet have any form of barrier-free access. I seek his understanding as there are residents in every estate who are waiting for such lifts to be installed. We will study the possibility of a signalised pedestrian crossing; the primary consideration being the safety of pedestrians, especially seniors.

Moving on to feeder buses. Besides walking, many train commuters use feeder buses to get to the MRT stations. Today, FLMCs via some 64 feeder bus services are generally good. Most residents, including those living in private estates, have a bus stop within a five-minute walk.

To encourage more people from private estates to take public transport, Mr Lim Biow Chuan suggested providing peak hour shuttle bus services to connect MRT stations and private estates. We are open to providing public buses, especially if it is assessed that ridership will reach a certain minimum level. There should be reasonable cost recovery; otherwise, the service will not be well used and the resources should be re-deployed to areas where more residents can be served. This is a fair approach to assessing the regular requests for bus services and LTA can work with Mr Lim and other advisers to make the necessary assessments.

So far, Madam, I have spoken on what we are doing for pedestrians. This is an important priority for us because almost every public transport user would need to walk at some point in their journey. But more and more Singaporeans are making their connections to the public transport network or getting around their neighbourhood in another way – by cycling and using PMDs. This is a small, but rapidly expanding group. Their profile is quite diverse, ranging from neighbourhood "uncles" and "aunties", to students going to school and parents sending their kids to and from childcare.

As many Members would be aware, we are building dedicated intra-town cycling networks for every HDB town as quickly as we can.

Today, residents in Tampines, Sembawang, Pasir Ris, Changi-Simei and Yishun are already enjoying their completed networks. We will build cycling networks in 11 more towns over the next five years.

12.45 pm

In particular, Ang Mo Kio will be a demonstration project as we test out additional infrastructure, such as seamless cycling and walking corridors below the MRT viaduct. If these experiments work well, we can replicate them in other towns.

Mr Lim Biow Chuan also suggested providing bike-sharing services to connect MRT stations and private estates. We are, indeed, keen to test out how bike-sharing can help improve first-and-last-mile connections. We will pilot bike-sharing services in the Jurong Lake District next year, learn from this pilot and see how we can bring it to other residential areas.

As Mr Gan Thiam Poh and Miss Cheng Li Hui noted, dedicated cycling paths are really the most ideal and safest option for cyclists and pedestrians. So, I fully share their concerns for pedestrians, especially seniors. But the reality is that we have limited land and much of Singapore which the public regularly accesses is already quite built-up. It is, therefore, not realistic to build dedicated cycling paths everywhere.

For cycling and use of PMDs to become viable first-and-last-mile options soon, rather than far into the future, we need an environment and culture where pedestrians and cyclists, as well as users of PMDs, are willing and able to share space.

To consult the public on how we can foster such an environment and culture, we set up AMAP in July last year, and the members were drawn from a broad spectrum of society and were led by Parliamentary Secretary Muhammad Faishal Ibrahim, my former MOT colleague, who remains very passionate about active mobility. The Panel submitted its report to the Government last month. Mr Gan reminded us: "请三思". There is another phrase thereafter: "而后行". So, think thrice but, after that, take action.

I am pleased to share that the Government will accept the Panel's recommendations in full. I commend and thank the Panel for their detailed work and well-considered recommendations. They have taken in as many views as possible and made some very difficult trade-offs. Overall, the recommendations are fair and balanced, with sensible rules and guidelines to ensure the safety of pedestrians, cyclists and users of PMDs alike.

These new rules will mean that bicycles and PMDs like kick-scooters, e-scooters, electric unicycles and hoverboards, can be used on footpaths, shared paths and cycling paths. We will, however, not allow power-assisted bicycles, or e-bikes, on footpaths, because their nature and use tend to pose a higher safety risk to other path users.

These new rules significantly improve the mobility options for everyone. Our seniors and persons with disabilities will find it easier to get around their neighbourhoods using motorised wheelchairs or mobility scooters. Students will find it safer to cycle to school; parents have more peace of mind. Families cycling to town centres for their daily activities or to catch a train will also be safer.

On the other hand, we fully recognise the safety concerns of pedestrians in sharing the footpaths with faster moving users, as pointed out by Mr Gan, Miss Cheng and Mr Dennis Tan. That is why the Panel had also proposed a set of rules and code of conduct and policies on speed limits and maximum weight and size of permissible devices. Education and enforcement will also be important, as many Members have pointed out. Let me outline our broad plans.

First, on education – how do we foster a culture of safety and consideration for others? The first thing we will do is to launch a nation-wide Active Mobility campaign this April to raise awareness about the proposed policies, rules and code of conduct. Through a mix of outdoor, online and printed media, we will explain the new policies and rules and their rationale. We will also encourage cyclists and users of PMDs to pledge their commitment to riding safely on footpaths, shared paths and cycling paths through various activities.

This will be supplemented by more in-depth education on safe cycling through a new Cyclist Education Programme. Participants will be taught how to be safe and considerate around others, how to use cycling infrastructure properly and practise what they have learnt. The programme will be launched in May and will be progressively rolled out in schools, community centres and foreign worker dormitories.

Third, a shift in culture is a shared responsibility. To change habits and evolve new ones, to contribute to a culture where all users of shared paths conduct themselves with consideration for others, we need the involvement and ownership of the community. This is the only way. I agree with Mr Ang that it is important to cast the net wide when engaging these partners. LTA will partner community interest groups, grassroots organisations, retailers of bicycles and PMDs and others to help spread key education messages in their respective communities.

In particular, we will work with the grassroots to set up volunteer Active Mobility Patrols. This is modelled after the cycling warden programme that has been successfully implemented in Tampines. Some of you from Tampines GRC may already know Mr Steven Yeo. He is a long-time volunteer cycling warden and he believes strongly in the role of education to change behaviour. It has taken 10 years to develop this sharing culture in Tampines, but he feels that the end result is fulfilling. Cyclists in Tampines have become more considerate and the most encouraging indicator is that they maintain safe cycling habits even when the wardens are not around.

Moving on to enforcement and how we step up deterrence, cyclists and PMD users should always care for and give way to pedestrians, who are gracious in sharing the space with them. Just like how cyclists do not wish to be endangered by motorists on the road, they should spare a thought for pedestrians and avoid being a menace on footpaths.

The Government will step up enforcement against reckless cyclists and users of PMDs. LTA will set up a dedicated enforcement team and will join the Traffic Police on joint enforcement exercises at hotspots. NParks will also play their part by conducting targeted enforcement in parks and park connectors. We will also increase penalties for stronger deterrence against reckless behaviour.

Miss Cheng asked how we will be enforcing the speed limits on footpaths and cycling paths. It is not practical to station enforcement officers at every corner – I think we all know that – nor should we be overly rigid by penalising users for going slightly above the speed limit by one kilometre per hour or two kilometres per hour. For a start, we will focus on hotspots, such as crowded bus stops, and use speed guns to help us identify those who are speeding excessively and posing a danger to pedestrians.

In the same vein, AMAP was particularly concerned about the proliferation of illegally modified power-assisted bicycles, or e-bikes. The Panel recommended registering these devices for more effective enforcement.

The Government accepts this recommendation. Some irresponsible users have illegally modified their e-bikes to travel at high speeds of 40 km/hr, even 70 km/hr on the roads, effectively making them similar to motorcycles. They pose a safety hazard to pedestrians and motorists and, if I may add, to themselves.

I thank Mr Ang Wei Neng for his suggestions on how registration can be implemented. We accept that there should be a grace period for e-bike owners to register and will need more time to work out the details. We hope to be able to share more information by the end of this year.

