Update on Batch 10 of Estate Upgrading Programme

Mr Speaker, we will invite the Citizens' Consultative Committees (CCCs) to make nominations for Batch 10 of the Estate Upgrading Programme (EUP) when we have a firm implementation timeline. There are currently 17 ongoing EUP projects from various Batches island-wide, including nine of the most recent Batch 9 projects that have just been approved. We would like to complete some of these ongoing projects first before calling for new nominations. This will allow us to devote more requisite resources to better manage current projects and to ensure that new projects will be well-managed as well.

Typically, it takes about eight to 10 months to evaluate nominations before announcing the selected estates. But the exact duration depends on the number of nominations that we receive and the completeness of each application. Using Batch 9 as an example, we received 55 nominations that took us about eight months to evaluate. During this time, the Ministry of National Development (MND) and agencies assessed the scope of the potential upgrading works, conducted site visits to assess the on-ground conditions, and considered how best to dovetail the works with the agencies’ other improvement plans.

I thank the Senior Minister of State. I have two follow-up questions. The first is that I understood from the answer that Batch 10 nominations have not been done. Can the Senior Minister of State please confirm that because my understanding is that Batch 10 nominations had been submitted previously?

My second question is for the EUP Programmes. As the Senior Minister of State knows, the private estates do not have support from either Town Council Upgrading Programmes, Community Improvement Projects Committee (CIPC) or Housing and Development Board (HDB) Upgrading Programmes. So, to that extent, private estates really rely on EUP Programmes to upgrade and renew the facilities, including drains, culverts, sidewalks, roads and so on.

Given that the EUP Programme for Batch 9 has been suspended and there is no timeframe for Batch 10, would the Ministry consider accelerating the programme, expediting it and, perhaps, giving more priority to constituencies which are either substantially or wholly private estates?

Mr Speaker, let me just address the Member's concerns. For private estates, I understand that the Member faces those constraints that he has described. But actually, if there are any existing issues that require emergency attention, for example, drains that are not in good order, then we can look at how we can best address these as emergency repair works in the meantime.

The Member is right to say that Batch 10 has previously asked for nominations, and I remember we did send a letter to notify the Advisers of each of the wards that have previously been asked to do so, that there has been a review of public sector projects to be implemented, so that we can make sure that the demand for construction workers and also the total number of workers in Singapore can be better managed. In that sense, Batch 10 has been deferred somewhat. But in May this year, we have actually just approved all the Batch 9 projects. So, the Batch 9 projects are currently undergoing consultations and they will be implemented over the next couple of years or so.

So, we are trying to pace out some of these works to make sure that we have a good completion of Batch 9 projects, together with some of the existing projects from Batches 6 to 8 that have rolled over as well. In existence, there are 17 projects to be managed on the ground. Once we have a clearer idea of when these projects are nearing their completion, we can then look at how we can reactivate nominations for Batch 10 again.

But in the interim, if there are really areas that the Member feels that need to be repaired urgently, do let the agencies know and we will see how best to manage those at the moment.

Speaker, a supplementary question for the Senior Minister of State regarding EUP.

I would just like a confirmation that there is actually no prohibition from the Government for the CCCs to work with the Member of Parliament (MP) of the area, even if the Member is not from the ruling party.

Mr Speaker, I believe this question has been asked by the same Member in a previous Sitting and I will just repeat the key points, that the CCC is involved in ground engagement, because the Working Committee comprises members of the Neighbourhood Committee, who are residents within the estate themselves, as part of the ground consultation. And I did reply to the Member in the previous Sitting that when the works and the timeline have been settled, we will also notify the MPs for the area to tell them of the existing plans.

Sir, actually, I remember that exchange rather well. But I think, at that time, the Senior Minister of State did not answer my question, which was that, at the idea stage, whether the MPs can work with the CCCs to provide ideas because we also have feedback, we are also on the ground.

Mr Speaker, the whole concept of EUP is meant to be largely a ground-up kind of initiative where residents within the estate actually give the inputs as to how they want to see their estates developed. So, regardless of the mechanism, the idea is that the current working mechanism comprising a working committee largely made up of the residents who are staying there, who are members of the Neighbourhood Committee, who know the estate very well, working closely with the implementing agents, as well as the consultants to walk the ground, to give feedback. That is the reason why the whole entire consultation process can take up to several months before actual groundbreaking starts.

Just for my own estate, over the last few weeks, we have been walking the ground with the various agencies to understand the concerns of residents and take in their feedback as well. So, regardless of the mechanism, the present-day mechanism where ground feedback is taken into account, really is a good way in which residents' concerns are taken on board.