Land Transport Authority of Singapore (Amendment) Bill

Mr Speaker, Sir, I support the formalisation of LTA's role to coordinate electric vehicle or EV-related efforts across Singapore. I am pleased to note that the amendments are focused on safety and operational capacity, which were among key technical concerns shared during the Budget debates. I wish to raise four concerns which I hope LTA will look into as they assume their new responsibilities.

First, safety concerns for both motorists and building occupiers and residents, given that most of the charging stations going forward would be located at housing estates and commercial buildings.

With plans to increase the number of charging points, there are some concerns among residents on safety issues – whether this may lead to situations such as electrical overload and overcharging, resulting in fire outbreaks or worse, an explosion.

There have been several cases of fires and explosions caused by PMDs that were charging overnight, whether domestically or overseas. So, some are asking if similar scenarios could happen with EVs left to charge overnight.

May I ask what is being done to safeguard against this? I note that purpose-built EV chargers would be safe but what happens if someone tampers with it or tries to use a non-compatible extension plug, for example?

This brings me to my next point on batteries. A number of high-profile global recalls were made last year over battery fire risk in EVs. EVs are fairly new technology. With the recent boom, engineers are in a global race to design the fastest and cheapest EV batteries. This can result in plenty of revisions along the way, even at the expense of safety.

As technology on the batteries develops, how will LTA allocate the tenders for charging points and types of EV vehicles over the next five to 10 years? How will LTA ensure that the winning tenders are committed to adapting continuously to the evolving technology, with safety and quality at top of mind, and how do we ensure that our charging points can be easily adapted as technology progresses?

With increased deployment of EV charging points in the housing estates, how will agencies like HDB, Town Councils and EMA work together for installation, maintenance and safety issues?

In Toa Payoh Lorong 8, for example, the EV charging points were built with wires cutting across the pedestrian paths. This has posed a safety hazard to residents. This could have been avoided if there had been closer cooperation and consultation prior to this decision. Clearer guidelines and policies must be spelt out for cross-agency collaboration. Otherwise, I fear that, in an emergency, time will be wasted in delegating the responsibilities.

My last point is on national power consumption. An energy department study done in the context of the US found that increased electrification across all sectors of the economy could boost national consumption by as much as 38% by 2050. This is, in large part, due to EVs.

What would the impact of widespread usage of EVs be in Singapore? Do we also expect a surge in electricity usage nationwide and will this affect the capacity capabilities of our power stations in the residential areas? For example, is there a need to upgrade electricity substations to cope with the potential increase in power usage? What about the current underground cables? Are they able to cope with the higher usage?

Mr Speaker, Sir, EVs are the way forward, as demonstrated in many developed economies, so this amendment comes at a timely moment. In the meantime, there should be more conversations and reassurances on the safety issues related to EVs. Moreover, residents' safety and convenience must not be compromised. Mr Speaker, Sir, I support the Bill.

Mr Speaker, Sir, this Bill seeks to amend the Land Transport Authority of Singapore Act to confer on LTA new functions concerning the regulation of safe use of EVs and the development and maintenance of accessible charging points in public and common areas, as well as working with EMA on the area of electric charges for vehicles and the facilitation of the development and maintenance of charging points in the public and common areas.

In my Budget debate speech this year, I had raised, among other related issues, the issue of the critical number of charging points required in all residential, commercial carparks and even other public carparks, as well as the design of the carparks vis-à-vis the locations of the charging points as well as my concern that most of the present HDB public and commercial carparks are not being adequately designed to prevent bottlenecks or congestion caused by more than a few cars waiting for the current few charging units available at each carpark, especially as, currently, the lots with the charging units are placed side by side and usually on the lower floors.

On 1 April 2021, it was reported in The Straits Times that a public tender for the installation of EV charging points at some 200 public carparks across Singapore has drawn 19 bidders. The tender called for bidders to build, operate and maintain more than 600 charging points for 12 years, starting as early as 31 August this year.