Mr Ang Hin Kee called for stricter enforcement against retailers of non-compliant e-bikes. Since last year, LTA has stepped up enforcement against errant retailers and will continue to do so. We will also amend legislation to tighten up on the sale of non-compliant e-bikes.

Mr Dennis Tan also provided several suggestions, for example, allowing throttles. LTA will study this as we go about, together with implementation of e-bike registration.

Mdm Chair, the transition to the new policies, rules and code of conduct is challenging and will take time. We target to implement most of the changes by the end of this year. In the meantime, we will need to study the details carefully, make the necessary legislative changes and ramp up our resources.

Even after these changes are implemented on paper, it will not all be smooth sailing. It will take time for everyone to get used to the new policies and rules and to cultivate the habits and culture of safe sharing of paths. Some conflicts will inevitably occur, but I believe that, with time and strong education and enforcement efforts, we will be able to develop a culture of safe and gracious sharing.

This is the right direction to go and we are taking an important first step, but the journey will be a long one spanning many years. We will have to make adjustments along the way, by continuing to take in feedback and constantly engaging the community.

Once again, I would like to thank Parliamentary Secretary Muhammad Faishal Ibrahim and his Panel for their very good work in putting forward a set of recommendations to MOT. Parliamentary Secretary Muhammad Faishal Ibrahim has also graciously agreed to MOT's requests to continue to chair the Panel, which will advise on the implementation process and champion this worthy development.

Mdm Chair, I have spoken at length about the importance of making the first-and-last-mile of our daily trips comfortable, safe, convenient and inclusive. Where would we like to see ourselves in 15 years? Tokyo, a familiar city for many Singaporeans, offers a good preview. Thirty-seven percent of all trips in Tokyo are made on foot or on bicycles, compared to just 17% in Singapore today. There are only about 10 km of dedicated cycling paths in Tokyo, yet pedestrians, cyclists and motorists co-exist harmoniously. Mr Lee Yi Shyan also reminded us about their extensive underground pedestrian network. For all of these, the most important ingredient in Tokyo's success is the people's civic-mindedness and consideration for others.

Such changes in habits and culture will take time. But we are making a good start and with perseverance, we have a good chance of becoming an attractive walking and cycling city, where the first and last mile are among the best that any city can offer.

The Chairman: Ms Sylvia Lim, not here. Mr Leon Perera.

Uses of ERP 2.0

Mr Leon Perera: Mdm Chairperson, the new GNSS-based ERP 2.0 will allow real-time tracking of traffic and road usage. I would like to make several suggestions and pose a few questions.

Firstly, has MOT done any simulations to show the net impact of the ERP 2.0 system on total revenue collection? If not, I would urge them to do so and to design the charging model to ensure that total revenue collection remains more or less neutral relative to the current distances travelled and current vehicle population. The purpose of the ERP system should be to ease congestion and not to raise revenue.

1.00 pm

Secondly, MOT has said that the data collected will be made available to motorists so that they can easily see which are the congested roads and avoid them if possible. How will this be done? I suggest that the aggregated and anonymised data be made accessible in real time and in a user-friendly manner to the private sector so that third-party app developers can provide innovative solutions to motorists, making Singapore a test-bed for such innovations.

Thirdly, the Government has provided assurances that data privacy will be upheld. I would like to ask if the Government can conduct a privacy-impact assessment (PIA) to give the public transparency that personally-identifiable information is collected, used, accessed, shared, safeguarded, stored and discarded in a proper manner. The US Department of Homeland Security, for example, conducts PIAs for several of its programmes.

I would also like to ask if Government agencies will have limitless access to these data or will there be safeguards against executive over-reach. For example, if the Police want access to information on someone's travel patterns, will they need a Court Order or can they do so without one?

COE

Mr Ang Wei Neng: Mdm Chair, we can expect a bumper crop of COEs this year and next. The motor vehicle industry players have been appealing to the Government to smoothen the supply of COEs and to avoid cyclical retrenchment and mass recruitment of staff. At the same time, wild-swinging COE prices have encouraged premature de-registrations of relatively new vehicles in the past, which is a wastage and not pro-environment. Hence, we would like to know if MOT has plans to further regulate the supply of COEs in the coming year.

The growing proportion of Category B or Cat B COE, vis-a-vis that of other categories, is also a concern. In January 2000, Cat B COE only constituted 10% of the total COE quota for that month. In January 2016, Cat B COE constituted 28% of the total COE quota. So, 10% in year 2000, 28% this year.

This is because Open Category or Cat E COE received at least 10% of the de-registrations in each category and Cat E COEs are mainly used to register the CAT B vehicles. Such a phenomenon has unfairly disadvantaged Singaporeans who just want to buy a basic car out of necessity. Thus, I would like to urge MOT to consider a reset of the COE distribution to make the system more equitable.

Equitable COE Systems

Assoc Prof Daniel Goh Pei Siong (Non-Constituency Member): Mdm Chair, as we move towards a car-lite Singapore and improve our public transportation system to make it as cost-effective, reliable and comfortable as it was before, more individuals would choose to travel by bus and train rather than drive. However, it would take a generation to wean cars from our culture. For some, owning a car would remain an aspiration or a status symbol. For many others, owning a car is felt as a necessity, especially young families.

In a car-lite Singapore, cars will become even more a scarcity than it is today. Therefore, the socio-economic inequality and wealth gap between Singaporeans will become reflected in car ownership. The Government created Category A or Cat A for social equity reasons and had to re-categorise it recently to keep the Category for mass-market car buyers after luxury car buyers swamped the category and drove up prices. This will become a cat-and-mouse game between the re-categorisation of Cat A and the re-engineering of luxury makes to fit Cat A, especially in car-lite Singapore.

Therefore, for a fairer COE system, would the Government consider adding a surcharge to the COE for cars owned by a single-generation household beyond the first car and a multi-generation household beyond the second car? Like the Additional Buyer Stamp Duty for the property market, a carefully calibrated COE surcharge would help to reduce over-consumption on the part of the wealthy and help achieve some equity in the car market, especially in favour of young middle-income families. I understand a version of such a proposal was considered and rejected in 2013 by LTA after public consultation due to the belief that it would be difficult to implement. If this is to be the reason again, would the Ministry explain the difficulties in implementation?

COE for Motorcycles

Mr Muhamad Faisal Bin Abdul Manap (Aljunied): Madam, I have previously made the call to review the COE for motorcycles and, in particular, abolishing it for motorcycles in the class 2B Category whose engine capacity does not exceed 200cc. Another colleague of mine had also touched on this issue during last year's COS debate.

Many Singaporeans utilised their lower capacity motorcycles for work and to feed their families. As such, an abolition or review of the COE will be a much-needed boost for them, especially in the weakening economy.

Presently, a class 2B motorcycle will cost an average of $11,000, with the Category D or Cat D COE costing an average of $6,106 in 2015. This is three times higher compared to the average in 2011 which was $2,098. The then Minister of Transport Mr Lui Tuck Yew, in a response to my question on whether LTA will consider splitting the COE for motorcycles into three categories according to the engine capacity of the motorcycles, which correspond to the class 2, 2A and 2B licences, said that, "splitting would result in a much smaller quota in each sub-category and this may lead to more volatility in quota and prices."

I would like to propose that the available Cat D quota for class 2B, class 2A and class 2 motorcycles be allocated in accordance with the percentage of these vehicles on our road. This means to say that if the average class 2B motorcycle population on our road is 75%, then 75% of the available Cats D to E quotas will be allocated to class 2B motorcycles, adjusted according to the demand. I believe this move will address many of the concerns, as expressed in the Minister's reply to my Parliamentary Question.

