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

Madam, I had, over the years, spoken for higher priorities to be accorded to single mothers, and parents with children. Given that housing problems are much less intense now – and this is kudos to the Ministry and HDB – I would like to now ask that we accord more attention and a higher priority to vulnerable groups, including divorcees, single parents and ex-convicts.

In my Budget Debate speech, I had asked that the Government fund more and decide less. The world is changing faster than we can govern. Given the current complexity on the ground, we can either build up the Government more, make more elaborate plans and go into finer details. Or we can do less. We let

Page: 99

the community plan for and have a say in it.

I believe in our Government's philosophy of self-help and self-determination. But over the years, this basic policy has given itself a moral edge. Those who have succeeded have worked hard and those who have not are lazy, ill-disciplined with an overgrown sense of entitlement.

I have spoken on this before, when I decried the behaviour of some rich young Singaporeans thinking that they are better, more talented and more deserving of success than their peers when all they had was the incredible good fortune to be born to rich parents.

Today, I want to make the broader point that the notion of meritocracy has been tainted from an anti-corruption, fair play motivation to one which lauds success and ties it with justice, that the rich deserve to have more, to be treated better because of something that they themselves have done. Sure, there is some link between effort and success but, given that luck and circumstance too have a role, we ought to recognise that how a man sometimes ends up at age 70 is sometimes not completely within his own control.

We, therefore, have a moral obligation, those of us whom time and circumstance have been kind, to give this man as much help as we can. Not out of charity, not because we are so benevolent, but because, there, but for the grace of God, or the throw of a dice, go I.

I ask the Minister to consider if the community can have some inputs on who ought to receive housing priorities or whether the CDC can have this role. I am referring to groups, such as divorcees, single parents and ex-convicts.

As the Ministry calibrates and tries to stabilise and moderate housing prices, achieving a balance in interests between current home owners and prospective ones is also important. At the same time, there is a need to ask the public to exercise caution with regard to buying of properties overseas as there are other factors to be considered, such as forex and interest rates. In some places, there is a very limited secondary market. I am referring to properties where there is little scope for real price appreciation. The Ministry's job is not to be naysayers, of course, but to provide some public education. I hope the Minister can give his views on this.

Page: 100

Mdm Chair, in recent years, we have seen more Singaporeans buying overseas properties, including those in our neighbouring countries in Malaysia and in Thailand.

Prices in some of these locations such as Iskandar, have also risen sharply, which could be partly due to strong interest from Singaporean buyers. In some of the recent property launches, properties were quickly snapped up in droves by Singaporeans, regardless of fundamentals or whether there would be tenants to occupy the properties. Low interest rates and ample liquidity may be among the reasons for this surge in interest in overseas properties, and some may have bought into these properties hoping to make a quick buck.

Clearly, there are significant risks to these investors. Should there be a major correction either due to changing macroeconomic environment or an oversupply situation, prices of these properties may fall sharply. Is the Government concerned that Singaporeans may be overly exposed to overseas property markets? Are there any possible measures that the Government could take to rein in excessive speculation in foreign properties by Singaporeans?

The information on Singaporeans buying overseas properties is not readily available and much of it is anecdotal. Would the Government have the necessary information and data to monitor these developments?

There have been more launches and exhibitions of foreign properties in Singapore. Does the Government regulate these real estate sales that occur in Singapore like how CEA regulates the local property real estate agents?

Madam, our property prices have been soaring over the past decade. Singapore has also become a very important destination for foreign investment, buoyed by our stable and predictable economy, besides a strong currency. The influx of foreign money to Singapore fuelling our property prices is one of the significant reasons for the high property prices today. The Government has done well to clamp down on this with several rounds of measures, especially the recent total debt service

Page: 101

ratio (TDSR) and, today, prices are in check.

The series of measures by MND has helped to ensure that young Singaporeans are able to afford and gain access to their first home. I thank the Minister for that. But we need to help them a bit more. Our younger Singaporeans aspire to someday own a private property and there is nothing wrong with that. They should dare to dream. However, with the influx of foreign money in private property, this has become more difficult. As a result, many of our younger Singaporeans head overseas to fulfil some of these aspirations as they realise it becomes increasingly difficult here to do so. I think we should ensure that the younger and future generations of Singaporeans are able to achieve their aspirations with hard work and determination.

Therefore, I would like to propose efforts to protect properties with prices up to $3 million or $5 million from foreign investment and local speculative play. It is essential to take a firm and hard decision to prevent foreign investment on our real estate if we want to preserve opportunities for our younger generation in our land-scarce country. Failure to act now may prove very costly for our future generations.

Mdm Chair, housing is a major asset for most families in Singapore. The majority of these homes sit on leasehold land. These should be depreciating assets but have not been because general property prices have risen substantially over the years, propping up the value of all homes.

I am not a property expert, but let me try to illustrate with a simple model. If I buy an HDB flat for a quarter of a million dollars and, say, it has a 99-year lease, if we use straight-line depreciation for building and land, the flat's value will fall about 1% per year till it hits zero at the end of the lease period. For the flat to keep its nominal value, the cost of new and similar flats in future years must keep on going up.

In my simple model, if we assume that any appreciation in property prices results in the same percentage of appreciation in similar types of properties, then in my initial years of owning my leasehold property, property prices would need to go up at an increasing rate for my flat to keep its initial nominal value – very slowly at first, but accelerating as my flat becomes older. This does not even take into account the need to cater for inflation. If we want our leasehold

Page: 102

properties to keep their real value at a 2% inflation rate, the nominal market value would need to double in 35 years; and at a 2.5% inflation rate, it would need to double in 28 years.

We have had no issues for the past decades because of a confluence of very favourable factors. In our 50 years of nation-building, we have had high economic growth, high population growth, a young population, high demand for homes and a relatively young housing stock. Property prices have also risen dramatically over the years, and this may mask any future issues we will face. For the small number of very old HDB flats, we have the Selective En Bloc Redevelopment Scheme (SERS) for some of them and, for older private condominiums, we have encouraged en bloc redevelopment, too.

In future, the situation may change quite dramatically and I am concerned about this. Economic growth is slowing, population is still growing but at a decreasing rate, the population is ageing, the demand for homes may also slow. At the same time, more homes may be sold as some older people may cash out on their homes and more would pass on. In addition, the interest rate environment is currently extremely benign. Many of us would remember the 1997/1998 Asian Financial Crisis and the adverse effects of high interest rates on property prices.

So, my concern is that should property prices stagnate and start falling, how would we make sure that a potential downward spiral does not happen? This is especially important for leasehold property owners.

As I mentioned earlier, the Government has started SERS as a programme to rejuvenate estates and to allow SERS residents an opportunity to move from their old flats to new and better flats with fresh 99-year leases, and HDB survey results show strong support for SERS. My concern is whether there may come a time when HDB has to dramatically expand the SERS programme. We have more than 900,000 HDB flats – I do not know the age profile of the flats – but if we offer SERS to everyone, every flat that, say, reaches 50 years, this would mean SERS for an average of nearly 20,000 flats per year.

We are in a very comfortable position now and probably for the next decade because SERS has only been used for 18,000 flats and there are only about 31,000 flats which are more than 40 years old. The numbers may continue to be small in the next 10 years. But does MND anticipate the programme would have to be stepped up? SERS residents receive compensation at market values. The SERS expenditure is extremely low now, but do we have to set aside more

Page: 103

funding for SERS in the future if we have to substantially step up the programme? And would the average cost of SERS per block go up significantly in the future because we already would have intensified the use of land for new estates? If, on the other hand, SERS continues to be highly selective, what would happen to the value of these old flats that are not selected for SERS? I would be grateful for MND's views on that.

Madam, Government leaders have, over the years, frequently told Singaporeans that their HDB flats are an asset which they can monetise during retirement. However, less frequent are the reminders that, as a flat approaches the end of its 99-year lease, its asset value will depreciate to zero.

While most Singaporeans know that their flats are on a limited lease, many assume that HDB will not let their assets become worth nothing, or that their flats will eventually go through an "en bloc" before their leases expire.

The Minister told me in a reply to my PQ in January that the selection of sites and the pace of the Selective En Bloc Redevelopment Scheme (SERS) will depend on factors, such as their redevelopment potential and the availability of replacement sites for rehousing and other resources.

Can the Minister confirm whether all old flats will eventually be replaced through SERS before they reach their end of lease? If not, what proportion will not be replaced?

Other than SERS, what are the Government's plans for HDB flats that approach their end-of-lease? For example, will their leases get topped up, and will the topping up cost be borne by HDB or the lessees?

There are now over 31,000 flats which are more than 40 years into their lease. I am sure many young couples are still buying these resale flats, which would mean that the leases may end within their lifetimes.

If the Government does not have any specific plans for flats when their leases expire, I think it should make this clear to the public, so that buyers can factor this in when choosing a resale flat and they do not pay too high a premium for older flats.

Page: 104

Mdm Chair, I would like to ask if the Ministry would consider reviewing the present booking system to enable HDB to better gauge and respond to potential buyers' demands. What are the measures being planned to engage buyers earlier and anticipate bookings for flats? In addition, would the Ministry be able to provide more information earlier to potential applicants regarding the site plans and the details of the flats?

Secondly, I would like to suggest that HDB consider removing the income ceiling for all first-time buyers. The Minister has always made it clear that when formulating housing policies, he is guided by the important social objectives of encouraging our young to get married and to have children as soon as they get married. I totally agree with him that young healthy parents provide the best chances for their children.

However, most Singaporean couples today will not start a family until they have settled into their own homes. They work hard at their jobs to accumulate savings first for their weddings and the deposits on their flats. In this sense, they are being responsible and independent which is commendable. By the time they feel financially stable, a number of them face another problem – they hit the income ceiling of $10,000 and no longer qualify for a purchase flat directly from HDB. At the same time, resale flat prices are still on the high side and they cannot quite afford the heavy downpayment required for a private condominium. They end up postponing childbearing even further. I hope we can allow this sandwiched class to purchase new HDB flats, those with less subsidies, tiered according to their incomes.

Mdm Chair, the Lease Buyback Scheme (LBS) was introduced in 2009 to help seniors monetise their HDB flat and boost their retirement income. The number of seniors taking up the HDB's LBS went up last year by 240 after rules were relaxed. However, this number reflects a rather lukewarm response to the LBS even after enhancements to the scheme were implemented last year.

As our population ages, we do need to look at more ways to help our elderly who wish to monetise their flats. Can the Ministry review the low take-up rate of the LBS and look into why elderly Singaporeans today are not considering housing monetisation as the preferred option to enhance their retirement income and age-in-place? Given the number of seniors who are asset-rich but

Page: 105

cash-poor, are the monetisation benefits in the Lease Buyback Scheme attractive enough? While some may say they prefer more cash upfront for discretionary use, others are worried that they may outlive their 30-year lease and become homeless, even though assurances were given by HDB that this will not be the case. Is the scheme's low take-up due to a lack of awareness and outreach to elderly Singaporeans? Can more be done to raise awareness of LBS so that those who need to monetise their homes are aware and understand the benefits of the scheme? Would the Ministry review the LBS package and will the scheme also be expanded to include larger flat types so that more can monetise their assets?

Mdm Chair, as our society ages, more and more HDB flat owners are expected to have stayed many years in their flats. Some may want to continue to stay in their flats as they have deep emotional attachment to their current flat and neighbourhood. On the other hand, there are others who may want to right-size to smaller flats, as many of their children would have shifted out.

Page: 107

I would like to ask the Minister, how many elderly or families have requested for right-sizing to smaller flats? How long does one need to wait to right-size? What are the types of flats that these owners right-sized to? Is monetising a key reason for right-sizing?

I am happy that the Minister had announced that he is refining the Lease Buyback Scheme. I would like to ask the Minister on the take-up of the Lease Buyback Scheme. How will the changes that will be announced later affect the take-up rate?