I would like to ask the Minister: one, whether the successful bidders are supposed to install the charging points in existing lots in the existing public carparks; two, whether the Government has decided on the minimum number of charging points per public carpark, that is to say, what is the ratio of charging points vis-à-vis the number of carpark lots; three, whether these charging points will be in consecutive lots side-by-side; and, four, whether they include any change of design of the carpark in such a way that any queue waiting for any single lot will not cause any obstruction to other cars leaving the carpark or going to another parking lot.

Next, beyond the importance of having the right carpark infrastructure or making the necessary conversions or adjustments to ensure the carpark design or infrastructure does not by themselves cause any unnecessary obstruction and inconvenience to motorists and other members of the public during charging, I would also like to ask the Minister whether he will consider any of the following actions to encourage people to move their vehicles away from charging stations immediately after charging so that others are not unnecessarily deprived of their use.

One, require service providers to impose heavy payments after charging is done if the vehicle is not removed from the station within a short grace period. Or alternatively, to have carpark authorities impose an escalating fine for motorists continuing to keep the spot occupied after charging and, beyond a short grace period, for example, fines to increase at every 15-minute interval.

Next, I would also like to ask the Minister, for non-landed, private residences and commercial buildings, whether the Government will stipulate a fixed minimum number of charging points in each carpark or what is the ratio of charging points vis-à-vis the number of carpark lots and, if so, for carparks in these non-publicly owned properties as well as public carparks, will the Government stipulate the ratio in any Government regulation.

Mr Speaker, Sir, during the Committee of Supply debate for MSE this year, the hon Mr Lim Biow Chuan raised the issue of MCST needing to obtain approvals from residents via general meetings. Mr Ong Ye Kung replied that there are certain places, such as SP Mobility, Greenlots and Charge+, who are willing to foot the upfront installation fees for EV charges in return for collecting charging revenue for a period.

One of the condominium MCSTs in my constituency has already provided feedback that, given the conditions of the lease of chargers, with one of the companies mentioned by the Minister, they may still need to obtain between 75% and 90% general or special resolution approval from residents for the lease anyway. I hope that the Ministry will look further into this and to provide necessary assistance so that condominiums and their residents will be able to overcome all difficulties arising from the need to obtain adequate general meeting resolution approvals and, in the event of no approvals, to advise them what they should do.

In the meantime, I will also be grateful if the Minister can update us on the Government efforts made so far to ensure that all private condominiums and commercial properties will be able to get adequate support for the installation of charging units beyond the EV Common Charger Grant as well as the adequacy of the grant to all eligible or affected parties. May I also know whether the grant covers any infrastructural works required for the installation charges beyond price and the installation charges?

Mr Speaker, Sir, notwithstanding my questions and concerns, I support the Bill.

Mr Speaker, one of the key sources of carbon dioxide emission is road transportation. Borneo Motors CEO, Jasmmine Wong, shared with me the results of a study they have done internally which shows that Internal Combustion Engine, or ICE, vehicles emit 50% and 25% more carbon dioxide than EVs and hybrid EVs respectively. Tackling the issue of having cleaner energy vehicles on our roads is of great urgency. Mr Speaker, let me start by stating my support for the LTA (Amendment) Bill.

The planning and deployment of EVs involve different Government agencies, and a coordinated approach to the design of policies and regulation as well as stakeholder engagement is critical. Industry players like Borneo Motors and members of the European Chambers' Smart Mobility Committee are all supportive of the Singapore Green Plan 2030 and look forward to collaborating with Government and stakeholders in the eco-system to achieve the goals set.

For today, allow me to highlight three broad themes which will need further dialogue and consultation amongst the stakeholders and the Government.

The first broad theme is around the EV charging infrastructure. The first issue around EV charging infrastructure is the choice of standards. The choice of charging standards will have an island-wide infrastructure impact. It is good to know that the Government has already identified a TR25 Committee put together such a team to look into this.