Secondly, I would like to touch on the present COE renewal term for motorcycles. An estimated 40.1% of the total renewal in 2015 chose a 10-year renewal term, compared to an estimated average of 63.4% between 2010 and 2014. Due to higher COE prices, more motorcycle owners are compelled to renew their COE every five years instead of 10. I would like to propose that the motorcycle owners who have earlier chosen a five-year renewal term be offered the option to renew their COE for another five years which, I understand, the present policy does not allow.

Madam, these measures, to improve the present policy, will address and mitigate the financial burden of our fellow Singaporeans who rely on their motorcycles to make a livelihood. I hope the Ministry will consider them.

Motorcycle COEs

Mr Kwek Hian Chuan Henry (Nee Soon): I thank the Minister and his colleagues for sharing with us MOT's vision for the future. Transportation is very challenging and we appreciate MOT's hard work. I would like to talk about the issue of motorcycle COEs today.

Motorcycle COE prices have increased significantly since 2014, even though our COEs for cars have largely stayed the same in terms of pricing. Many motorcyclists in my constituency shared with me that in times of peak congestion, for example, at traffic light junctions, motorcyclists in Singapore ride in between cars. If so, this means that motorcycles could lead to a smaller impact on peak congestions than many of us previously assumed. Since we are re-evaluating our overall traffic pricing model with the upcoming satellite ERP system, can we consider increasing COEs for motorcycles by perhaps 5%-15%? This could decrease the motorcycle COE prices considerably, without increasing the impact on congestions significantly. I look forward to hearing MOT's view on this matter.

COEs for Commercial Vehicles

Mr Yee Chia Hsing (Chua Chu Kang): Mdm Chair, business owners have complained about the high cost of Category C or Cat C COEs for commercial vehicles. In fact, for the first bidding in February and March this year, we have a perverse situation where the price of Cat C COEs is higher than Cat B COEs for bigger passenger cars.

The main reason for the high cost of Cat C COEs is that the quota set aside for Cat C is reduced by the number of vehicles registered under the Early Turnover Scheme, which encourages commercial vehicle owners to switch to cleaner models.

The high cost of COEs for commercial vehicles not only affects companies but even sole proprietors, such as hawkers and wet market stall-holders. One stall-holder selling fish at the wet market told me that he is going to retire once the COE for his van expires because a new van would cost $80,000 to $100,000 and he will not be able to recoup the cost selling a few "ikan kuning" for $3.

For the current quarter, there should have been more than 4,000 Cat C COEs. However, as 90% of the COEs used under the Early Turnover Scheme are deducted from the Cat C quota and there are more than 3,000 vehicles registered under this scheme, the number of Cat C COEs available for bidding is substantially reduced to less than 1,000 for the quarter; or about 300 per month. If we do not adjust the current formula, we may even end up with a situation where there may be no Cat C COEs available for bidding when there is a high number of vehicles registered under the Early Turnover Scheme.

How can we justify a deviation from the formula? First, quotas for Cat E draws from Cat A to Cat D equally. Currently, each of Cat A to Cat D contributes 10% of their quota to Cat E. This percentage has been reduced recently but was as high as 25% in 2012. So, over the years, while Cat C for commercial vehicles has contributed quota to Cat E, most of the COEs under the Cat E were used for bigger passenger cars. While drivers of bigger passenger cars have alternatives, such as taking public transport or switching to a smaller car, there are no alternatives available for commercial vehicle users.

Secondly, the Early Turnover Scheme was meant to benefit commercial vehicle users, but because the number of Cat C COEs available for bidding was so small, we ended up squeezing supply, pushing up the price and then giving them a discount to the high price.

Third, because of the factors mentioned above, even though our economy has grown substantially since 2008, the number of commercial vehicles on our roads has remained constant at around 150,000 over the past seven years. As our economy grows, it is logical that the number of commercial vehicles must grow in tandem to support our businesses.

To help businesses and for the reasons mentioned, I urge MOT to do a comprehensive review of the way COEs for commercial vehicles are determined. Meanwhile, we should consider adjusting the formula such that a higher percentage for the Early Turnover Scheme is deducted from Cat E.

The Chairman: Mr Ang Hin Kee; not here. Senior Minister of State Ng Chee Meng.

The Senior Minister of State for Transport (Mr Ng Chee Meng): Mdm Chairperson, I thank Members for their questions on car ownership, and taxi and chauffeured services.

As Minister Khaw noted, the emergence of new technology is transforming our transport system. Nowhere is this more evident than in the area of point-to-point transport services, especially in the area where taxis are providing this service today.

Since I joined MOT some six months ago, I have had the pleasure of getting to know some of our 55,000 active taxi drivers. Our taxi drivers take great pride in their profession. Good taxi drivers know their routes and where and when customers are likely to be waiting. They plan their routes well, try very hard to avoid traffic jams and provide good customer service.

Singaporeans recognise that, generally, our taxi industry has served their needs adequately. For the past three years, in our annual Taxi Customer Satisfaction Survey, more than 90% of respondents say that they are satisfied with taxi services. This, of course, is, in large part, due to our taxi drivers.

1.15 pm

Our taxi drivers are embracing new technologies. For example, more are taking bookings via apps. The number of pre-booked taxi trips has increased by 50% over the last three years, with the bulk of this increase coming from bookings via apps. This is partly because our taxi companies have improved their own booking apps, with smarter algorithms to match commuters' needs with the drivers. They have done this more efficiently and better. Third-party taxi apps, on the other hand, have helped to aggregate supply and demand at the industry level.

As a result, both taxi commuters and drivers have benefited. Taxi drivers, especially those from the smaller taxi companies, tell me that they get more jobs from bookings and earn more. Indeed, taxi drivers' incomes have increased continuously over the past three years.

However, not all the levers for responding to the new environment are in the taxi companies' and drivers' hands. The Government will play its part. One common feedback I receive from taxi drivers is that the training curriculum for the Taxi Driver Vocational Licence (TDVL) should be updated to reflect technological developments. I agree. For example, we should no longer focus as much on memorising the street directory for route planning. We should instead also teach our drivers to use GPS and online navigational tools. In addition, we can deliver more training online, rather than in the classroom. I have, therefore, asked LTA to shorten the TDVL course with appropriate modifications.

I have also asked LTA to exempt good drivers who do not have any demerit points from having to attend mandated refresher courses. I hope this incentive can lead to better services which would, ultimately, benefit commuters. It will be a win-win situation.

Technology has also transformed chauffeured services to become an attractive alternative to taxi services. The entry of Uber and GrabCar has made chauffeured services more accessible to the general public. They have disrupted the industry. Mobile apps can now match individual passengers with a chauffeured car service quickly and on a per-trip basis, rather than on a per-hour basis or perday basis, as it was previously in the chauffeured industry.

Today, an estimated 8,000 to 10,000 drivers provide chauffeured services during peak hours. This has effectively increased the supply of point-to-point transport services by about a third during these hours. Many commuters I have met have told me that they really appreciate how chauffeured services supplement taxi services, especially during periods when taxis are in short supply.

Most of the drivers providing chauffeured services are part-timers. One such driver, Mrs Rennu Mahajan, a mother to two sons and also a real estate agent, shared that she has been a part-time GrabCar driver since August 2015. She explained to me that she enjoys the flexible hours where she can have her time with family while also earning some extra income in a rather quiet real estate market.

The growth of chauffeured services has benefited commuters, but the new competition has understandably caused some disquiet amongst some taxi drivers. While Mr Ang Hin Kee did not quite raise the issues in Parliament today, in our course of discussion when he was representing NTA, we had discussed many pertinent points about the disrupting effect on the taxi drivers, so I will take the time now to address some of these points.