Finally, is the Ministry working out any other forms of monetising options for Singaporeans?

Madam, many singles give the feedback that direct purchase HDB flats are financially helpful and a huge psychological relief. However, as flat sizes are small, they cannot entertain guests or have relatives, especially their nieces or nephews, stay over. Hence, their wishes are:

(a) include bigger flats;

(b) extend the Multi-Generation Priority Scheme (MGPS) to singles so that they can live near their parents and help look after them; and

(c) modify the Married Child Priority Scheme (MCPS) to encourage singles to live near their families, so that they can mutually support one another.

Can the Minister consider these requests which are all in line with HDB's ethos of building strong families, please?

Madam, Bukit Panjang is a resettlement town. Twenty seven years ago, many of our residents were relocated from Lim Chu Kang, Chua Chu Kang, Woodlands and Marsiling villages. The villagers and their family members were offered Housing Board flats in Bukit Panjang town. As a result, we have many 3G families and extended families staying in Bukit Panjang. Some of them stay in the same flat while others live in the same block

Page: 108

or precinct.

Madam, over the years, I have noticed that my residents have benefited a lot by living with or near their parents, grandparents and extended family members. Living near one another enables family members to spend more quality time together, look after one another and strengthen family bonds. In fact, some of the children who got married also choose to buy flats in Bukit Panjang. As such, we have residents with four or five extended family members living in Bukit Panjang. This is, indeed, a very happy outcome for my residents.

Madam, over the years, our housing policies have encouraged home ownership and family formation. We have succeeded in achieving a high percentage of HDB home ownership. But due to the different phases of new town developments, many young families who bought HDB flats in new towns are not living with their parents or siblings. Many siblings of many families are also living in different parts of Singapore when they got married and purchased their HDB flats. This has resulted in today's spread of families in different housing estates, thus weakening the family bonding and support network in our society.

Madam, Singapore has a fast-ageing population and we are encouraging Singaporeans to age in place, that is, age within their homes and community. However, many children of these ageing Singaporeans are not living with them or near them. This will pose immense challenges to the seniors to get support from their family members in times of need. This problem is further aggravated if the seniors become immobile and need regular medical treatment. Although the Government is building many infrastructures to support the seniors, no amount of community support can replace that of family members. Many seniors prefer to be with their family members. The emotional, mental and physical support of family members will make a difference to the quality of life of our seniors in times of good health and in sickness.

Madam, we need to review our HDB housing policies to bring 3G families and extended families together. In this regard, I would like to make a few suggestions to the Minister to consider.

First, build more 3G BTO flats with different types of flat sizes to facilitate 3G families and extended families to stay together within the flat, block or precinct. Accord these flat applicants higher priority to expedite the formation of 3G families and extended families in our housing estates.

Page: 109

Second, develop more infill development BTO flats or expedite en bloc development in mature estates so that young families can have more choices to stay near their parents or siblings who are ageing in these mature estates.

Third, build more studio flats for the elderly in all new towns and accord priority to those elderly who wish to move near to their children or siblings who are living in the new towns. The elderly can sell their existing flats, right-size to these studio apartments near their children or siblings and have adequate sales proceeds to live a good quality of life.

Madam, I wish to ask the Minister the following questions:

(a) How effective are the existing housing policies to encourage 3G and extended families to stay near one another?

(b) What are the Ministry's plans to further encourage 3G and extended families to live together within the community?

Madam, our housing market is turning the corner. The HDB Resale Price Index has turned negative last year, for 2013, the first time in eight years. The Private Property Index has also fallen for the first time in seven quarters. All property analysts and developers are projecting a softening market ahead. They only differ on the speed of softening.

In last year's MND COS, I "suffered" 40 COS cuts. This year, there were only 27. Clearly, our efforts to cool the housing market are producing results. Madam, I was going to say that even my eye bags have shrunk. But I checked in the washroom just now; they have not.

I must place on record my thanks to our fellow Singaporeans for your patience and understanding over the last three years. I thank Members of this House, particularly GPC Chair Er Dr Lee Bee Wah, for your many feedback and suggestions. Many of your ideas, I have put them into practice.

In previous COS sessions, we had to be hyper-active and we made many big moves on housing: we ramped up the BTO flat construction programme; we raised the HDB and EC income ceilings; we delinked BTO pricing from the resale market; we allowed singles to buy new BTO flats; we built more HDB rental blocks; we stepped up Government land sales for housing; we introduced property cooling measures. They were urgent, they were necessary. For this COS, we can maintain a calmer stance, taking a deliberate and targeted approach, as we negotiate the turn.

We must be mindful that as the market turns the corner, the way forward is not straightforward. As 孫燕姿, local singer Stephanie Sun, cautioned in one of her songs,“向左，向右，向前看” or turning left, turning right or go forward, have a care. Be hopeful but do not be hasty.

Some key data to help us appreciate how far we have come in the last three years. We launched over 77,000 BTO flats: 14,000 units were completed last year and handed over. This year, double of that – 28,000 completed units will be handed over. These decisive steps have helped many young families, our top priority. In three years, we helped 80,000 households book their HDB flats; 60,000 of them were young families; 10,000 enjoyed priority because they had kids or were expecting; 8,000 benefited from the new income ceilings; 800 are now staying in our rental flats while they wait for the keys to their flats; 250 will

Page: 111

move into 3Gen flats, the first batch in Yishun South, to be precise. These are significant numbers of beneficiaries from the new housing policies.

Mr Gan Thiam Poh and Er Dr Lee Bee Wah suggested that we lift the HDB and EC income ceilings immediately. I have no plan to do so immediately. But put in the appeal and I will look into each individual case.

We have helped many vulnerable families who cannot as yet afford homeownership. Five percent of HDB flats – that is about 50,000 units – are now available for public rental housing. Another 10,000 units are at different stages of construction. They will raise our proportion of rental flats to 6% of our total public housing stock.

We broke new ground with helping the singles buy new HDB flats: 1,400 have benefited from this new policy. Many more – quite a few thousand – will benefit this year as we ramp up the supply of 2-room BTO flats. Miss Penny Low shared the wishlist for singles – I have heard them – including the suggestion that we extend the scheme to larger flats. I have no plan for such a change immediately. Given our limited resources, let me prioritise and give greater priority to the married couples first.

As the market is at a turning point, there are, not surprisingly, opposing views on the way forward. Developers are calling for early removal of the cooling measures. Many Forum page letters argued for the cooling measures to stay.

As noted by Mr Dhinakaran, the Government's cooling measures have been necessary to ensure that prices move in line with our economic fundamentals. With prices still rising, though tepidly in some market segments, it is premature to withdraw these measures.

While we have re-tilted the balance between buyers and sellers, we are not yet at the optimal state. We will continue to watch the market closely. On the supply side, we are moderating both the BTO programme and Government land sales. Meanwhile, both buyers and sellers have to be realistic in their expectations.

One evidence that the resale market is turning the corner is the declining trend in the cash-over-valuation (COV). Nearly 40% of resale transactions last month were priced below valuation, a negative COV. In fact, the market has coined a new term – CUV, or cash-under-valuation. Whether it is COV or CUV,

Page: 112

the practice of bargaining based on this, rather than the total price of the flat, is an anomaly unique to the HDB resale market in Singapore. How did it come about?

Currently, most flat sellers would obtain a valuation report for their flats, which they then use as a base price and negotiate with buyers based on COV. Contrast this with practices in the private market. Negotiations there are, rightly, based on recent transaction prices and are typically carried out before buyers request for valuations.

Er Dr Lee Bee Wah has suggested that the HDB resale market follow the practice in the private housing market. I agree with this. With COVs now hitting zero or negative, now is a good time to make the adjustment. I have asked HDB to move on this.

HDB will rationalise the process of price negotiations and restore the original intention of valuation, which is to help buyers get a housing loan. In parallel, HDB will publish daily – not monthly but everyday – prices of resale transactions as soon as they are registered. This way, buyers and sellers can refer to latest market information during their negotiations. Negotiating based on price rather than COV will take some getting used to. However, it is a useful move for long-term market stability.

Er Dr Lee Bee Wah, Mr David Ong, Ms Foo Mee Har and Assoc Prof Muhammad Faishal have all spoken on the housing needs of our seniors. Our priority is to help our elderly retire comfortably with security. With a large supply of new flats, their married children are now spinning off to their new flats. We meet many of them in our house-to-house visits; a big flat but just an elderly couple staying there. Most seniors are happy to stay where they are, although some find it bigger than they need, but they are comforted that they are sitting on a valuable asset. Nearly 220,000 HDB flats are owned by Singaporeans aged 55 and above, and with the mortgage fully paid up – 220,000 such flats. This is more than 20% of the HDB's stock. We should reflect on this number and be proud of this achievement.

Most seniors have strong family support and healthy savings. However, for some who want to convert part of their housing asset into cash, they have options. They can rent out a room; they can switch to a smaller flat or they can take up our Lease Buyback option. In the last three years, 5,600 elderly households booked Studio Apartments. Another 390 took up the Lease Buyback Scheme. Since 2013, 70 topped up their CPF Retirement Accounts when they

Page: 113

right-sized, which means, moved into a smaller flat. They received a Silver Housing Bonus of up to $20,000 in cash.

When we engaged the elderly in Our Singapore Conversation last year, we discussed, in fact, the low take-up of the Lease Buyback Scheme. Many told us they want two things: age-in-place and also they want to have an asset which they can bequeath to the family. Along the way, some suggested that we offer them reverse mortgages.

Reverse mortgages are loans taken up by the owner using his property as collateral, and repaid with interest upon termination or death, typically from the sales proceeds. Like Lease Buyback, reverse mortgage is a form of equity release that enables the owner to age-in-place while unlocking some of the equity. Reverse mortgage has been tried before in the past by NTUC Income, but it did not quite take off.

As our population ages, retirement adequacy and how equity release can help enhance it is, indeed, an important issue. We have to spend time thinking about this. We have had some experience now with Silver Housing Bonus and the Lease Buyback Scheme. Now, with a better understanding of our seniors' preferences, it is timely to revisit reverse mortgage as an additional option for our seniors.

My Ministry has begun a serious study of this option. We hope to formulate a practical scheme for our elderly. Along the way, we will also see if the Lease Buyback Scheme can be further improved, as suggested by some Members here, to be extended to larger flat types. Er Dr Lee Bee Wah, Assoc Prof Muhammad Faishal and Mr David Ong suggested that just now. We will also study how we can make our options more readily available and easier to understand, so that the elderly can make informed choices when they need to tap on their flat for retirement income.

Ms Foo Mee Har noted the commercial success of The Hillford but wondered if it would really become a good retirement village. I think the jury is still out. The success of such a development can only be seen several years later when it is completed and when residents have moved in. Meanwhile, URA is in no hurry to push out other sites until we are clear about the outcome. With 80% of Singaporeans living in HDB, our priority is to make sure that the vast majority of seniors can age-in-place in HDB towns with strong community and neighbourly support. We shall leave the market to cater to the high-income

Page: 114

segment of our population.

Er Dr Lee Bee Wah has reminded us that a home offers basic security for divorcees and their children. Mr Seah Kian Peng spoke very passionately on the housing needs of vulnerable segments of our society, including divorcees, single parents and ex-convicts. He felt that many were victims of circumstances and deserving of society's support. Now that the market is stabilising, both Members suggested that we shift our priority to the vulnerable families. I agree.

Now that we have cleared the backlog for newlyweds, we have begun to focus on helping the vulnerable groups, especially divorcees with children. These eye bags would not go away.