Of course, globally, there is a flurry of activities in the industry to come up with the technology that will become the industry standard. The jury is still out and there is also the related issue of fast charging or slow charging. The variance between fast and slow charging can range between 20 minutes and seven to eight hours, and the cost of fast charging is estimated to be 30 times the cost of a $10,000 to $12,000 slow charging station. How will Singapore decide on the standard to be used? How will Singapore manage the risks involved with this big bet depending on how battery technologies advance or if other technologies disrupt, for example, hydrogen?

A second issue around EV charging infrastructure is the accessibility of chargers which is a key factor affecting the rate of adoption of EVs. During the Committee of Supply, the Minister for Transport announced that, by 2030, it is planned that there will be 60,000 EV charging points available across the island. What is the planned roll-out of these charging points? Will EV charging be considered a national infrastructure or will the Government leave it to the private sector to decide based on their business models? What will be the design point for the charging network, balancing speed, cost, coverage, convenience and load on the grid? HDB carparks will be a major real estate for charging points. So, will HDB fund the roll-out of the charging infrastructure? How does LTA plan to encourage existing condominiums to put in charging stations since MCST will have to fund the capital costs?

Industry players support a more extensive slow-charging network complemented by a fast-charging network for top-up and emergency. The slow-charging network can be shared or is specific to each EV. The shared model will require consumer acceptance of some level of inconvenience. So, imagine having to drive your EV to a HDB carpark maybe three MRT stations away and then wait for your car to get charged up and then bring it home. So, those are the inconveniences that may appear.

The industry is exploring an option for the installation of the slow chargers to be provided as part of the purchase of the EV, similar to how chargers come with our smartphones today. Does this mean Singapore may need to consider the approach in Japan, where one can buy a car only when one owns a parking lot? If that is so, then the EV charging station is individually owned, which also has the benefit of the charging taking place off-peak and not strain the electricity grid. Is it, however, wasteful since each EV probably only needs to be charged a couple of times a week at most? The dilemma is how best to balance cost, convenience and social acceptance when deciding between all these options.

A third issue around EV charging infrastructure is how to handle range anxiety. With the average driving distance being 50 kilometres a day, one charge can probably hold up for three to four days. That said, access to fast-charging is still needed in the event of "emergencies". In speaking with several mall developers, many are already fitting up a few EV-ready fast-charging stations. There are, however, questions around how many lots to provide optimally and the sharing of these lots by EV drivers.

Perhaps an intelligent app can help to alert the driver that his or her EV is fully charged and higher parking charges will kick in thereafter if the car is not moved. This is but one form of behaviour-changing tactics that could be considered.

To help accelerate provision of fast-charging stations, will the Government consider EV lots to be included in URA's existing Community/Sports Facilities Scheme, or CSFS, which allows Gross Floor Area, or GFA, exemptions? Such carrots should help to make fast-charging stations more accessible at malls, office buildings and new developments. Existing petrol stations and public carparks are also, of course, potential fast-charging sites.

The second broad theme is around re-skilling the mechanics and technicians in the workshops. Singapore needs an EV-ready skilled workforce. It is exciting that MTI and EDB have attracted Hyundai Motors to set up their electric car manufacturing in Singapore. I am sure it will be a highly automated facility but still our Singapore workforce needs to be systematically upskilled to support electrification across all the OEM brands – from manufacturing, service, aftersales – and to ensure that our workers are future-proof. There are new opportunities for our workers in this industry as the EV works on digitalisation and there will be new digital jobs in the auto industry. We hope that the Skills and Jobs Framework in the new clean energy for the auto industry can be in place early to help current workers upskill and next-gen workers be future-ready. The industry is ready to collaborate with our IHLs, SSG and WSG.