The responses from some cities like Paris, Brussels and Rio de Janeiro have taken what I think is the wrong approach, by creating protectionist regulations or banning chauffeured services entirely. Such an approach ultimately leads to a poorer outcome for commuters and risks fossilising the taxi industry.

Fortunately for us, we are in a much better position. Our taxi industry has generally been well-run, based on sound market principles and not excessively regulated. We do not rely on a medallion system or an expensive taxi permit licensing system to limit the entry of new taxis or drivers. Therefore, our taxi drivers are not in heavy debt, unlike some in Paris or Florence where a taxi driver must pay anywhere from €200,000 to €300,000 euros just for the privilege or the right to provide taxi services. We have opened up our industry and deregulated fares for many years now and so the industry in Singapore has remained competitive and market-responsive. With our good foundation, we are better able to move with the times and reap the benefits of technology improvements and innovations.

Nevertheless, with the growth of apps like Uber and GrabCar, some basic regulations are needed to ensure that the commuters' interests, particularly safety, are taken care of. Hence, LTA will introduce a new Private Hire Car Driver Vocational Licensing framework, PDVL. Like for the Taxi Driver Vocational Licence, this framework ensures that drivers providing chauffeured services undergo sufficient training on safety and the regulations for providing such services. Applicants will also undergo background screening and be subjected to a demerit point system for errant conduct, like touting or soliciting street-hail jobs.

As the profile of private hire car drivers is quite different from taxi drivers, the eligibility criteria for their respective licences will not be exactly the same. As per current criteria, private hire car drivers must either be employed as a driver in a limousine company or be registered as an owner of a chauffeured services company. For the safety of commuters, applicants for the licence must have a minimum driving experience of two years.

We recognise that the TDVL curriculum covers a substantial part of the PDVL curriculum. Hence, we will make it easy for taxi drivers to convert their TDVL to a dual TDVL-PDVL licence. They will only need to undergo a short briefing on the chauffeured services industry and regulations unique to the industry. This will allow them to easily switch between taxi driving and providing chauffeured services using private hire cars.

The Singapore Taxi Academy will continue to be the training provider for the TDVL. LTA will later decide on who would provide the PDVL.

In order to strengthen enforcement against errant drivers, private hire cars providing chauffeured services will have to be registered with LTA and they will display a distinctive, tamper-evident decal that will be visible from the car's exterior. This will also help to assure commuters that the vehicle is, indeed, registered with LTA. LTA will make more detailed announcements later today.

We have taken a practical, balanced and minimalist approach in these new regulations. They will ensure that we meet our key objectives of protecting commuters' interests and safety, allowing the point-to-point transport industry to continue to grow and innovate and also, at the same time, helping our taxi industry adjust to new and disruptive "sharing" technologies.

Let me now turn to the Certificate of Entitlement (COE) and Electronic Road Pricing (ERP) policy questions raised by Members.

Mr Leon Perera asked about the next-generation ERP system. As LTA had announced, the system is being developed and will be implemented from 2020. This new system will open up many opportunities to improve our transport system, beyond congestion management. There is, of course, potential to offer added-value services to motorists, such as using it to replace the paper coupon usage for roadside parking, getting more accurate and real-time traffic information, providing such real-time information to motorists and also including enhancements to the Off-Peak Car schemes.

Mr Perera also raised concerns about privacy under the next-generation ERP. LTA takes this issue very seriously. For the purposes of traffic management, only aggregated data will be used by LTA and we will also ensure that the appropriate data security technologies and controls are put in place for all data use. MHA has already addressed the ERP 2.0 for security uses and I will not go further into that. Mr Perera has made some good suggestions that MOT will also take on board to study as we look at the renewal of the ERP system.

Mr Muhamad Faisal Abdul Manap shared his concern regarding COEs for motorcycles and suggested different forms to make the Cat D motorcycle COE framework better. Mr Henry Kwek suggested riding on the introduction of the next-generation ERP system to consider increasing COE quotas for motorcycles, on the basis that ,being smaller in size, they contribute less to congestion.

First, I would like to point out that the lesser contribution of motorcycles to congestion is already accounted for in the lower ERP rates they pay, compared to other vehicle types. In addition, owners of motorcycles enjoy several concessions, such as lower taxes, compared to car owners.

On the specific suggestion of allowing Cat D owners to have unlimited shorter-term renewal, currently, COE tenures are all fixed at 10 years for all categories and, as a concession, vehicle owners are allowed a five-year renewal on the condition that they deregister their vehicle thereafter.

Allowing repeated short-term renewals for motorcycles, however attractive, favours the incumbent owners and delays timely deregistration, and this reduces the quota for potential new buyers of motorcycles. It can also lead to older and potentially more pollutive motorcycles remaining on our roads. This is a phenomenon that we actually see today, where older motorcycles are kept on the roads for a long time, polluting the air. While these suggestions are on the table, we will continue to study this and see how we can make the Cat D framework better.

But, ultimately, the COE system is designed to help control Singapore's vehicle population, given the land constraints. As Minister Khaw has explained, there is very limited room for us to grow the overall vehicle population, whether it is for cars or motorcycles. We should, therefore, be very cautious about increasing the COE supply in one form or another. Instead, we should be encouraging Singaporeans to move towards public transport. Having said that, I do know that COE is a hot topic and LTA does regularly review the COE framework to keep the system updated.

Assoc Prof Daniel Goh suggested levying a COE surcharge on multiple COEs registered to a household. Indeed, he pointed out that this is not a new suggestion. MOT has consulted the public extensively in 2013 on this issue and the outcome of the discussion was that this form of surcharge or the form of proposal given by Assoc Prof Daniel Goh would be very easy to circumvent. It would also inadvertently penalise households that are larger. LTA had, therefore, decided not to implement such a measure back in 2013 after extensive consultation. All the considerations and findings had been shared and discussed with Singaporeans.

Mr Ang Wei Neng and Mr Yee Chia Hsing have offered suggestions to address the trend of Cat E COEs being used mainly to register Cat B cars. The Cat E provides flexibility in the COE system by allowing the vehicle mix to evolve in response to market demand. While most of the Cat E COEs in recent years have gone to Cat B, this has not been the case always. For instance, Cat E COEs were routinely used to register Cat C vehicles between the years 2008 and 2010, when Cat C COE prices exceeded that of Cats A and B COE prices. We also saw this in recent COE bidding exercises just this year.

1.30 pm

Nonetheless, to maintain a more stable supply of COEs in each category, we had lowered the Cat E contribution rate from 25% previously to 20% back in 2012 and further to 15% in 2013 and to 10% in February last year. We are not keen on lowering the contribution rate to zero as it is still helpful to keep some fluidity within the system, so that COEs can still move across different categories to meet demand. Again, the COE system, as I have said, is one area that LTA monitors closely and we will continue to study this area with all the suggestions that are given.

On the impact of the Early Turnover Scheme (ETS) on Cat C quotas and premiums, while the ETS reduces the quota available for bidding, it also reduces the actual demand for new Cat C COEs. This is because when an ETS-eligible vehicle is deregistered, that COE can be used to register a new vehicle within a one-month period. This means that the owner of the ETS-eligible vehicle would already have a COE obtained in this manner and would not need to bid for a fresh COE for his or her new vehicle. In fact, what we have observed is that Cat C COE prices have seen a slight downward trend generally since the introduction of the ETS in April 2013.

Mr Ang Wei Neng also asked if we should consider smoothening the supply of Cats A and B COE quotas in the coming year. We have studied this issue extensively. It is really difficult to determine the optimal amount of quota supply to hold back and determine the right time to release the withheld quota back into the system. The risks of inadvertently causing even more volatility in COE premiums are very real. In any case, even our projections were not right on target. Recently, many more car owners have decided to renew their COEs and this has tempered the previously expected increases in Cats A and B COE supply by more than 10% in the last two quarters. Hence, we feel that it is better that we leave it to the market to determine the supply of quotas.