Last year, we reserved a 5% quota for divorcees or widows with young children applying for 2- or 3-room flats in non-mature estates. They get priority. In fact, they get very high priority. This has helped 60 such families get a flat. The number sounds small because the number of applicants was also small. We were able to satisfy almost everyone's needs. If Members come across cases in your MPS that have seemingly dropped through the net somehow, let me know. We will take a look.

We have also shortened the debarment period and 120 divorcees have gotten to buy a flat earlier as a result. The question is: what else can we do? I am open to suggestions. This afternoon, we heard two suggestions: Er Dr Lee Bee Wah suggested that we remove all forms of waiting periods for divorcees with children; Mr Seah Kian Peng suggested that we get the local Community Development Council (CDC)'s inputs when we evaluate an applicant's housing needs. We will study both suggestions. Meanwhile, we will continue to exercise flexibility and compassion whenever we receive worthy cases from Members. Many have, in fact, been helped.

Beyond housing, we also offer practical help to the lower income, particularly those who work hard to better their lives. Er Dr Lee Bee Wah highlighted one specific group, the despatch and delivery riders. Today, motorcyclists using HDB and URA carparks are charged a flat rate of 65 cents for either a day or a night session in the same carpark. This is inexpensive, but those who use multiple carparks in a day, such as despatch or delivery riders, may still chalk up considerable parking charges. Apparently, they bear such

Page: 115

costs, not their employers.

I accept Er Dr Lee Bee Wah's suggestion that we should revise the Electronic Parking System (EPS) parking rates for motorcycles and begin to charge on a per-minute basis. In addition, we will introduce an enhanced Season Parking Ticket that allows motorcyclists to park in all HDB and URA carparks for a flat monthly fee. Right now, it is not. For HDB carpark and URA carpark, you have to pay separate rates. We will make sure the monthly rate will remain affordable. HDB and URA will work out the details and implement them as soon as possible.

As we rein in our property market, some Singaporeans have turned to investing in foreign properties. The Government does not interfere with such investment decisions, but I do share the concerns of Mr Seah Kian Peng and Mr Liang Eng Hwa. I echo their words of caution. Property markets move in cycles. For foreign properties, there are additional risks and complexities, because their legal and regulatory frameworks governing the purchase and their financing agreements are all different from ours. And they may change suddenly when domestic politics push for a change in policies. So, do go in with your eyes open.

The Council for Estate Agencies (CEA) will launch an online guide to provide some general tips to consumers who are thinking of buying a foreign property. Do read it, exercise due diligence, caution and good judgement before you invest. There are no sure-wins in property investments, whether here in Singapore or overseas. CEA will also step up its effort to regulate estate agents marketing overseas property developments here. Members of the public should report to CEA any marketing activities by unlicensed foreign estate agents so that we can investigate and take appropriate action.

Mr Laurence Lien painted a dark scenario of housing prices spiralling downwards, not as a cyclical phenomenon but a permanent trend due to structural changes. He worried that the ageing of our population might cause such a scenario. The future is, of course, full of uncertainties, and anything is possible. But we know that property prices are correlated with economic growth. If Singapore's economy were to decline permanently, all assets, including properties, will decline in value. That is why it is so important to ensure that our economy remains dynamic and vibrant. Underpinning that must be a healthy population growth and a productive workforce. These were the critical issues that the Population White Paper highlighted and we discussed at length in this House.

Page: 116

Our demographic challenges are serious, but we can overcome them. We have done well in the last 50 years and we believe the best is yet to be. The key is to ensure that we have an honest and competent Government that continues to plan ahead for the long-term interest of our people, and our people are solidly united behind the Government. Then we can avoid such a dark scenario.

Mr Gerald Giam asked again in this House about HDB flats at the end of their 99-year leases and the role played by the Selective En bloc Redevelopment Scheme (SERS). Like all leasehold properties, HDB flats will revert to HDB upon expiry of their leases. HDB will, in turn, surrender the land to the state. Hence, everything else being equal, properties with shorter remaining leases should have lower value than those with longer remaining leases. Buyers of short remaining lease properties buy with such an understanding and price in such an outcome, that upon expiry of a lease, the land will revert to the state.

Before then, and where possible, we shall revitalise old estates through SERS. But SERS is selective and dependent on the potential for land intensification. SERS also assumes that the Government's finances are healthy to fund it. In short, for as long as our economy is strong, and our Government competent and well supported by the people, we will have many options to address such challenges.

In the last 50 years, we have housed a nation, but our public housing programme is more than just providing a shelter. It is about forging relationships in our families and communities. It is these intangible aspects of the HDB flat and HDB town that make it an endearing home. HDB estates provide a unique Singapore way of life which we all share as a people. Our housing policies must continue to enable those relationships.

Beyond the hard infrastructure, it is the mutual care and support within the extended family that people most value – be it support for parenthood or care for the elderly. Mayor Teo Ho Pin has made the point convincingly. I agree fully with his sentiments. Many young married couples want to live near their parents, especially after they have kids. Likewise, many elderly parents wish to live close to their children and grandchildren. The presence of family nearby is particularly reassuring and comforting for the elderly. We must do our best to meet such aspirations. It is not difficult in non-mature towns where we are still building new flats. It is more challenging in mature towns where the opportunity to build new flats is less. Nevertheless, I want to push the limits to enable extended families to live near one another. So, I will study Dr Teo's and

Page: 117

Er Dr Lee Bee Wah's suggestions, and we will think out our own ideas as well.

Miss Penny Low suggested that any enhanced scheme or greater priority given to those who wish to live closer to their elderly parents should not neglect the singles, the unmarried. Mr Gan Thiam Poh felt that the BTO system could also be refined to better gauge and respond to demand. I will also bear these points in mind.

Finally, some Members commented on the housing difficulties faced by families with very complex social challenges. Some may have sold their flat because the family broke up or because of poor financial management. Others are unable to afford their next flat because they do not have a steady job to qualify for a loan or a grant. And public rental may not be the best solution for those households, especially over the longer term. So, what more can we do to help such families progress to home ownership? How do we ensure that they will continue to sustain their home to ensure a good living environment for their children? Even as we continue to support marriages and families, and reward self-reliance, how can we, in housing, build a social compact that is more inclusive and provide greater support to divorcees and unmarried parents with kids?

I intend to further engage Singaporeans on the relationships and values we hold dear as a society, and how housing policies can better support them. Our Singapore Conversation has demonstrated its usefulness and we will do similar engagements this year.

Madam, I believe I have addressed almost all the comments raised by Members, but a few outstanding ones on the construction industry and estate upgrading will be addressed by my colleagues later on.

Mdm Chair, our housing market is turning the corner. There are dangers ahead of us, as there will be surprises. The best strategy going forward is to focus on the basic values and work on the priorities. What are they? Get our young to marry and have babies; get extended families to live near one another; forge the kampong spirit among neighbours; help vulnerable families to stand on their feet again; leave no one behind. In Singapore, if you work hard, you will earn yourself a brighter future. This is our promise and I will do my part.

Since Independence, the Government has made the building of good affordable homes a national priority. We bring home ownership within the reach of every citizen and his family. Over the years, HDB has produced

Page: 118

increasingly better homes, upping our quality of life. Just last month, we marked the 50th anniversary of the Home Ownership for the People scheme. This is a major milestone on a journey launched by Mr Lee Kuan Yew, driven by his vision to make Singapore a nation of home owners. At The Pinnacle@Duxton's ceremony, Mr Lee recalled:

"When I got HDB to launch the home ownership scheme in 1964, there were many sceptics. We had little reserves then. Singapore was still in Malaysia. Our future looked bleak. The post-war baby boom and the high unemployment added to our pressures. Our construction industry was low in skills and lacking in building management. Few believed a home-owning Singapore was possible. Against the odds, through grit and determination, we housed the nation progressively and systematically."

Fifty years ago, we were an island of squatters and slums. Fifty years later, the third generation of Singaporeans is now embarking on their own home ownership journey. We inherited all these. I think it is our job to build on this. During Our Singapore Conversation last year, an overwhelming 97% of Singaporeans said "yes" when asked if home ownership was important to them.

But while we can provide a solid foundation for Singaporeans to start a family, the Singaporean way of life is ultimately determined by ourselves. While we can build a flat, it truly becomes a home only when we put our hearts into it – taking pride in the ownership and sharing life's ups and downs as a family together. While we can build a most liveable estate, a community comes alive only when shared experiences forge strong bonds, and a sense of rootedness grows out of shared memories and personal attachment to the estate.

The last three years have been very busy and I want to thank the many officers in MND, and especially HDB, who have worked tirelessly to tackle the public housing situation. This year, I want to do more for the elderly, the vulnerable groups and help extended families live near one another. We will push the limits, do our best and try to realise some of the Members' wish lists.

Madam, the Lift Upgrading Programme aims to retrofit all the HDB flats built before 1990 with lifts to serve every household. However, currently, there are still approximately 200 HDB

Page: 119

blocks that because of cost or architectural reason are unable to benefit from the programme. There are four such blocks in Ang Mo Kio/Hougang. One of these is an HDB block that consists of only eight maisonette units. I would like to know whether the Ministry has found any alternative and considered some other options, like lift chair, bubble lift or so-called hydraulic lift. That would help to resolve the issue for some of these residents who stay in such a block, as until today they still cannot benefit from the LUP.

Besides LUP for all the residential blocks in HDB, residents also see that some of the Multi-Storey Car Parks (MSCPs) have undergone LUP. They hope that all the MSCPs could be provided with lifts as the population is ageing. I hope MND would clarify the plan of having lifts for all the Multi-Storey Car Parks and let us know what is the timeline for this.

(In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] I hope that MND can find a feasible solution as soon as possible for the 200 HDB blocks whose lifts cannot be upgraded and install lifts at all multi-storey carparks. This will allow our elderly residents to live safely, comfortably and happily.

The Community Improvement Projects Committee (CIPC) funding is an important source of taxpayer funding to Town Councils to assist in the construction and upgrade of community facilities. The Citizens' Consultative Committee (CCC) is the entity within the CIPC framework which nominates projects to MND. While the CIPC Committee at MND has to ensure that taxpayers' monies are prudently spent, in view of the finite amount available and different needs of each town, I would like to ask if there is a distinction made in the percentage of funds disbursed for upgrading existing facilities of Town Councils on the one hand and new projects on the other, for CIP nominations by the CCC. Would the Ministry consider the formation of an appeals forum under the CIPC framework where differences of opinion, if any, about an Opposition Town Council which manages and maintains the community facilities, and the CCC's nominations can be ironed out?

Page: 120

I go on to my second cut on the greater public awareness of the Home Protection Scheme (HPS). From Parliamentary Questions asked by Members, the Government has replied that about 60% of HDB home owners with outstanding loans are paying for HDB flats through their CPF. Extrapolating from these percentages, about 16,000 are uninsurable and about 11,000 have lapsed on HPS premiums.

For the remaining 40% of homeowners who pay for their HDB flats by cash, about 200,000 or 56% are not covered by HPS, although an unknown number from this figure may have some mortgage insurance or some other catastrophic event cover. As this number appears to be high, would the Ministry consider more initiatives to educate Singaporeans on the importance of mortgage insurance cover and look into ways how HDB homeowners who pay their mortgages by cash can be better protected.

While additional catastrophic insurance cover is ultimately a personal decision and requires individual responsibility, some households, especially lower-income households, would be much more affected by the demise of a breadwinner than most and may not be fully apprised of the importance of the HPS.

Can the Ministry consider targeting these households for specific outreach and look into how future Government transfers can include the prospect of HPS rebates as a recognition and signal of how important such insurance schemes can be for the low and middle income? Another possibility is to review and assess if HDB homeowners who are not servicing their loans through CPF can choose to be automatically included in HPS, but with the ability to opt out at any point.