The third broad theme is around hybrid being the low hanging fruit to decarbonising on our roads. While EVs offer the largest reduction in carbon dioxide footprint, drivers could take a while to warm up making their first EV purchase. I must declare I do drive a hybrid car. Hybrid presents the lowest hanging fruit to decarbonising our transportation. Hybrid's carbon dioxide emission reduction of 25%, compared to an ICE, is considerable.

Adoption of hybrids is independent of charging infrastructure and the psychological barriers for purchase are significantly lower. To encourage hybrid adoption alongside EV adoption, the industry has a suggestion for LTA to review the COE Category classification for hybrid vehicles. I am told that there are best-in-class hybrid EV powertrains which use a 1.8-litre engine to achieve remarkable carbon dioxide emissions. De-carbonising should not come with a premium COE or a premium road tax.

One other point I would like to bring up is how used cars will be treated. As we pursue the transition to cleaner energy vehicles, with the various policies for new vehicle registration, what regulatory changes will the Government be making with regard to used cars? Will the same penalty policies for C1 and C2 banding guidelines for new cars be applied for used cars, if their emission test results at point of COE renewal fail to meet the mark?

In conclusion, the industry supports the Singapore Green Plan 2030's move to cleaner energy transportation. Singapore is not an early adopter and so there are many best practices and lessons in other cities we can learn from and adapt quickly for our situation. The industry suggests for the Government to use the many levers at its disposal, namely, car taxes, COE quotas and road taxes, grants, rebates and so on as both sticks and carrots to help accelerate cleaner energy vehicle adoption, both hybrid and EV.

The time to act is now. The industry looks forward to participating in MOT and LTA's industry consultation to discuss the above issues, amongst others, and move the agenda into high gear. Notwithstanding the issues and questions raised, Mr Speaker, I support the Bill.

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

The city of Shenzhen in China, for instance, was early to the game in providing direct and indirect subsidies to encourage taxi drivers to go electric. This encourages network effects, where the industry becomes more willing to install charging and maintenance facilities because the city now has a minimum market of 22,000 EVs via taxis.

Such additional incentives are not without precedent because we already are giving some support to some groups in Singapore for vehicles on the basis that they need to use their vehicles for work, such as in the case of the Disabled Persons Scheme, for example, where exemptions are provided from paying COE and Additional Registration Fee (ARF), provided the vehicle meets certain conditions.

Enhancing incentives for high-use drivers to switch to EVs would get us disproportionate traction in achieving our environmental outcomes while buying more time for the development of new public transport infrastructure to attract transitioning drivers of low-utilisation vehicles to switch to EVs.

Next, Mdm Deputy Speaker, we should welcome the reduction in the ARF floor and the revision in the road tax framework, which would come into effect next year for EVs. This is a good first step and will reduce the green premiums EV users have to pay. As per the latest EV incentives announced in Budget 2021, from January 2022 to December 2023, the minimum ARF of $5,000 will be lowered to zero dollars for all EVs – and EVs do not pay fuel excise duties.

Given this, EV owners will be made to pay an additional $700 road tax from 2023 with a phase-in period from 2021. This lump sum tax negates some of the savings derived from the reduced ARF but there will probably still be net savings from these measures for EV owners.

However, the presence and uncertainty of fuel excise duty rebates makes this cost-benefit calculation for switching to EVs more complicated and less predictable going forward. The Workers' Party has argued for a phasing in of the fuel duty hike – and I shall not repeat the arguments here – to ensure that our incentives are having the desired effect.

Would the Government consider setting yearly targets for and publicly keep track of EV charging infrastructure – for instance, chargers per car and chargers per region and the corresponding number of EVs on the road?

Next, Mdm Deputy Speaker, we need more clarity on what the Government's electrification plans are for the Government-owned fleet.

In her reply to my Parliamentary Question in March, Minister Grace Foo said that, "All new purchases for Government-owned fleets will be cleaner and greener where feasible with effect from 2023." I would urge the Government to set clear targets for the electrification of Government-owned vehicles to be in line with the target set for the building of charging infrastructure.