To conclude, a car-lite Singapore does not mean a carless Singapore. Car-lite is about creating an eco-system of transport options in the form of good quality public transport, first-and-last-mile options and point-to-point services like taxis and chauffeured services, so that Singaporeans feel that their commuting needs can be met without owning a car.

Importantly, it also requires a change in mindset, lifestyle and culture to one of sustainable, smart and green mobility. As Minister Khaw and Senior Minister of State Josephine Teo have stated, we have started the journey and, together, we ask Singaporeans to come along this journey with all of us to make our transportation system better and greener for the future.

Strategic Air and Maritime Hub

Mr Zaqy Mohamad (Chua Chu Kang): Mdm Chair, Singapore's status as a major trade and business hub in Asia is heavily dependent on our air and sea connectivity for us to provide easy access to people, goods and capital. In line with this, the Government's announcements to build Terminal 5, a third runway at Changi Airport, as well as a new port in Tuas, are designed to build our capacity as an air and maritime hub in Southeast Asia. Can the Ministry elaborate on what are the new capabilities that will be developed as part of these developments that can benefit and differentiate Singapore as a maritime and air hub and for businesses to look forward to?

Last year, Singapore also saw the sale of its national liner, NOL, to a foreign entity. With the sale of NOL, what are some of MOT's plans to ensure that we do not lose container volumes and that the sale would not adversely impact our logistics sector, in particular, in the mid to long term, where the new entity's private sector interest may change due to competitive or business priorities? How does the sale of NOL impact our position as a strategic maritime hub, given that a foreign entity now has better access to our strategic port facilities?

The redevelopment of our strategic plan and maritime capabilities would enhance our economic and transport standing in the region. But it is also important that these developments provide for meaningful business and jobs for Singaporeans. What are the expected new jobs and business opportunities that these hubs will bring to Singapore and what are the Ministry's manpower development plans to provide these enhanced sectors with a Singaporean Core? How can we get young Singaporeans also excited about the prospects of working in these transport hubs, given that these are not typical professions that our young look forward to? I think there is that scope to make it sexier.

Challenges Budget Airline Crew Face

Mr Ang Hin Kee: Mdm Chair, air travel is now made more affordable due to the popularity of low-cost carriers or the so-called budget airlines. Through interactions with the budget airline staff in my capacity as an advisor to one of the airline house unions, I understand that the operating mode of low-cost carriers can potentially generate high levels of stress and fatigue amongst the flight crew.

Budget airlines typically keep costs down by deploying the flight, cabin crew and aircraft in the most economically efficient manner. Furthermore, these low-cost carriers may get more red-eye flights, as well as less favourable arrival and departure timings, with short turn-around flights as well.

By that, it may mean that the pilots have tight rosters and operate at or near maximum flight and duty time limits. As for the cabin crew, they may have to work extra hard to turn-around the plane within shorter timelines.

Staff should have sufficient rest periods during duty time to perform at an optimal level, so that neither service delivery nor the well-being of crew is compromised. With hectic working hours, safety and welfare conditions of the airline crew should be looked into.

Currently, there is little data or research done in this area. Will the Ministry consider embarking on a study to understand the needs, challenges and stress faced by the crew in budget airlines, as well as full-service airlines?

The Chairman: Senior Minister of State Josephine Teo.

Mrs Josephine Teo: Mdm Chair, I thank Mr Zaqy Mohamad for his interest in strengthening Singapore's position as a global aviation and maritime hub. Together, the direct economic contribution of these two sectors amounts to 13% of our GDP. Their indirect contribution is much larger. For example, our financial services, tourism, manufacturing and logistics sectors are considerably enhanced because of our position as aviation and maritime hubs.

Let me start by providing an update on aviation. Our air hub now provides good jobs to some 55,000 people. The dedication and pride of these staff have made Changi Airport the most-awarded airport worldwide for passenger experience. As a result, passenger traffic has continued to grow. Thanks in part to a rebound in tourist arrivals from key markets, such as China, Thailand and Australia, a record 55.4 million passengers flowed through Changi in 2015. Airfreight volumes, which have been lacklustre everywhere, still managed a 0.5% growth.

We continue to be optimistic about Changi's prospects. Air travel in the Asia Pacific is projected to double over the next two decades. We have also put in place policies to ensure that Changi remains a leading air hub and continues to provide good global connectivity for our people and businesses. If Asia grows as projected, passenger traffic through Changi can also be expected to grow at between 3% and 4% annually over the next two decades.

A key plank of our strategy to ride this growth momentum is to expand Changi Airport. Terminal 4 is on track to open in the second half of 2017 and Jewel Changi Airport in 2019. Works to operationalise a three-runway system are also going well, with Changi Airport Group (CAG) having awarded the first construction contract in October 2015. We expect the three-runway system to be operational in the early 2020s.

The centrepiece in positioning Changi Airport for the future is Terminal 5. Since finalising its concept plan in 2014, we have been engaging the aviation community to develop a robust and flexible design that will stand the test of time. This is a mammoth task, as Members will know by now, that when T5 is fully developed, it will, in fact, be bigger than Terminals 1, 2 and 3 combined. So, you take Terminals 1, 2 and 3 today, put them together and imagine what Terminal 5 is going to be like. With Terminals 1, 2 and 3 today, if you just add them up, it is 66 million passengers. After Jewel Changi Airport, actually Terminal 1 should be able to handle a little bit more. So, that is the scale that we are talking about.

Terminal 5 will open in the late 2020s and be operational till about 2050 before a major upgrade is due. It will have to last us much longer than that, but around 2050, that is when you can have a major upgrade. The architects for the design have a heavy responsibility; they will be appointed within the next one to two years.

As was the case when we moved our airport from Paya Lebar to Changi, the expansion of our air hub will create many good jobs for Singaporeans and business opportunities for our companies, in areas ranging from airport management to aircraft maintenance.

But we are also mindful that with our manpower constraints, quantum improvements in productivity are needed. Efficiency-enhancing innovations must be incorporated into the new facilities at Changi as well as existing ones. These efforts will be complemented by programmes to attract Singaporeans to take up aviation careers and continuously upgrade their skills. The bottom line is this: for our air hub, we must always be ready to take advantage of improved technologies as they become available.

One aspect of aviation which requires constant and careful attention is safety. Most of us do not have to think too much about it and that is only because many other people in aviation spend a great deal of time and resources to make sure that we get to fly safely. Therefore, I am glad that Mr Ang Hin Kee has asked about rest, welfare, training and other needs of low-cost carrier crew, because it is, ultimately, about safety.

All Singapore carriers, both full-service and low-cost carriers, are required to meet the same safety standards for fatigue management and crew training and competency promulgated by the Civil Aviation Authority of Singapore (CAAS). These standards are based on scientific research and studies and consistent with the requirements of the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO). You have to set the standards and what are the standards based on? You have got to do studies. And you have to leverage on other studies that are present, or do your own studies. Most of our airlines have done their own studies.

In particular, there are mandatory rest periods between duty periods to ensure that the crew have sufficient rest. All airlines are also required to have structured training and competency frameworks and ensure that their crew maintain currency in their operational duties. Tests are conducted annually to ensure that crew members have the necessary competencies.

Rules aside, it is penny-wise and pound-foolish for anyone involved in aviation to take chances with safety. It has very much to do with culture. That is why in the Singapore air hub, we instil and reinforce a safety culture through stringent independent audits and regular exercises.