When we started our public housing programme, our priority was to quickly move our people out of slums into basic, affordable housing. In the early days, flats were simple and utilitarian because we needed to house an overcrowded city urgently. While the young of today may not be able to imagine how anyone can live in such basic housing, these flats were a marked improvement from the attap- and zinc-roofed huts that many from the Pioneer Generation had grown up in.

But as Singaporeans became more affluent, and basic housing needs met, we began to pay more attention to the design of our flats. Queenstown residents will recognise the distinctive "Butterfly Blocks" built in the 1970s.

Page: 122

Bishan residents are familiar with their unique blocks with pitched roofs built in the 1980s.

Since the first HDB town in Toa Payoh, HDB has built 23 more towns all over the island. Through refinements over the years, we have steadily improved the quality of HDB living. HDB developments, such as The Pinnacle@Duxton and Casa Clementi, have even won international accolades. The experience in developing them inspires us to build better new towns for the future.

As one who has lived in Toa Payoh for 20 years, I was lucky to have witnessed first-hand a period of fundamental transformation in Singapore's housing scene. I am grateful for the Lorong 5 2-room flat and the Lorong 8 4-room flat which my family grew up in. Because of the comfortable shelter, we were able to focus on our studies and acquire useful skills that my parents did not have a chance to.

But today's younger generation of Singaporeans has a different starting point. If they had grown up in modern Singapore in the 1990s, their expectations would necessarily be different from my generation's. We will have to build new towns taking into account their lifestyles and aspirations.

Last August, HDB held the "Future Homes, Better Lives" exhibition, which showcased plans for three housing areas: Punggol Matilda, Tampines North and Bidadari. They are the distillations of our housing development experiences over five decades. The exhibition went well, generating great excitement and buzz about new HDB living.

HDB has started launching BTO flats in Punggol Matilda last year and is on track to launching the first BTO flats in Tampines North later this year. The project will also provide 1,500 homes, including 50 3G flats for multi-generational living. Those currently living in Tampines, Bedok and Pasir Ris, with soon-to-be married kids, may find these 3G units attractive.

Tampines North will become a new "green-shoot" of the existing Tampines Town. It will have two major parks, seamless pedestrian and cycling networks, and a new landmark mixed development that will be integrated with a bus interchange.

HDB intends to launch the first BTO project in Bidadari sometime next year. As shared in the exhibition, Bidadari will be a tranquil urban oasis, a garden community well-served by amenities and transport networks. An Alkaff Lake

Page: 123

will remind younger generations of a lake of the same name built in 1929 by the Alkaff family. A Heritage Walk lined by an idyllic canopy of mature trees will retell the stories of Bidadari and the contributions of past prominent personalities.

Even as we build new housing districts and towns, we have not forgotten about existing towns where the majority of Singaporeans live. Resources permitting, we will upgrade and update them to keep up with the changing needs of our residents. We will do so in a number of ways.

First, our major strategy is the Remaking of Our Heartland (ROH) initiative. We have, to date, announced two batches of ROH projects in six estates: Punggol, Yishun, Dawson, Hougang, East Coast and Jurong Lake. Works are underway to transform these areas with widened pavements for pedestrians and park connectors for joggers and cyclists, upgraded town centres, new community spaces and town plazas, heritage trails and landmarks reflecting the history of these places. We are now selecting three more towns under the ROH Batch 3 and will announce them in a few months' time.

Second, from this year, we will ramp up the Home Improvement Programme (HIP) to help more households address maintenance issues earlier, which Er Dr Lee Bee Wah spoke about. We have selected 100,000 homes thus far, and we will now select 35,000 homes each year, up from 28,000 previously.

Third, we will press on with the Neighbourhood Renewal Programme (NRP) to add covered link-ways, playgrounds, street soccer amenities, pitches and residents' corners, to provide better amenities in existing towns. We have, to date, announced 85 projects, benefiting about 127,000 households. We will launch another 14 projects this year.

Fourth, we will step up lift installation to make HDB estates even more elderly-friendly. We started on this as early as in 2001, with the Lift Upgrading Programme (LUP). Since then, with a budget of $5 billion, we have offered LUP to more than 5,000 blocks and 500,000 households. Mr Yeo Guat Kwang has asked about HDB's plan for the other remaining 200 blocks that are not feasible for LUP, based on today's cost and technology. I would like to assure Mr Yeo that HDB will continue to look for new technology to overcome existing technical and cost constraints. Meanwhile, residents who require direct lift access due to medical conditions can approach HDB for special assistance.

Page: 124

Beyond LUP, we are now installing lifts in Multi-Storey Car Parks (MSCPs). Mr Yeo will be pleased to learn that by the end of this year, HDB will complete the lift installation for 73 MSCPs. HDB will start work on 200 more this year, and another 200 from 2015. We will complete installing all these lifts of MSCPs by 2017.

Fifth, in addition to the LUP and MSCP Lift Installation Programme, we are making individual HDB flats more elderly-friendly. HDB is providing elderly-friendly fittings, such as grab bars, slip-resistant treatment to bathrooms and ramps, under the Enhancements for Active Seniors (EASE) scheme. The retrofitting for each flat costs $2,000 if the household opts for all the items offered; but the elderly of Singaporean households pay $100 to $250 only, depending on the flat type.

Response to EASE has been positive: 24,000 elderly households have signed up. We are now reviewing the scheme, with a view to lower the age criterion for direct application and to expand the coverage of the items. We will complete the review in a few months' time.

Sixth, we are actively involving residents and grassroots organisations in shaping their living environments because it is only with the people's involvement that towns become stronger, cohesive communities. We have been doing so through the Community Improvement Project Committee (CIPC) and, more recently, through new initiatives like the "Cool Ideas for Better HDB Living". The Cool Ideas initiative aims to gather ideas from members of the public to improve the HDB living environment. We will be holding the Cool Ideas Exhibition 2014 later this month. I invite all Members and their residents to participate.

To encourage ground-up proposals for precinct improvements, CIPC was conceived to co-fund grassroots organisations to carry out their community improvement projects. Mr Pritam Singh asked if there can be a better way to nominate CIPC projects with the CCCs. I believe all CCCs consult widely to derive CIPC project proposals and they would be happy to take in Mr Pritam Singh's suggestions.

For most people, home purchase is probably the single largest financial investment one would make in his lifetime. Financial planning and adequate

Page: 125

financial protection are, therefore, essential.

Currently, at least 76% of HDB owners with outstanding loans are safeguarded by the HPS or an equivalent mortgage-reducing insurance. At the point of purchase, whether it is a new BTO flat or a resale flat, HDB will encourage all home buyers who take an HDB loan to take up HPS, and will explain to the buyer HPS' benefits and coverage. Regardless of whether the buyers plan to pay their mortgage instalments by cash or CPF monies, HPS will work the same way, giving financial protection to the flat owners and their dependents. Mr Pritam Singh may be pleased to learn that, in fact, HDB provides buyers with a guide book on the HPS to help home buyers understand the benefits of the scheme.

Mdm Chair, let me now touch on the topic of construction productivity which several Members have spoken about.

Raising construction productivity remains one of the key priorities of MND. We need to build a skilled workforce with sufficient local manpower participation. Our developers, architects, engineers and builders need to learn to work closely together through technologies, such as Building Information Modelling (BIM) platform. We also need to develop new capacities in design, construction methods, in particular, in precast and prefabrication capacity. Finally, our public agencies will take the lead in adopting productive construction methods and best practices. There are many pieces in this jigsaw. But we are confident that, over time, we will put them together in partnership with our industry stakeholders.

Ms Foo Mee Har suggested that we should help smaller firms invest in machinery and incentivise firms to adopt productive technologies. Indeed, we have done so. Since the launch of the $250 million Construction Productivity and Capability Fund in 2010, over 4,000 firms have benefited from the Fund and embarked on their productivity journeys. More than 80% of them are small companies.

Er Dr Lee Bee Wah asked for an increase in the Fund. I am pleased to inform Members that we will top up the five-year Fund with another $30 million to benefit more companies before it ends in 2015. We will explore a second five-year tranche of funding to continue our support to the firms later on when the first tranche ends.

Page: 126

To accelerate the use of precast and standardised components, as suggested by Dr Teo Ho Pin, BCA will, under its buildability legislative framework, require with effect from September 2014, the following:

(a) the adoption of standardised floor heights and building component,s such as precast staircases, precast refuse chutes and doors, in new projects; and

(b) the use of drywall as internal partitions for dry areas in all residential and non-landed developments.

This would help downstream construction achieve better site productivity and quality standards.

While the adoption of precast and prefabricated components in HDB projects is high, the same cannot be said of projects in the private residential sector. To catalyse the transition and accelerate the adoption of prefabrication, we will introduce the following measures:

(a) mandating the use of Pre-fabricated Bathroom Units (PBUs) for all residential Government Land Sale sites in the second half of 2014; and

(b) setting a minimum percentage of prefabrication level for Industrial Government Land Sale projects in the second half of the year.

In anticipation of higher demand for precast and prefabricated components, BCA will roll out more land tenders to have about 10 integrated construction and precast hubs by 2020. Together with our firms' precast yards in Malaysia, they can meet the rising demand of precast components of the industry in the years ahead.

As public sector projects are expected to account for about half of the total projected construction demand in the coming years, our public agencies are well positioned to take the lead in adopting productive technologies. Going forward, the public sector would not be just interested in the final outcome of the projects, but also give fair considerations to how productive the projects are being carried out.

To this end, we will review our tender evaluation framework for public sector projects, to recognise the more productive methods of construction. We

Page: 127

will progressively increase the weightage for the productivity component in the Price-Quality Method (PQM) to favour productive construction designs and methods. For the Quality Fee Method (QFM), consultants who adopt more buildable design will similarly be recognised with higher productivity scores.

To break our inertia and adopt unfamiliar but productive construction methods proven elsewhere, I am pleased to announce that the Government will require selected Government Land Sale (GLS) sites to adopt new productive technologies, such as Prefabricated Prefinished Volumetric Construction (PPVC) and Cross Laminated Timber (CLT).

Since not many Members are familiar with the two methods, let me spend a little bit of time to explain what they are. First, PPVC is a construction method where the prefabricated and prefinished units are manufactured in the factory, before being transported and installed onsite, just like Lego blocks. In this Australian apartment block example, the installation only took nine days. This is how the completed building looks like.

Second, in the CLT method, cross-laminated timber is used for structural and wall components to replace concrete and steel bars and brick walls. Besides residential and hotel projects, CLT has also been used in healthcare, sports halls and institutional projects.

To pioneer the adoption of these methods, NTU will be the first local developer to adopt the PPVC system for its high-rise hostel project and the CLT for its upcoming Sports Hall. MOH will also pilot the PPVC system in a nursing home project.

To build a productive construction workforce, we need to attract enough locals to take up various skilled jobs in the industry, as Ms Foo Mee Har has suggested. We are currently working with the industry stakeholders and the Institutes of Higher Learning to offer scholarships and sponsorships to attract students to study the relevant fields. We are also working to professionalise the industry's HR practices so that they could offer well-paying jobs and career development.

Madam, the past five decades of building HDB estates have given us invaluable experiences in creating homes to accommodate Singaporeans' aspirations. For most of us, HDB living is very much part of our growing up. It is part of our childhood, as well as intergenerational memories upon which Singapore's identity is built. The design of our new towns will surely be greener,

Page: 128

user-friendlier and prettier. Let us hope that the "kampong spirit" of our society, characterised by generosity and mutual care would prosper, just as the city state flourishes into a large garden city.

Mdm Chair, through my ground engagement, I am happy to note and feel a significant reduction in the demand for rental flats. I am also happy to sense the decrease in the general level of unhappiness due to waiting time for rental flats among Singaporeans. Nevertheless, there are still Singaporeans who hope to get a rental flat to get on with their lives. These mainly include divorcees, sometimes with their children, and a few elderly, who have difficulties staying with their married children.