I would also call on the Government to develop a strategy to nudge motorcycle users towards electric motorcycles as these are also high-use vehicles in many cases as these are heavily used in delivery work.

Next, Mdm Deputy Speaker, I would like to talk about the e-waste that EVs will generate. EVs produce considerable e-waste with the higher battery and semiconductor content and the EPR or Extended Producer Responsibility scheme for e-waste will be in place from 1 July 2021. But EV batteries are considered "non-consumer goods" and all producers of batteries are only required to use a licensed waste disposer or e-waste recycling provider. There does not appear to be any clear mandate to recycle but only rules and responsible handling of end-of-life to prevent illegal dumping and so on.

Such EV batteries are goods that can be leased out and returned to the original producer either through car dealerships or private hire fleet or taxi fleet owners. It might be cost-effective for these organisations to reuse and recover materials from batteries rather than dispose of them. We should encourage circularity in our battery production and use.

My parliamentary colleague, Ms He Ting Ru, will draw attention to the importance of early forward planning and creating an eco-system for e-waste recycling for EV batteries. This can be married to the support of our locally rooted recycling and material recovery companies in Singapore since Singapore already has businesses that can do this. In fact, promoting e-waste recovery from batteries could be a competence we could nurture in Singapore so that Singapore-based companies can invest in the region to export this know-how.

Hence, I would like to ask if there are targets to increase EV battery recycling and material recovery and is the Government looking to legislate the end-of-life management of EV batteries to mandate reuse and material recovery rather than disposal?

Next, while we push for our EV transition, it is important to note that better low carbon forms of transport, such as public transport and bike riding, are still far better alternatives in terms of emissions and waste, and it behooves us to not lose sight of this fact in any discussion about promoting EVs. Now is the right time to ask if our current public transport goals are ambitious enough.

One of the key goals in the Land Transport Master Plan 2040 announced in 2019 was to increase the peak hour public transport mode share to 75%. We are on track to meet this target as we appear to have crossed 67% very recently. I would like to ask the Government to review this.

Next, the Government has a commendable commitment to doubling cycling paths to 800 kilometres by 2023, with a target of 1,320 kilometres target for 2030. We should try to frontload our cycling targets in this way, in light of the recent reports of bicycling accidents. The cycling boom during COVID-19 has created an opportunity to foster a cycling culture for health, recreation and climate benefits. We should strike while the iron is hot.

Such an expansion of cycling paths should, of course, take into account nature conservation and there should be safeguards to deter cyclists from going off path into nature areas like the Dairy Farm area, for example.

My parliamentary colleague Mr Dennis Tan has been a passionate advocate for responsible cycling in this House over the years and is an avid cyclist himself. I urge Members to review the suggestions he has made and continues to make. My colleague Ms He Ting Ru will also speak on this theme in her speech on the Bill.

Lastly, Mdm Deputy Speaker, we must be humble and transparent in consultation. LTA recently said that it was in the midst of an industry consultation regarding private sector participation in public charger deployment. But can it do more public consultations regarding other aspects of the EV roll-out?

For instance, it can do more to engage those whose COEs are near expiry. It should also engage members of the public who are about to buy their next car or about to rent a car for private hire driving.

Can the Government also commit to publishing more of its consultations unless there are specific business sensitivity reasons not to do so? I note that in the reply to one of my recent Parliamentary Questions, only 39% of 126 consultations published on REACH over the past five years had their findings or summary of responses published in full.

In conclusion, Mdm Deputy Speaker, at Singapore's first climate rally in 2019, despite the haze and the Formula One race that was going on nearby, nearly 2,000 people turned up – many of whom were young adults, young parents and students – so as to make a statement that this green transition represents our future and that this green transition is people-powered and people-centric.

EVs are an important part of what needs to be done, which makes this debate and this Bill important.