Another area where safety matters a great deal is in air traffic management (ATM). As Members know, CAAS manages the airspace known as the Singapore Flight Information Region (FIR). The Singapore FIR, which was assigned by ICAO in 1946, has seen air traffic grow by leaps and bounds.

Last year, it handled some 650,000 flights, which are 50% more than 10 years ago. Six hundred and fifty thousand flights that our Singapore FIR manages, flying through our skies. But of this number, around 40% were over-flights, meaning that they neither landed at nor departed from Changi; they are just over-flights. They are part of the air connectivity of other countries. By 2025, it is projected that more than a million flights will fly through the Singapore FIR annually.

1.45 pm

Given the importance of the Singapore FIR to the international aviation community – it is not just for us, it is for the international aviation community – Singapore takes its responsibility as the FIR manager very seriously. To ensure the highest levels of safety and efficiency and to prepare for the growth in regional air traffic, CAAS invests heavily to enhance our ATM capabilities.

For example, our pool of air traffic controllers has expanded and will grow further from 380 today to 600 within the next five years. Our state-of-the-art ATM system – the third-generation Long Range Radar and Display System (LORADS III) – is one of the most advanced in the world. We continually incorporate advanced technologies, such as Automatic Dependent Surveillance-Broadcast (ADS-B), which allows CAAS to extend tracking of aircraft beyond radar coverage. This, in turn, allows us to provide better ATM services to more aircraft to fly safely within a block of airspace. From 2018, we expect to also use satellite technology to track aircraft.

With a firm eye on the future, CAAS is commissioning significant research and development efforts in ATM. It has embarked on an initiative to develop Singapore as a Centre of Excellence for ATM by setting aside $200 million to fund research and development projects. Within Southeast Asia, this is the only cluster of research and development focusing on ATM. In less than three years, the initiative has built up a pool of more than 50 researchers and funded more than 20 projects.

The investment has started to bear fruit. For example, CAAS is working with its counterparts in Thailand and Hong Kong to develop a concept to better manage air routes with heavy traffic. Typically, air traffic controllers worry about getting departing flights out on time, but not whether there could be bunching when these flights arrive at their destinations. So, as an air traffic controller, if you have a job to get a flight out, your job is to make sure it gets out on time. But you never really worried about what happens when it arrives at the destination airport and if there could be bunching.

This collaboration will allow air traffic controllers at both the departure and arrival airports to share information and adjust the departure times of flights to avoid bunching at both ends. This is especially helpful for busy routes which will get more congested as regional air traffic grows; it will minimise delays and optimise capacity usage at each airport – and we know airport capacity is very expensive. The concept is now undergoing operational trials. We intend to pair up with more airports so we can manage the growing air traffic in our region more efficiently.

As all fair-minded users of our air navigation services can attest, CAAS air traffic controllers conduct their operations professionally and objectively, in accordance with international standards and best practices. With the help of technology and research insights, our controllers will raise their game and uphold the trust and confidence of the international aviation community using the Singapore FIR.

On this note, let me reiterate that FIR boundaries are designated by ICAO based on technical and safety considerations to ensure air traffic safety and efficiency. Inevitably, FIRs cross national airspace boundaries and air traffic controllers are expected to consistently and professionally handle aircraft movements in their designated FIRs, irrespective of who owns the airlines, where the flights originate from or are headed.

If FIR boundaries were based on state boundaries alone, we would see fragmentation of regional airspaces. This means breaking them up into smaller pieces with more parties managing the airspaces, more complexity, multiple points of coordination and, certainly, more safety risks.

In fact, fragmentation of regional airspaces runs counter to calls by the international aviation community, particularly the airlines which have to operate the flights, for more seamlessly-integrated airspaces. Europe is taking the lead on this move, with the Single European Sky vision being one such example.

Indeed, with air traffic in ASEAN projected to grow strongly, it is all the more important that airspaces in our region be more integrated, not less. We need to enable more aircraft to fly safely and efficiently within the same volume of airspace. If we cannot do so, we will fail to capture the opportunities that aviation connectivity provides to all our economies.

It was, therefore, far-sighted that ASEAN Leaders called for the implementation of a Seamless ASEAN Sky when they met last year. Singapore is committed to this worthy goal.

Mdm Chair, let me now move on to the maritime sector. The shipping industry, which anchors our maritime sector, has been in difficult waters for several years now. For the first time since the 2009 Global Financial Crisis, PSA saw container volumes decline last year. Charter rates for offshore and dry bulk carriers have come under intense pressure due to weakened demand.

Nevertheless, the medium- to longer-term outlook is positive. Over the years, we have made significant gains in building up various aspects of our International Maritime Centre. It is today more multi-faceted and vibrant than before, with activities ranging from maritime insurance to LNG bunkering. Moreover, the maritime community here is resilient and adaptable.

Employment levels in the maritime sector have also remained stable at around 170,000. With Government support, we believe that recovery in shipping will return and broad-based growth momentum will pick up again.

To lend a helping hand to shippers, the Maritime and Port Authority of Singapore (MPA) enhanced the port dues concession to offshore support vessels in November last year. Last week, MPA extended the concession to dry bulk carriers. MPA has also granted an additional 10% port dues concession to container vessels calling at Singapore.

Taken together with existing concessions, the full slate of concessions is expected to yield $18 million in annual savings for shipping companies. It is not a lot of money but I am told that they are nonetheless well appreciated by the industry.

In spite of the current headwinds, Singapore's International Maritime Centre continues to stay ahead of the competition. For two years in a row, Singapore has topped the Baltic/Xinhua international shipping centre development index, which ranks the relative performance of maritime centres around the world. In addition, our port has just been voted "Best Seaport in Asia" for the 27^th time.

These accolades were not easy to come by and we do not take them for granted, even though we got it for the 27th time. They are a result of careful nurturing of a robust maritime ecosystem that has taken many years. Today, Maritime Singapore is home to over 130 international shipping groups and more than 5,000 maritime establishments.

As in all business sectors, corporate restructurings are not uncommon. The strength of our maritime cluster does not depend on whether the companies are Singapore-owned but whether they see value in being anchored here. For maritime businesses which can have very long investment horizons, the key is that our policies must be sound and consistent over time.

Mr Zaqy Mohamad asked about the sale of NOL. We all feel a bit "sayang" because it is like marrying off a daughter that has long been a flag-bearer of our maritime sector. But at the same time, let us also recognise who the suitor is and the way the marriage could work out.

The merged entity draws on the complementary strengths of both groups and provides a firmer footing for them to compete with the giants. NOL brings something to the table, CMA-CGM brings something to the table that the other party does not quite have. In its proposal to acquire NOL, CMA-CGM has made it clear its intention to establish its regional head office in Singapore and commit more volumes through Singapore. This is a testament to Singapore's importance as a maritime hub and will reinforce Singapore's leadership position in container shipping.

As Mr Zaqy Mohamad pointed out, it is crucial that Singapore continues to enhance our value proposition as a maritime hub. Indeed, we are taking proactive steps to develop the key capabilities. And I will touch on them now.

First, we will continue to invest in building port capacity that meets the industry's long-term needs. Works on the Pasir Panjang Terminal are on schedule and reclamation works for the new Tuas Terminal are progressing well.

Infrastructure aside, technology is an enabler to improve capabilities, as well as the quality of maritime jobs. We are investing in technology as a multiplier of capacity, to boost productivity and transform current jobs into higher quality, higher value-added jobs.

A good example can be found in PSA. In many ports, conventional rail-mounted gantry cranes are individually manned and operated from booths that sit atop each crane. However, PSA has introduced new systems at Pasir Panjang Terminal where a single crane specialist can remotely monitor and control the operations of several cranes, from the comfort of an air-conditioned control room. Better comfort means better concentration and higher productivity.