This is mainly either due to space constraints or relationship issues. I hope that the Ministry would help this group of applicants. I would also like to ask the Minister on the current length of queue for rental flats. What is the waiting time for an eligible applicant to be assigned a rental unit?

Madam, HDB rental flats are an important housing option for many Singaporeans who have difficulties paying their own flats for a variety of reasons. While I do acknowledge the policy decision to increase the number of rental flats available over the last few years, I would like to enquire from the Ministry if there are any plans on raising the income ceiling in view of the raising of similar floors across some other Government assistance schemes, so that those in genuine need are not turned away.

Separately, while the public rental scheme is a crucial safety net, I would like to enquire if the HDB exercises greater flexibility or consideration in waiving or reducing the resale levy of rental flat tenants who previously owned HDB flats, but who now seek to purchase their 2- or 3-room flat so as to get back on the road to self-sufficiency. What incentives are in place to encourage rental flat tenants to work towards moving out of these rental flats and owning their own HDB units again, so as to free up the finite number of rental units for needy Singaporeans?

Page: 129

Mdm Chair, Singapore obtains about 90% of its food needs from other countries. Around this time last year, AVA gave a statement in the Forum page of The Straits Times that Singapore aims to be self-sufficient in fish, eggs and leafy vegetables. HDB also said that it intends to build more than 100 multi-storey carparks with rooftop gardens where the new facilities would allow residents to plant their own vegetables. Recently, there was also a report in The Straits Times about rooftop vegetable

Page: 130

gardening right in the heart of town.

Mdm Chair, my question relates to fish farming and rooftop vegetable gardens. Recently, there had been severe losses in the fish farm industry as a result of fish death. I seek three clarifications on this matter.

Firstly, to what extent is the aim of being self-sufficient in fish now affected by the fish death and how much time is needed to recover from these losses and get back on track?

Second, in response to the PQ that I filed last month, Minister of State Dr Maliki confirmed that part of the reason was the fact that the fish that were farmed were not able to adapt to our waters. Does it mean then that the choice of fish species had been ill-advised, and was there a fiscal consequence to the Government?

Thirdly, in AVA's continued support for fish farms, how would AVA ensure that the selection of high-value fish that is better able to adapt to the local conditions will be made?

With regard to rooftop gardens, I seek clarification on whether there will be support – both funding and professional advice – for residents who wish to be part of this initiative. If so, what are the details, especially if, for example, residents wish to be able to derive some income from this initiative?

Sir, I understand that the Ministry formed the Inter-Ministry Committee on Food Security (IMC-FS) in 2012. This is to coordinate and look into holistic measures to mitigate our food security risks and vulnerabilities. I also understand that, as part of its strategy, the Committee is studying two broad areas, namely: reducing food wastage and boosting industry production capacity and resilience.

I would like to ask the Minister for an update on the works of the IMC-FS. Has the Committee engaged stakeholders, such as importers, manufacturers, retailers and logistics players? How supportive are these stakeholders with regard to the strategies of the Committee? What are the recommendations on industry development and food wastage reduction? Finally, how will these

Page: 131

initiatives benefit Singaporeans?

[Deputy Speaker (Mr Seah Kian Peng) in the Chair]

Despite these, some are still not able to buy a 2-room flat and have no family support. This is why we build public rental flats as a safety net for them. When we resumed the building of new rental flats in 2007, we had 42,000 flats. Today, we have 50,000 flats and are on track to reach 60,000 by 2017.

Applicants on the rental queue wait seven months to be allocated a flat, down from 21 months in 2008. We can always expect some waiting time, as applicants can choose their preferred zone, to be nearer their workplace or nearer their children's schools, but where there may not be vacancies in those places.

Let me assure Assoc Prof Muhammad Faishal that we do exercise flexibility in allocation, by administratively adding up to 10%-points to the Ethnic Integration Policy (EIP) block limits for rental flats and allowing applicants to switch to another zone with vacancies. While waiting, families on the queue can take up Interim Rental Housing, where they pay the same rates as they would

Page: 132

under the Public Rental Scheme.

Even as new units become progressively available, we want to help as many as we can with what we have. Mr Lim Biow Chuan proposed allowing elderly singles to rent a 1-room flat alone. Mr Lim said that we have done well in giving our Pioneer Generation good health coverage to ease their worries and so why not extend it to their accommodation needs. This is something we have to consider very seriously, as it is not about just the Pioneer Generation, but that of the housing needs of single elderly in an ageing population. We recognise that among those who approach HDB for a rental flat, some do not have next-of-kin, while some are estranged from their family, although we should be careful about dispute and inability to get along becoming convenient excuses for children to absolve responsibility for their aged parents.

I can appreciate that elderly singles may not like having to give up comfort and privacy to live in a rental flat with someone else, be it a friend they apply with, or someone on the single persons listing; and to be able to live together amicably requires mutual respect. We can appreciate that. However, in allocating a limited resource, the trade-off we have to consider is having fewer flats for the other 1,800 households on the rental queue. In extenuating circumstances, where it is not forcible or feasible to share because of medical conditions, we will make that trade-off, to not require co-sharing. Sharing living spaces is not uncommon in various forms of elderly accommodation in other ageing societies like Japan. It facilitates mutual support for these single elderly.

I think it is timely that we take stock and ask ourselves some critical questions as we consider ways to strengthen the social compact and support the housing needs of our low income.

First, who should public rental flats cater for? We set the income ceiling at $1,500 a month, to focus our help on the bottom 20th income percentile. Mr Pritam Singh suggested raising it, so that those in genuine need are not turned away. Let me assure Mr Pritam Singh that we will not turn away those with genuine housing need. We are not heartless. We do not apply rules unthinkingly. As a social worker, I have always guided my staff to exercise compassion as we go through each case carefully and assess the housing options available. In the last three years, 340 or 3% of approved applicants, had incomes above $1,500, but were allowed to rent because we assessed that they had no other housing options.

Page: 133

However, a debate over whether to raise the income ceiling masks the complexities driving demand for rental flats. Why is it that some earning more than $1,500 are unable to buy at least a 2-room flat when others who earn less were able to do so – like the 800 households in 2013 – were able to buy 2-room flats with incomes below $1,500, amongst which half were second-timers?

In 2013, two-thirds of approved rental applicants were second-timers who owned and benefited from the sale of a subsidised flat. In some cases, the need for a rental flat is only temporary, because they have suffered a setback, such as a divorce, and need time to stabilise themselves and their children, while they work towards home ownership. Some may need a rental flat over a longer term as they face chronic difficulties that render them unable to work. Yet, there may also be some who see rental flats as the easy way out after cashing out from the sale of their flats; or are unable to live with their family because of disputes. Many may claim to be in need, but how do we discern those in genuine need and prioritise them within our limited resources?

More fundamentally, our objective should not be putting more people into rental flats as a convenient first response, as many of them would also prefer, but rather how can we help those who are able to work towards owning a flat to do so, within reasons. At times, this calls for an exercise of judgement and flexibility in the application of rules.

Let me cite the example of Mr H, who wanted to rent a flat with his wife, after they sold a flat less than two years ago and had spent their cash proceeds of $37,000 on living and medical expenses. In fact, they had combined CPF savings of over $150,000 and could get a loan with their income of $1,550 per month but just did not have enough cash for the resale levy – a question that Mr Pritam Singh asked.

HDB encouraged them to apply for a BTO flat instead and incorporated the resale levy into the selling price of the flat. While waiting for their flat to be completed, HDB is assisting them with Interim Rental Housing at subsidised rent. When they move into their flat later this year, they should be able to pay their mortgage instalment with their CPF, without cash outlay. This was a better outcome than if we had given them a heavily subsidised rental flat. They will continue to be home owners and have a stored value in their asset in their later years.

Second, my Minister has mentioned that our rental stock will make up 6% of our total public housing stock. We know that we cannot build new rental flats

Page: 134

indefinitely. Thus, how can we get more rental tenants to progress to own a flat? Can rental flats be seen as transitional housing for those moving on to home ownership? Indeed, for some, the story does not end with allocating them a rental flat – today, over 4% of existing tenants, or some 2,200 units, have booked a flat. Over the last three years, 1,100 tenants moved into flats they bought, and 60% of them do so with the help of the AHG, or AHG and SHG.

Despite rents being heavily subsidised, we also waive the rent increase for tenants whose income improves from "$800 or less" to "$801 to $1,500" for up to two term tenancies, so that they can use their additional income to build up their savings.

What more can we do to give tenants a leg-up, and create the right incentives to reward positive work ethics and self-reliance? Our housing policy rests on the primary pillar of promoting home ownership and we help even our low-income Singaporeans aspire to be home owners.

Third, as we build more rental flats, how should we do so in a way that is inclusive? We build rental flats not just as shelters, but integrate them within estates, where tenants are able to go about their daily lives no differently from those who own their flats. HDB builds rental blocks in new BTO projects, sometimes in infill sites, to ensure a good geographical spread. As we build more rental flats, we will ensure that they are well-integrated, and we hope that residents can also play their part to be more understanding and accepting.

Let me conclude that making a decision on whom to allocate rental flats to boils down to an assessment of housing need. Members would appreciate that it is not straightforward, as circumstances and challenges underlying housing difficulty are complex. Where housing can be removed as an impediment to stabilise the family, we will do so. However, often times, needs go beyond housing, and it may be too simplistic to surmise that resolving their immediate housing need would eradicate other challenges they face. For those who need support beyond housing, we work with the social service sector to provide relevant social services for these families to improve their incomes and social well-being.

The Government remains committed to giving the less fortunate a leg-up. We will do so and we will do our utmost to help those who are willing to work with us. We will make sure that as we move ahead, we will stay together and no one will be left behind. But this also depends on individuals exercising responsibility and having the aspiration to improve their lives and work towards

Page: 135

securing a better future, especially for their families. The Singapore Dream will always be within reach for those who work for it and we will do whatever it takes to give each one a lift.

Mr Chairman, let me now touch on the issues raised by Ms Faizah Jamal and Assoc Prof Muhammad Faishal on food security.

Today, Singaporeans enjoy a steady supply of safe food at affordable prices. Our supermarket shelves are never empty and we can always find a place, be it a hawker centre or restaurant, to have our meals. Yet, like water and energy, we should never take our food availability for granted. We must continue to ensure our food supply resilience, especially when we import more than 90% of our food.

Mr Chairman, food source diversification will continue to be our core strategy to ensure Singapore's food security. This strategy has worked well when some supply sources are disrupted. For instance, the recent export ban of several species of fish by Malaysia had minimal impact on our fish supply as our importers were able to increase fish imports from other countries to meet our consumers' demand.

During the world rice shortage in 2008, Vietnam banned the export of rice but we had adequate supplies from different sources and our rice stockpile provided the additional assurance of buffer stock. While we actively open up overseas food sources to guard against supply disruptions, we have also supplemented our food imports by producing three key food items, namely, eggs, fish and leafy vegetables locally.

Ms Faizah has said that AVA gave a reply to a Forum page letter in The Straits Times last year that Singapore aimed to be self-sufficient in these three key food items. This is incorrect. We have never aimed to be fully self-sufficient in these food items. We cannot, as we do not have enough farmland. AVA's reply dated 23 February 2013 that Ms Faizah referred to, in fact, said that we only aimed to achieve some degree of self-sufficiency in the production of these three key food items.

The reality in Singapore is that we have limited land with many competing uses. Hence, land for our local farming sector will remain small. Our focus will be on the key food items, and we will work with these farmers to boost farm

Page: 136

productivity in a sustainable manner and to intensify the use of whatever limited farmland that we have.

Ms Faizah asked about how the recent mass fish death incident has affected our aim of achieving self-sufficiency in fish supply and how much time is needed to recover from the loss. The recent mass fish death incident which saw losses of up to 500 metric tonnes of fish was, indeed, unfortunate. However, the impact to our food supply was minimal as our farms produced only 6% of the fish consumed in Singapore. AVA is assisting the affected farmers to get back onto their feet and resume production in the following ways.

First, AVA will fund 70% of the cost of restocking of frys and fingerlings to help the affected farms re-start their operations.

Second, AVA will increase its Food Fund's co-funding support from 50% to 70% for the purchase of equipment and systems that farms can put in place to mitigate against similar incidents in future. These include aerators, oxygenators, generators, water treatment systems and water quality monitoring systems.

Third, AVA will review and strengthen the current alert system to quickly detect and warn farms of adverse environmental conditions which could affect their farm production.

Fourth, AVA will work with the fish farms to develop a more sustainable sea-based farming system, so that they are less susceptible to changes in environmental conditions.

The mass fish death incident is a timely reminder to our fish farmers to enhance their production systems through technological innovation to safeguard against externalities, build up their resilience and to improve productivity.

Mr Chairman, allow me to display a photo on the LED screen. One beneficiary of the Food Fund is the Metropolitan Fishery Group (MFG), a local fish farm which received about $570,000 for investments in solar-powered aerators and water monitoring systems to enhance its operations. The investment has indeed paid off as the farm was not adversely affected by the recent mass fish death.

Ms Faizah also asked about rooftop gardens and whether there will be support for residents who wished to plant their own vegetables on rooftops.

Page: 137

Such rooftop gardens are very much a community initiative and, indeed, we are seeing the community gardening movement flourishing amongst our HDB residents.

HDB will set aside space at all new multi-storey carparks (MSCPs) rooftops, and equip them with planter beds and irrigation systems to facilitate community farming. Both AVA and NParks also conduct training for these community farmers. However, our experience shows that such initiatives require strong local champions who are passionate about community farming. The production capabilities of such community farms are also limited.

Let me now give an update of the work of the Inter-Ministry Committee (IMC) on Food Security, as requested by Assoc Prof Muhammad Faishal. Formed in 2012 under the purview of the National Security Coordinating Committee, the IMC is tasked to review and formulate strategies to mitigate food security risks and vulnerabilities. It started out focusing on two broad strategies – industry development and food wastage reduction. The IMC has engaged stakeholders along their food supply chain, such as importers, processors, retailers and logistics players for their inputs.

The IMC recognises that there is room for the food industry to share resources and functions such as procurement, logistics or even equipment in order to boost productivity and efficiency.

We will also facilitate and encourage our food importers to move upstream and consider investment in farming, collection, processing or packaging to gain better control over product quality and supply. Some companies have started to do this, recognising the benefits of securing food at source. IE Singapore is in the process, for example, of assisting Chew's Group Limited to set up an integrated aquaculture centre in China through grants and operational support. In this way, not only does Chew's Group control the entire value chain, it can also gain access to one of the world's largest seafood markets.

IE Singapore and AVA will continue to identify interested companies and match them with available opportunities for upstream investments in the region, expanding the source and supply of food back to Singapore.

The IMC also recognises that food wastage reduction can help enhance our food security by managing the demand for food. We must inculcate the right attitude and habit in not wasting food amongst all Singaporeans – young and

Page: 138

old.

Today, households, food manufacturing and catering industries, food and beverage retail premises, hotels and shopping malls are the main food waste generators. In 2012, about 703,200 tonnes of food waste was generated in Singapore. This is equivalent to, on average, of an individual wasting about 650 bowls of rice per year. Imagine how much food we can save to help the less fortunate and buffer us during times of emergencies!

All our stakeholders agree that more can be done to increase awareness of the need to reduce food wastage. NEA and AVA are now looking into developing a comprehensive public education outreach programme targeted at schools, community and retailers to reduce food wastage, especially in moderating the way we consume food.

Many of our stakeholders have already implemented their own initiatives to reduce food waste and are willing to do more. As part of IMC's recommendations, several agencies such as NEA, AVA and SPRING Singapore are developing guidelines for food manufacturers and retailers to help them identify areas along their supply chain to minimise food waste. We will consult the industry on these guidelines when ready. To complement these guidelines, companies can leverage on the existing NEA's 3R Fund to reduce food wastage and promote more recycling.

Mr Chairman, we have done well in sensitising Singaporeans to conserve water and energy. We should do likewise for food consumption. All of us must play our part in ensuring Singapore's food security. Besides inculcating good habits not to waste food, we must also be prepared to switch to equally good alternatives, for example, frozen meat in place of chilled meat, or powdered and liquid eggs as substitutes for shell eggs, when supplies are disrupted. By working together, we can increase our resilience and safeguard our food supply for our present and future generations.

Mr Chairman, the Draft Master Plan (DMP) is an exciting plan to update Singapore's living environment. In the new social compact, a successful urban development plan is not just about aesthetics or building better infrastructure that meets demand. A masterplan should be one to bring out the best in people and also foster collective responsibility. As Minister Khaw said, shared responsibility, shared memory – it is about building a Singapore

Page: 139

home where people are at the heart of a city planning process.

A great renaissance city is about its people, whether it is Li Bai of the Tang dynasty, or Leonardo da Vinci of Florence, Italy. The environment incentivises the blooming of talents, which brings meaning, thoughts and civic behaviour to greatly enhance life. Instead of just looking at greening a space or planning connectivity from an agency perspective, or planning via agency KPIs, we need a holistic approach to building a home where people can be at their best.

Through people-centric design thinking and big data analytics to uncover what makes the soul of a bustling city, urban planners can create a truly sustainable, inclusive and renaissance Singapore. We should strive for universality in our urban design, building facilities that can be used equally by all regardless of their mobility needs; rather than separate purpose-built or dedicated facilities which are, by nature, exclusive rather than inclusive.

Hence, my questions are: one, what have we learnt from past masterplans? Two, have we extensively studied the social dimensions of urban planning so that we can build towns that can cultivate better people and shape more responsible, more cohesive neighbourhoods?

Sir, just taking a leaf from our NDP song "Home", let me quote, "There is comfort in this knowledge that home is about its people too. So, we will build our dreams together just like we did before. Just like the river that brings us life, there will always be Singapore." Singapore my home, our country. Let us strive together to make this best home for us now and for the future.

Mr Chairman, residents in new estates like Sengkang and Punggol face a lot of inconvenience in accessing basic amenities like barbers, markets, clinics, and food centres. This takes a toll especially on elderly residents and families with young children. I wish to focus this cut on accessibility of food centres in new estates.

In 2012, the Recommendation Report of the Hawker Centre Panel stated:

"Besides providing a source of affordable food for the community, hawker centres have become part of the social landscape, being community spaces

Page: 140

where residents from all walks of life could freely interact. They are a unique feature of Singapore's urban landscape and help engender a sense of belonging to Singapore."

I have four questions for the Minister.

(a) What factors does the Government take into account in assessing where new hawker centres are to be built?

(b) To what extent does the Government take into account the number of hawker centres per population within a locality as a deciding factor for building a hawker centre?

(c) What measures have been taken to ensure that residents of non-mature estates are not disadvantaged compared to residents of mature estates when it comes to nearby access to affordable cooked food?

(d) In planning for new towns, how are hawker centres factored into the planning process?

Mr Chairman, in land-scarce and highly dense Singapore, proper planning and utilisation of space is critical. Of late, the development of residential and industrial areas have mushroomed rapidly, especially in certain areas. It is also noticed that with some of these, the supporting infrastructure may not have been built or optimised and has, thus, caused much strain at various levels. And these strains include limitations caused by roads, either insufficient capacity, or the number of lanes available; insufficient designated parking facilities as well as traffic and social disamenities caused by over-crowding, especially where these areas are in close proximity to schools and residential areas.

How exactly does BCA/URA collaborate and plan with relevant agencies on meeting some of these needs and alleviating anticipated problems and challenges of existing as well as new developments? In many areas, the lack of proper early planning and alignment has resulted in agencies having to play a catch-up game.

Page: 141

Sir, Singapore prides itself as being very forward-looking in our development plans. We plan for population growth as far ahead as 2030. We have a well-articulated land transport plan and we also have a regularly updated URA Master Plan, with the most recent made public just a few months ago. What we do not have is a national nature conservation policy and I am making a call for one.

Sir, in just the two years that I have been a Member of this House, I have seen the integrity of our nature areas either being chipped away or in danger of being compromised completely. Just to name some examples.

Last year, the custodian of our nature reserves gave permission to a for-profit company to organise a night-time high impact sports event through part of our nature reserve, even though it knows that the animals in our forest are for the most part nocturnal, and are highly sensitive to human presence. This is on top of the trash that inevitably gets generated in such an event where being eco-friendly is not part of the event organiser's consciousness.

Early last year, the debate on the Population White Paper and Land Use Plan saw me questioning the proposed reclamation works that will swallow up the much loved Chek Jawa on Pulau Ubin as well as arguing strenuously against the proposed train line cutting through the nature reserves.

Sir, the recent URA Master Plan is very articulate in terms of economic, recreational, social and cultural aspects. However, with respect, the focus seems to be more on minimising the impact of our massive development by its plans to ease transport problems and reducing air pollution rather than a pro-active stance on conservation of our natural spaces.

According to the Master Plan, only 4% out of 29% of our natural areas is to be protected as nature reserve. The number and size of nature parks, however, would be increased to 5% of our land area. This seems to be a rather hazy picture of what nature reserves do. Nature parks, while a very good thing, with its implication of the intervention of the human hand, is not the same as nature reserves with forests that have been here for thousands of years.

Page: 142

In my Budget Debate speech, I have enumerated the many values of nature reserves like biodiversity in providing wellness.

To add to the list, nature as protection against climate change and as free eco services. Our nature reserves and mangroves provide eco services, like oxygen, clean air and prevent flooding. With the current drought, frequency of flooding in recent years in some places that has never happened before and the worst haze last June, it surely is no longer lost on anyone just how dependent we are on the environment. Of what use is a sterling economic promise if there is no sterling environment?

Nature is eco tourism. Friends who are professional nature guides have told me that many tourists marvel at the fact that in just a short inexpensive bus or taxi ride away from their downtown hotel, they are already in some part of the oldest forest in the world, unlike in other countries where you have to travel some distance from the city. This can give us an economic competitive advantage over our neighbours.

Nature is heritage. It is time that we value our natural spaces as much as the value we place on our built heritage.

Nature "just because" – it defines us as a mature society because we know the inherent value of areas that do not necessarily have to translate into dollars and cents.

Sir, for these reasons, I am making a call for a national nature conservation policy that makes clear that our nature reserves are inviolate: a fair and equitable distribution of nature areas all over the island instead of the situation now where they are situated at the central and northern areas only; that the future Pulau Ubin be a central part of this conservation policy and Chek Jawa be protected from any reclamation plans.

Sir, I mentioned that under the URA Master Plan, only 4% of our natural greenery is protected. This falls far short of the UN Convention on Biodiversity's Strategic Plan 2011-2020, which calls on states to conserve 17%. Whilst 17% may be too much of a stretch, I think Singapore can do a lot more in order to not fail in its international obligations as a respected member of the UN.

Sir, last year, when I attended the ASEAN Inter-Parliamentary Assembly in Brunei, parliamentarians had committed to ensure that we hold our governments to account for the commitments that we had agreed to at that

Page: 143

Assembly, one of which was to ensure green growth and sustainability in economic development.

Even though I understand that such commitments are not binding, I would be very remiss if I do not uphold this responsibility.

Sir, Singapore is overcrowded and the density of population causes discomfort and tension. In private estates, one recurring complaint is the shortage of car parking space.