The new Tuas Terminal will be a greenfield site that offers exciting opportunities for the use of smart technologies. For example, instead of prime mover drivers, driverless vehicles will ferry container boxes around our port. This will provide new job opportunities in engineering and software development. Meanwhile, the next-generation Vessel Traffic Management System to be deployed at Tuas will need skilled data analysts and data scientists to predict congestion hotspots and to avoid potential collisions.

To spur the development of a vibrant maritime technology cluster in Singapore, MPA has been actively encouraging R&D and innovation through the Maritime Innovation and Technology or MINT Fund. A total of $150 million has been set aside to support numerous research organisations and projects.

One such organisation is the Energy Research Institute at NTU where a new Maritime Energy Test Bed facility was launched last November in collaboration with the Singapore Maritime Institute. This facility will help build up R&D capabilities in areas concerning ship emissions and abatement, alternative marine fuels and energy storage.

The MINT Fund is also helping to put Singapore at the forefront of the global push towards cleaner marine fuels. Supported by the MINT Fund, Singapore company Billion Miles Pte Ltd is pioneering a methanol fuel blend system for marine engines to run on methanol. The attractiveness of this system is that it requires only minor modifications to conventional bunkering infrastructure on top of vessels. If the concept works, it will mean lower cost for ship owners to meet the higher standards for clean energy use that they must comply with in the future.

I am pleased to announce that MPA will top up the MINT Fund by a further $50 million and extend its term to 2021. Part of the MINT Fund's enhancements will be directed towards encouraging product and solution development for the maritime industry. For instance, with the support of the MINT Fund, local firm Hope Technik developed the Water Spider – a buoyant, waterproof drone that can be deployed to monitor oil spills or support search and rescue operations in Singapore's waters. The MINT Fund will support more of such technologies and use-inspired R&D to further promote maritime innovation.

2.00 pm

Besides harnessing cutting-edge technologies to our advantage, having a highly-skilled workforce sets us apart from our competitors. We will continue to invest in developing manpower for the maritime sector, especially during periods of slow growth. This requires a multi-pronged approach. First, help more Singaporeans know more about jobs and careers in the maritime sector. I note Mr Zaqy Mohamad's point that we have to try and make it more "attractive and sexy", as he said. Second, make sure that those who are interested gain the skills and experience to take on the job opportunities. And, third, support for those in the sector − up-skilling and re-skilling.

With the support of our unions and industry associations, we will do more to raise Singaporeans' awareness of good jobs and rewarding careers in the maritime sector. Indeed, this is one of MPA's priorities for this year. For example, it is organising the inaugural Maritime Youth Festival, where outreach activities will help generate curiosity and interest about the maritime sector amongst our youths.

To complement these outreach efforts, the Singapore Maritime Foundation's Maritime Singapore Connect Office will intensify efforts to profile the maritime sector. It will provide a platform to connect employers, schools, relevant Government agencies, industry associations and other stakeholders. In addition, it will develop an online portal to provide access to information and guidance on maritime careers and training opportunities.

We will also equip Singaporeans with the necessary skills and experience to take advantage of job opportunities in the maritime sector.

MPA will roll out the Internship Reimbursement Scheme to help students gain relevant work experience. The scheme will defray the costs incurred by employers when providing internship placements. One good example is Ms Ong Pei Wen. She shows how internships can help students kick-start their careers. She was a recipient of the MPA Global Internship Award while a student at NTU. Her internship was at Shipowners' P&I Club and her host company was impressed by her good performance and attitude and offered her a job upon graduation.

For those fresh out of school, MPA will reintroduce the Graduates Attachment Programme or GAP in short. GAP seeks to place University, Polytechnic and ITE graduates in participating maritime companies so as to help them gain industry experience. We recognise that companies are under pressure to cut costs amid this downturn. So, MPA will provide monthly stipends to graduates on the programme to encourage companies to take them on board, rather than turn them away.

For Singaporeans looking to make a career switch into the maritime sector, the Maritime Career Conversion Scheme will subsidise training costs and provide wage support. One of the many such individuals who have taken advantage is Mohammad Huzaifah bin Rasidi. Huzaifah was previously a technician working at a shipyard. Peering out at sea from where he worked, he was amazed to see tug boats towing far larger vessels and oil rigs. In February last year, he took the plunge and joined the pioneer batch of trainees for the 15-month tug-master training programme. Huzaifah is now gearing up for his final examinations and looks forward to graduating this year, as a tug-master, sometime in May.

Finally, to encourage up-skilling and re-skilling amongst Singaporeans already in the sector, we will increase co-funding support for maritime companies to send their local employees for selected maritime training courses. All in all, MPA will set aside $12 million for its enhanced manpower initiatives which are expected to benefit some 5,000 Singaporeans. MPA will announce the details of these new programmes shortly.

In closing, Mdm Chair, Singapore and Singaporeans have benefited from our strengths as aviation and maritime hubs. We are committed to enhancing Singapore's connectivity to the world by investing in first-class infrastructure and technologies. At the same time, we will develop a future-ready workforce that will uphold the standing of our twin hubs.

The Chairman: We have a bit of time for clarifications. Er Dr Lee Bee Wah.

Er Dr Lee Bee Wah (Nee Soon): Thank you, Mdm Chair. I am happy to hear from the Minister that for the 17 stations that will be upgraded, they will be more spacious, more seats for elderly residents. I would like to ask the Minister whether it is possible to also take this opportunity to address the problem of the morning sun. Because quite a lot of commuters have been complaining about the hot morning sun; it is very glaring. It is not just from the commuters in Khatib. I have also heard about this from commuters who use Yishun and other stations.

Mr Khaw Boon Wan: Yes, we will try.

Mr Ang Wei Neng: Mdm Chair, I have three clarifications – one for Senior Minister of State Josephine Teo and two for Senior Minister of State Ng Chee Meng. I will keep them short. Senior Minister of State Josephine Teo said that MOT is already working with building owners to encourage them to build linkways to link up with Government-built linkways. But it is up to building owners to decide whether to build the linkways. I suppose the Civil Service Club at Bukit Batok is a Government-owned building. Will MOT encourage the Government to take a lead so that the rest of the building owners from the private sector will also follow?

For the second clarification, I agree with Senior Minister of State Ng Chee Meng that Cat E COEs, at times, are used for Cat C and Cat A vehicles. But the fact remains that the majority of the Cat E COEs, a big majority, are used for Cat B vehicles. It also appears from the speech that MOT is not quite ready to do a reset of the COE distribution across the different categories. So, would Senior Minister of State Ng Chee Meng agree that it is not healthy for Cat B COE to continue to grow in this proportion, beyond 30%, or is it something that the Senior Minister of State would like to see increase beyond 50%?

Lastly, many industry players reckon that COE bidders, particularly the industry players, will likely be more careful in bidding for COEs if we adopt a pay-as-you-bid system. It is not a new topic but I hope the Senior Minister of State would consider doing a trial in one of the categories; perhaps Cat A.

The Chairman: I think it will be wonderful if the clarifications could be as short as the Minister's response, but I know it is a tall order. If you can meet it halfway, it would be fantastic. Senior Minister of State Josephine Teo.

Mrs Josephine Teo: Mdm Chair, yes, we will also try.

Mr Ng Chee Meng: Mdm Chair, I will keep it short as well. We will let the market decide. Ultimately, even though there are imperfections, the current COE mechanism is the best that we have today. As the Member rightly pointed out, where Cat E COEs have been moved to Cat B, that is the market's decision. If we come back to the fundamental reasons for this allocation, well, I will keep the answer short as well − let the market decide.