One trend compounding matters is the Government's approval of multi-unit condominium developments within mature landed housing estates to replace single household property. Such approvals are granted with minimal car park requirements of just one lot per unit. This trend has affected many residents, including those around Hillside/Rosyth and Kovan. Often, the access roads are two-way and narrow, with limited parking available. The quality of life in some areas has deteriorated due to parking shortages and road congestion.

Prior parliamentary answers to my questions were that the Urban Redevelopment Authority (URA) would guide developers, if necessary, to improve their proposals before planning approval was granted. The Government said that, in some cases, developers might be required to carry out detailed traffic impact studies and adopt improvement measures to avert congestion. However, in at least one case I came across, traffic assessments were only required after approval had already been given.

I understand that the formula for the maximum number of dwelling units for problematic Gross Plot Ratio (GPR) 1.4 estates is 30% lower than other GPR 1.4 estates. Telok Kurau Estate was designated a problematic GPR 1.4 estate in 2011 and Kovan in 2012, but traffic congestion remains a problem in these estates.

I believe MND should work more with LTA at the pre-approval stage to assess if condominiums at congested streets need to make a more generous provision for parking beyond one lot per unit. In highly congested streets, a moratorium on further condominium developments may need to be imposed.

Page: 144

Mr Chairman, the foreign workers in the construction, marine and manufacturing sectors are only allowed to stay in dormitories. However, due to the shortage of dormitory housing space, it is not unusual to find workers in these sectors living in makeshift housing facilities usually carved out of private premises, such as old shop houses or factories and so on.

With the shortage of dormitory space, dormitory rental prices also have gone up from $150 to $170 in 2009 to about $300 per month, almost double. This increase signals not only the failure of supply to keep pace with the demand of the market, but also explains the trend in the last few years that dormitory planning focused on maximising the bid space at the loss of the recreational and social amenities within the dormitory developments.

As Chairman of MWC, I would like to know how MND will ensure that the supply of dormitories would be able to meet the demand. I also hope that the space for recreation and social activities will be incorporated into the building of such plans for the dormitories, particularly the new ones. MWC also hopes for more recreational centres to be built. We have seen some positive efforts by the Government agencies recently. At the moment, there is a total of four recreational centres. I would like to know what is the plan the Government has for the migrant workers to have a wider range of social and recreational options.

Sir, to strengthen the overall living standards in the dormitories, MWC also mooted the formation of the Dormitories Association of Singapore in early 2013. All the founding members of this Association have pledged their commitment to a list of 52 benchmark standards covering living facilities through cleanliness and hygiene, and so on, to ensure that these are up to the standards. I would like to urge all the relevant agencies to work together with them to ensure that all these standards get into the code and to be used to accredit and professionalise the industry. I hope the relevant agencies could also expedite the clearance of this set of standards and help to get the operators of dormitories, including those that are factory-converted, to adopt such a standard.

Mr Chairman, in Mandarin.

(In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] Mr Chairman, foreign workers have been contributing to our economic development.

Page: 145

Considering this, we must ensure that there is adequate supply of foreign worker dormitories and recreational facilities for them. The lack of either will add to our social cost. The Government should systematically accelerate the construction of foreign worker dormitories and recreational facilities, and make sure they are effectively managed.

Sir, I serve a constituency in Jurong West. In my conversations with older community leaders and residents, I would be reminded from time to time that, not too long ago, Jurong was a swamp. Nobody thought it could be an industrial hub or a residential heartland. But our pioneers dreamt, persevered and their vision of Jurong became reality.

In 1965, Singapore was an improbable nation state. Our pioneers worked hard, thought far, had big dreams, but were very much pragmatists and, in less than the lifetime of a generation, turned this place into a city of opportunities – modern, green and constantly rejuvenating.

Back in the early days, our preoccupation was survival and providing the basic essentials for our people. Today, our focus is increasingly on quality of life: liveability, sustainability and inclusiveness. And if you had visited the exhibition or had been consulted on the URA Draft Master Plan 2013, you would have seen some of the ideas being proposed to enhance our living environment, to celebrate our heritage and our green spaces. We agree with Miss Penny Low's comment on the need to be people-centric when we plan urban spaces – housing areas, community areas. This is what URA and other agencies are precisely doing – building on experience from past Master Plans and applying lessons learnt from consultations, studies and continuous research.

Yet, in tackling the challenges of tomorrow for our land-scarce city-state, we should retain the "Can-do" spirit of our pioneers – forward-thinking, hardworking, sensible and pragmatic. This means constantly thinking out of the box and looking for innovative solutions but being disciplined in urban planning, having a clear sense of where the trade-offs lie and keeping a careful eye on the long term.

Ms Faizah Jamal made a very passionate speech and was concerned that the Government may be overly people-centric in our development.

Page: 146

Sir, we must provide for the needs and aspirations of Singaporeans and improve their quality of life in this small city-state. Within our confines, we have to provide for everything that a sovereign state needs. Unlike cities in large countries, we do not have the luxury to put our utilities, our defence needs and our nature spaces outside the walls of the city. Even then, we have protected more than 3,300 hectares in four nature reserves; designated 20 nature areas with significant biodiversity, including two more this year; planted extensive Nature Ways to facilitate movement of biodiversity between natural habitats; and embedded pervasive greenery through our parks and into our urban areas. Our passionate NParks officers work closely with agencies and with many nature volunteers on reforestation and conservation programmes, biodiversity research as well as public outreach and education of Singaporeans, including the young, and this work goes on day after day after day.

All of this is possible only because our Pioneer Generation of leaders, most notably former Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew, had consciously and deliberately made greening part and parcel of Singapore's planning and development DNA from day one and this continues to this very day.

Our efforts have not gone unnoticed by the international community. NParks was pivotal in facilitating the formulation of an index for biodiversity to guide sustainable development in cities. This has been endorsed by the United Nations' Convention on Biological Diversity and is now known as the Singapore Index on Cities' Biodiversity. This honour was accorded to Singapore because of the conservation efforts of our small city-state, which is a model now adopted by other cities.

At this point, let me share with you two new projects in two very different parts of Singapore which tell contrasting, vivid stories of how we hope to better the lives of our people in a uniquely Singapore way. With your permission, Sir, I have a couple of pictures and slides to illustrate my point. Thank you.

Sir, not far away from Parliament House, Marina Bay stands as an extension of our new CBD. Gardens by the Bay, the Esplanade and Marina Bay Sands, well recognised and iconic developments for Singaporeans and visitors alike, are, in fact, new developments which were built in the past 10 over years. With plenty of room to grow, Marina Bay is well positioned to serve as Singapore's premier business and financial hub for the region. But Marina Bay did not just appear overnight only in the last 10 over years. Our pioneers took a bold leap of faith more than 40 years ago when they started reclaiming Marina South and Marina Centre from the sea. They saw the potential for Marina Bay to become an attractive waterfront location for the expansion of our financial centre, but we

Page: 147

did not want it to be another Raffles Place or Shenton Way where offices dominate. We wanted it to be a "People's Bay", nestled amongst gardens and flanked by water, grounded in our heritage and historical memories, such as Clifford Pier, the Merlion Park and Collyer Quay, for Singaporeans to live, to work and to play.

So, we gradually reclaimed around 360 hectares of land at the Bay, about nine times the size of London's Canary Wharf. We deliberately planned for seamless connectivity between Marina Bay and the city, complemented by an integrated network of walkways, both above and below ground.

We provided well-landscaped open spaces for people to relax and gather in, and devoted 100 hectares of land to waterfront gardens. Gardens by the Bay has brought nature ever closer to Singaporeans. It is the pride of Singaporeans and well-liked by locals and visitors, including some otters that have visited the Gardens!

Over the years, more and more Singaporeans have taken the initiative to enliven and energise Marina Bay. Today, we see street performances, grassroots activities and arts festivals held at the Bay. The Countdown party draws around 300,000 people to the Bay each year, as well as over half a million New Year wishes in the wishing spheres on the waters of the Bay. Just last Friday, Sir, I had the privilege to open the "i Light Marina Bay" festival, where artists, students and the community pooled their talents to create a magical display of art and light. It was tremendously heartening to see many young Singaporeans participating actively in an eco-friendly low carbon footprint way to bring life and light and splendour to this beautiful Bay.

Sir, we will do more to realise Marina Bay as the "People's Bay". More affordable food options will be introduced along the Waterfront Promenade. There will be an open area for small-scale events, recreational activities and sports. We will also launch a pilot mobile transporter tour in the area soon, for a trial period of one year. Water activities are also expected to increase when the People's Association water venture facility at Marina East is completed by end 2014, and canoeing, dragon boating and sailing activities are available to the community.

With these enhancements, we expect Marina Bay to be abuzz with even more energy and excitement, and become a more popular waterfront

Page: 148

destination for our families and friends to visit and to enjoy.

Let me now turn to another part of Singapore. This time in the north east, to describe an area that is altogether different, that excites different impulses and senses, but which also presents opportunities that require the collective participation of Singaporeans to realise.

Sir, when we speak of Pulau Ubin, we think of a small island untouched by the hustle and bustle of Singapore, immersed in the rustic charm of yesteryear – an island which reminds us of life in the early days; an island which Singaporeans love to visit to be in close touch with nature and for activities like camping, cycling and hiking. It is a place close to the hearts of many Singaporeans.

Ubin is certainly all that. But it is also much, much more. In the 1950s, Ubin was a bustling island with 2,000 residents, many involved in farming, fishing and the quarrying of granite for construction. In fact, granite from Ubin had been used to build the Causeway and the Horsburgh and Raffles lighthouses. The history of Ubin tracks the history of Singapore and it is very much part of our heritage.

As farming and mining declined, so too did the number of residents. It now has less than 100 residents. But unknown to many, Ubin is a wonderful treasure trove of biodiversity. These include species which are endangered or not found in the rest of Singapore. Habitats are being enhanced and species are being discovered, with the help of many Singaporeans in the community.

Just some examples: in the 1990s, Prof Ng Soon Chye, former President of the Nature Society (Singapore), together with a French researcher, approached NParks to carry out a joint study on the Oriental Pied Hornbills on Ubin – large creatures. But the study revealed the breeding ecology of the hornbills. As a result, they installed artificial nest boxes on the island. From one breeding pair of hornbills, we now have over 60 of them on the island. Some have even flown across to other parts of Singapore, including Changi and Pasir Ris.

In 2003, NParks carried out a comprehensive survey of butterflies on Ubin with the help of butterfly enthusiasts led by Mr Khew Sin Khoon. More than 100 butterfly species were documented. This group went on to form the Butterfly Circle, an interest group. It advised NParks in planting up Butterfly Hill, a little knoll on the island created out of wasteland left over from Ubin's granite

Page: 149

quarrying history. Today, over 130 species of butterflies can be found there.

The Greater Mousedeer was presumed to have gone extinct from Singapore by the mid-1990s. It was re-discovered on Ubin in 2008, during a partnership project between NUS and NParks to study wildlife. These mousedeers are doing well on Ubin and are still frequently photographed by our remote cameras set in the forest.

The "Eye of the Crocodile", scientific name Bruguiera hainesii, or known by the Malays as Berus mata buaya, is a mangrove tree that is listed as "Critically Endangered" by the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN). Members cannot see it on the screen but it gets its interesting name from the breathing pores that you can find on the trunk of the tree which, if you look carefully, resemble the scaly lids of the crocodile eyes and which help the tree to take in oxygen in the muddy mangrove environment.

It is the most endangered mangrove tree species in the world, with an estimate of less than 250 of these trees left globally. Of these, at least 11 are in Singapore. Dr John Yong from SUTD had discovered the first one at Sungei Loyang, and subsequently helped to find one of two trees on Ubin. The largest tree was found along the Kranji Nature Trail by Ms Ria Tan, who is a passionate naturalist who set up WildSingapore, the popular nature blog.

These are just some of the many examples of how agencies like NParks have been working with passionate volunteers and experts to document Ubin's biodiversity, preserve its rustic character, enhance its natural environment and sensitively provide access so that the public can enjoy Ubin's natural charm.

Building on these efforts, Sir, we will initiate a conversation soon with Singaporeans, including the islanders, interest groups and experts, on how we can sensitively enhance the natural environment of Ubin and protect its heritage and its rustic charm. We will seek ideas about nature and heritage conservation, and about education and nature-based recreation. Minister Khaw has asked me to lead this project, and I am humbled and privileged to do so.

We will consult and engage widely. We will not rush because the process is as important as the outcome and we want to hear from as many Singaporeans as possible. Our collective ideas, when implemented, can be a gift for many generations of Singaporeans. Some of these ideas, if ready, will also be meaningful in our commemoration of Singapore's 50th anniversary

Page: 150

next year. We will share more details about "The Ubin Project" later this year.

I hope Members will support this initiative. I hope Singaporeans, young, old and the young-at-heart, as well as the heritage and green community, will rally around, support this project and share your memories, ideas and your impressions with us.

Sir, let me now turn to the remaining cuts filed by hon Members. First, on urban planning: Assoc Prof Fatimah Lateef, Ms Sylvia Lim and Ms Lee Li Lian had asked how plans for new developments had been properly coordinated and smoothly implemented.

In Singapore, land use planning is a structured process overseen and coordinated by URA, in consultation with all relevant agencies. The agencies will look at a wide range of parameters, such as the overall planning intention for the area, transport capacity, utilities, greenery and recreation, amenities like shops, schools, hawker centres, food establishments, so on and so forth.

The agencies will then assess the use, scale and intensity to determine whether these developments can be supported by local infrastructure, or whether the plans need to be adjusted appropriately to avoid adversely affecting nearby residents and businesses. They will also seek feedback regularly to make sure the planning parameters remain relevant.

But, Sir, sometimes, there are gaps between what is desirable from the planning perspective, what is feasible and what residents want. Sometimes, there is a limit to how much new infrastructure we can add in an area around new developments, as the area may already be built up. This is part and parcel of intensification, to make good use of our limited land. Sometimes, implementation may be held back by technical issues. It is often tricky to synchronise precisely an increase in demand for new developments, with the expansion of supporting infrastructure, which does usually takes years to build. As a result, residents may experience temporary inconvenience, which agencies will do their level best to mitigate.

For instance, we have required developers of Government Land Sales sites to inform residents living nearby about upcoming developments. We have also mandated that contractors reduce noise nuisance from construction. Overall, our agencies recognise the need to plan and implement ahead of demand in a coordinated manner, and will continue to do so. I note Ms Sylvia Lim had mentioned earlier about certain instances where certain surveys seem to have

Page: 151

been done after developments have pushed through. We would be grateful if she could provide us with the specific examples in order for us to take this matter up more effectively.

Sir, on Ms Lee Li Lian's specific concerns about food establishments, I mentioned earlier that the availability of amenities is one of many parameters that we look at when planning new towns but we assure her that agencies do plan for adequate food establishments in her constituency, as had been responded to on a number of occasions through Parliamentary Questions last year. Residents in the ward are currently served by two commercial centres located near LRT stations and within a walking distance of about five to 10 minutes for most residents. There are 15 food establishments in that area including coffee shops, food courts, cafes and restaurants. Nevertheless, more such facilities can be considered when there are more residential developments.

I would also like to thank Mr Yeo Guat Kwang for his cut on foreign worker housing. Sir, to build homes and other facilities for Singaporeans, including transport and infrastructure, we need foreign workers. The Government will continue to launch new sites for purpose-built dormitories that meet the housing, social and recreational needs of these workers. We have also launched and will continue to identify new sites to build recreation centres for these workers.

As mentioned by the Acting Minister for Manpower in his earlier speech during the MOM COS, the Government is considering enhancing levers to ensure that foreign worker dormitories better meet workers' needs. In that regard, the move by the Dormitory Association of Singapore Limited (DASL) to develop a set of standards, and to consult Government agencies on these standards, is very much welcome. The Government will work very closely with the industry on these initiatives.

Sir, on behalf of MND, I would like to thank all Members for their interest in the work of MND, and look forward to working with all of you and with fellow Singaporeans to realise the dream of a sustainable, highly liveable green home and city.

I have four clarifications. First, I would like to ask about these elderly without homes but have money in their Retirement Account. Will the Minister work with MOM or CPF to let them use part of the money to

Page: 152

buy their home, especially to buy the Studio Apartments?

Next is on the upgrading programme. I am happy to hear about expediting HIP but nothing has been mentioned about EUP. Are there similar programmes for EUP? Third question is the long waiting time at dumping ground. Is there anything that the Ministry is doing to solve this long queue? And the last clarification: will the Minister look into this minimum period for S Pass and EP, working together with MOM, to discourage job hopping?

Chairman, the first and the last queries on whether MND will work with MOM to look into the two aspects, the short answer is, of course, yes. As for Studio Apartment, I thought I should explain a little bit. What is this Studio Apartment concept? A Studio Apartment was conceptualised to help owners of larger flats right-size and then convert that into some cash for their retirement needs. That is why there is no need for loans or to tap into your CPF Account. In fact, by right-sizing, you will be freeing up part of your assets as cash and then we further incentivise through the Silver Housing Bonus to encourage you to put some of the money into CPF LIFE. That is the intent of the Studio Apartment which I hope the Member can appreciate.

As for HIP and EUP, Dr Maliki looks after this upgrading programme, I will ask him to address the specific query.

On the issue of dumping ground, I think we have discussed this in Parliament previously. Because we stepped up so much construction activities, and especially with the MRT tunnelling work, much excavated materials were generated. There was, in fact, a jam caused by the trucks. We have worked – though I cannot quite recall the technicalities of what we did but we have done a lot – to shorten the queues. What I am told is it is not as if there is long waiting throughout the day. It is only during the peak hours or a couple of hours a day. So, if you schedule your work and avoid those two hours, there is no waiting. For example, if you were to go and dump now, I can guarantee you, there is no waiting.

Sir, I can understand the Member's interest in the EUP. I have a constituency made up of 70% of private estates. I also have personal interest in ensuring that our private estates continue to be

Page: 153

upgraded. As the Member is aware, the EUP programme is quite an extensive programme. We have already launched about eight batches now; we have just invited nominations for the ninth batch and the deadline is 30 April this year.

We have also brought forward the gap between batches. In each batch, we select about seven to eight estates depending on the size. Each time we go out and upgrade those eight estates at every batch, it requires a long time to plan, to assess. It takes a lot of ground-up initiative because we want to ensure that there is ownership amongst the residents. So, the working committee has to be formed.

EUP is beyond the normal upgrading works of all the different agencies, so it does take a long time to get the projects going. As much as I can appreciate Er Dr Lee's interest in us expediting the programme, it is something that is an issue of capacity. As I have mentioned, we have reduced the duration. Members will notice that batch nine is just about one, or one-and-a-half years after batch eight. We will try to bring batch 10 even closer to batch nine.

But there is a capacity issue. For Members who really have got private estates that they would like to put up for nominations, please do so. As much as we want to give the project to everyone, as in any upgrading project, we just have to take turns and look at the needs of the ground as well as achieve a fair geographical spread over the different estates that we select.

Sir, I have one clarification for the Minister. During his speech, the Minister mentioned that I spoke about the success of The Hillford. I would like to clarify that. In fact, I expressed the disappointment of many seniors that they felt outbid unfairly by non-retirees and investors because they were chasing the same unit. In fact, the concession that the Government gave for this project to make it a retirement village was, they claim, no more than just a shoe-box apartment because of no age limit on occupancy. I would like to ask the Minister, would he consider more land to be set aside for retirement village but this time with very clear eligibility criteria for occupancy and buyers so that it genuinely benefits and meets the exclusive needs of our seniors.

I thank Ms Foo Mee Har for her clarification. Indeed, I did not mishear you. I said that you commented that it was a commercial success for the developer but whether it will end up a successful retirement village from the viewpoint of the retirees, I think the jury is still out. We ourselves are watching over this experiment that URA has done. But I note her suggestion that in future – for such land sites sale – we may want to put in more

Page: 154

conditions to better ensure that the outcome will be what we desire.

Indeed, when URA first formulated the tender specifications, they were quite tight. We did a lot of consultations and along the way as we consulted both the retirees and the developers, the final tender terms were as what were included in the Hillford tender. Whether there are better ways of doing it are things that we will certainly look into.

As I stressed just now, my priority is to the 80% of Singaporeans who live in HDB. I believe in retirement or ageing in place; I believe in village life, meaning kampung spirit. Whether one should design and build a retirement village purely for retirees only, with no young people and no other inhabitants, I am not so sure. I believe in ageing with a lot of young people around you and I think life should be that way. Within HDB towns, I am doing my best to create this kind of retirement villages but with young people.

We are doing a lot of experiments in my own constituency for example. The project I am doing, just behind Admiralty MRT station, will be such an experiment. Several Members have expressed interests and, in fact, we are working with them too. The key is to allow the retirees to age in place without having to move out of the community and often they want their children to be near them too, so that they do not have to move out. I spent some time discussing that just now and it is something I wanted to put my energy into, to try to realise as much of that aspiration as possible.

Much more than hardware, it is the whole community support – the software. I can create all the facilities, all the public spaces – will they come out to use them? Will neighbours come and take part in activities? We shall also get relevant social enterprises to come and support the right kind of activities. Those are the type of experiments that I am trying out in my own constituency and in a few of the constituencies that some of the Members have volunteered to join in. I am hopeful that we can have some breakthroughs there. Perhaps, in Yishun South, too.

Just want to ask the Minister of State Dr Maliki, whether he would agree that elderly singles who are unable to buy flats because they have no CPF or ability to pay loan instalments – for such people, they are really people with limited options – and whether the Minister of State would consider them as belonging to a vulnerable group. And if so, whether MND would be prepared to consider any application by elderly singles to rent a single flat on their own on a case-by-case basis because of the fact that they are elderly.

Page: 155

There cannot be that many elderly singles who want to live in a single room flat by themselves.

Just one more clarification, Mr Chairman, for the Minister of State Mr Desmond Lee – just wanted to ask whether it is likely that we will have water taxis along Kallang River and, if so, when.

Sir, the proposition for a single elderly living alone or be given a rental flat on his own or her own is very attractive. Even if we assume there is not that many today, the moment we open the door, I am sure we will get an influx of applicants. We want to be quite careful about such possibilities.

Secondly, for the singles, some cases are due to the death of a partner, and they may still have children. If they really do not have family members, then we want to try to encourage them, in the first instance, to share the space with another elderly. The reason being the limited resources. I have mentioned in my speech earlier that for every one rental 1-room flat that we give out, there is another family that will probably have to wait his or her turn. We have to strike that balance between whether we want to encourage or even facilitate elderly singles, understanding some of these constraints, and help them with another person.

Under special circumstances – where they really have got medical issues that are supported by medical documents that say that they really cannot live with another person – I have also mentioned earlier, that we have acceded to such appeals previously.

In response to Member Mr Lim Biow Chuan's query – we currently have a water taxi service at the Singapore River to facilitate movement of people within the city area. For Kallang River, it is something that we can look at in the future.

Sir, I would like to let the Minister know that construction sites start work at 7.00 am. Once they have excavated, they will load the waste on the lorries and go to the dumping ground. It will be throughout the whole day. If you want them to dump only in the evening time – that means double handling – it is not productive. Not only that, many sites do not have that space to store the excavated materials. That is why I would like to urge the Minister to look into ways to improve this. Otherwise, it is

Page: 156

unproductive.

*The hon Minister Khaw Boon Wan nodded.*