Mr Pritam Singh: Mdm Chairperson, my question is to the Senior Minister of State. Should Indonesia be able to address safety and equipment-related concerns with regard to the management of the Flight Information Region (FIR) over the Riau Islands and the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) directs Indonesia to manage that FIR, what impact, if any, will this have on Singapore's position as an aviation hub?

Mrs Josephine Teo: Mdm Chair, it is not a straightforward question. There are many complexities involved. In the first place, the ICAO requires that the parties who are involved should satisfy themselves that, indeed, safety considerations can be fully met. There are many parties involved in our FIR, even though it is Singapore that is managing it. It will not be a simple issue to resolve, but we have to work together and the way in which we think is a positive direction for this subject to develop is towards ASEAN Seamless Sky, where we work together with one another to manage the airspace.

Mr Dennis Tan Lip Fong: I have three clarifications, Mdm Chair. One is on the issue of safety protocols. I have asked about this in one of my cuts. Could the Minister please clarify what are the routine obligations of LTA to check on the MRT operators' observance of safety protocols for maintenance and operations?

Second, I agree with the Minister that we should appreciate the hard work of MRT engineers and workers who are running our MRT system. They are having to cope with the situation caused by legacy issues, such as lack of timely maintenance and parts replacement in the earlier years and failure to provide timely capacity for increase in commutership, all of which can be attributed to the past leadership.

Three, a question for Senior Minister of State Josephine Teo: would the Ministry consider my suggestion of allowing a one-off opportunity for current owners of unauthorised e-bikes which can comply with the new criteria?

Mr Khaw Boon Wan: Mdm Chair, let me take the safety-related questions. As I had stressed in my reply, I have been advised by legal counsel to be careful with what I say because investigations are still going on, so I cannot say too much.

The general safety principle that governs all metros, including SMRT, is that one must isolate the work area/space from any passing train. It does not mean the train cannot pass through the work area but, if it does, then the train has to be manually operated and at slow speed. That is the SOP that covers all operators and that includes SMRT.

Then how come the safety procedure was breached in this instance? That is the subject of the investigation.

Mrs Josephine Teo: Mdm Chair, may I seek a clarification from the Member Mr Dennis Tan? Just to check, Mr Tan, are you asking for an amnesty and, if that is so, are you also suggesting that after the amnesty is granted, the e-bikes which do not meet the criteria continue to be allowed on the paths and on roads?

Mr Dennis Tan Lip Fong: I thank the Senior Minister of State for the clarification. No, I am not asking for an amnesty but I can foresee that under the new rules, perhaps, it is possible that some of the existing unauthorised e-bikes, because they were not the subject of application by their manufacturers to register for authorisation, but perhaps, these e-bikes can comply with the recommended protocols by the Panel. So, for these people, would it be possible that you can have a one-off opportunity for them to come forward to LTA to present their e-bikes for registration?

Mrs Josephine Teo: Mdm Chair, I thank Mr Tan for his clarification. There must be a reason why those e-bikes were not authorised in the first place. Nonetheless, we take his point. We will have to consider the specific instances and take these on board when we draw up the implementation details for e-bike registration.

Mr Ang Hin Kee: Mdm Chair, two clarifications. One, for Senior Minister of State Josephine Teo: earlier she mentioned about safety for budget airline crew and that there are independent studies and there are standards to follow. But somehow or other, the crew themselves may not quite feel that these reports or studies gave them peace of mind. So, will the Ministry consider either publishing these reports or engaging the budget airline crew to assure them that these standards are adequate and that there is no excessive stress faced by them? The passengers who take the flights will feel more comforted that the crew are well taken care of.

The second clarification is for Senior Minister of State Ng Chee Meng: he mentioned earlier that LTA will encourage taxi drivers and taxi operators to change their mindset with regard to third party private hire vehicles. I was wondering if LTA themselves will be bold enough to also change their own mindset with regard to quality of service rules and taxi availability standards. These proxy measures with regard to taxi service standards may, indeed, be obsolete in view of available technology and other measures of taxi services that commuter may want to experience today.

2.15 pm

Mrs Josephine Teo: Mdm Chair, I thank Mr Ang for his suggestion for engagement and better communications. That is always a plus and CAAS will follow up with him.

Mr Ng Chee Meng: I thank the Member for the clarification. Indeed, I do agree with the Member. The quality of service standards and the taxi availability framework is currently undergoing review and would be consistently reviewed to make sure that it is updated and relevant to the evolving market and industry landscape.

Mr Leon Perera: Mdm Chairperson, I will keep it short. Just two points of clarifications to Senior Minister of State Mr Ng. I thank him for addressing some of my points. Firstly, on ERP 2.0, in designing the charging model, will the Ministry consider keeping the effect on total revenue neutral vis-a-vis the current vehicle population and current distances travelled? So, if the vehicle population increases, of course, revenue can increase, but the point of reference should be to keep it neutral to current revenue, since we want it to be mainly for easing congestion, rather than raising revenue.

Second point is: what will the Ministry be doing to work with the taxi companies to ensure that there is a minimum fleet of taxis that can carry wheelchairs, given the expected increase that we will face in the future of elderly Singaporeans who are not ambulatory and will need to go to and from medical appointments more? And also, to ensure that the fares are affordable for the most vulnerable group.

Mr Ng Chee Meng: I thank the Member for the clarification. On the charging model that Mr Perera had asked about, it is too early to say. We are in the preliminary stage. The primary objective of ERP 2.0 is for congestion management; it has never been to raise revenue.

Given the vast amounts of things that we have to study, whether eventually there will be more or less revenue collected, it is too early to say. Let me assure the Member that the primary objective of ERP 2.0 is for congestion management.

On the second point on the composition of the taxi fleet, when the demand goes up, we will be encouraging the taxi fleet to answer to these needs. As for the affordability part of it, MOT, together with MSF, has different programmes for the lower income groups to access certain grants so that they are able to afford such point-to-point services, should they need it.

Mr Muhamad Faisal Bin Abdul Manap: Madam, I would like to clarify on what Senior Minister of State Mr Ng mentioned earlier. He said that any improper tweaking of the current COE scheme may result in an increase of the vehicle population and this contradicts the objective of the COE scheme.

However, Madam, my proposal in asking for an adjustment to the existing Cat D is more towards making a proper and fairer allocation of quotas among the three different classes of motorcycles, according to the demand of the respective classes. Hence, it does not increase the vehicle population. So, I do hope that the Ministry will further study this proposal.

Mr Ng Chee Meng: Madam, I thank the Member for clarifying. I apologise if I got him wrong when he articulated the question. I could not hear the question clearly.

In terms of the engine power, 70% of the motorcycle population are motorcycles below 200cc, and about 30% are those above 200cc. There is a 70:30 split. But if we were to split the COEs into smaller categories, it will bring in rigidity and the subsequent effect will lead to higher volatility of COE prices for motorcycles. That is something we want to avoid.

And for the point on assistance to the lower-income, which I now recall the Member asked as well, can I suggest that we take a more targeted and needs-based approach towards assisting the lower income, outside of the COE system? Because, ultimately, as I have said, the COE system is to allocate the scarce resource of vehicle needs for Singaporeans in a land-scarce Singapore.

The Chairman: Mr Sitoh Yih Pin, do you wish to withdraw the amendment?

Mr Sitoh Yih Pin (Potong Pasir): Madam, I would like to thank Members for their insightful and thoughtful contributions. Further, on behalf of Members, I extend our appreciation to our officers from MOT and our Ministers for answering our questions, as well as sharing with us the future of transportation in Singapore. On that note, Madam, I beg to withdraw my amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

The sum of $1,346,786,800 for Head W ordered to stand part of the Main Estimates.

The sum of $9,459,952,200 for Head W ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates.