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

Madam, housing policies must meet the housing needs and aspirations of Singaporeans. With a fast ageing population and low birth rate, our housing policies must facilitate ageing in place of our elderly, and provide flexibility for family members to live near one another for mutual support.

Madam, at my Meet-the-People sessions, I frequently receive requests from residents for new and rental flats. Many of these residents face tremendous stress in housing their families due to the high open market rental. Children of these families are also badly affected as they face problems to find schools while their families are moving around or squatting with others. Many upgraders and downgraders also face difficulty to buy flats from HDB. Many cannot afford the Cash Over Valuation (COV) and open market HDB resale flats.

Page: 122

Thus, I would urge the Ministry to consider providing more flexibility for families to live near one another through the following suggestions:

One, allow Balance of Sale flats to be sold daily so that those eligible for such flats can purchase the flats as soon as possible. The queue should be on a first-come-first-served basis. We should allow more time for the applicants to choose their flats based on the urgency of their needs. We should not penalise those who have yet to select their flats.

Two, more studio apartments for elderly should be built and integrated into new or infill HDB developments. This will provide more choices for families to live near each other.

Three, more rental flats should be built for low-income families for short-term or long-term stay.

Madam, I wish to ask the Minister the following questions. First, how effective are the existing housing policies in facilitating family and community bonding? Two, can HDB allow Balance of Sale flats to be sold daily?

Mdm Chairperson, I would like the Government to re-consider my proposal last year about special housing grant for HDB applicants starting a family. I mentioned that we can start with $10,000 for each child which they can use to offset against the payment of their flat. We can introduce a HDB family housing grant for $10,000 for the birth of the first child, $20,000 for the second child, $30,000 for the third child, and so on. This will help encourage young couples to start a family early.

Young families also need the support of their immediate families, such as their parents and in-laws. We can do more for three generations of families staying together. The new multi-generation priority scheme allows parents and their married child to submit a joint application to purchase a studio apartment or a two-room flat together with another flat in the same project. I would like to ask the Minister for National Development about the take-up rate for this scheme.

I also suggest that the Government look at making bigger sized flats, that is, 4-room and 5-room flats, a priority for larger families.

Page: 123

I read from The Straits Times that the Parenthood Priority Scheme (PPS) has seen a strong take-up rate, with applicants making up 30% of the flats on offer in the non-mature estates. The number of married-couple applicants with kids in the more popular mature estates was almost 80% of the flats supplied. I would like to ask the Minister whether he sees the take-up rate stabilising in mature estates and whether the proportion of PPS is likely to increase in the future. Would the Minister further streamline the priority scheme to grant higher priority for families of three or more for 3-room applicants, a family of four or more for 4-room —

Mdm Chair, the Minister said in February this year that the prices of new HDB flats have been "delinked" from resale flat prices by varying the quantum of discounts applied to the selling price. He said that HDB will continue with this pricing policy for as long as "property remains hot". What are the criteria he will use to determine if the housing market is cool enough, resulting in the prices of new and resale flats being "linked" once again? Would HDB consider permanently delinking the price of new and resale flats so that new flat buyers are not at the mercy of resale flat prices, which the Minister has said he is not able to control?

I understand from the Minister's earlier replies to this House that the factors used to determine the selling price of new flats include the typical household income of the families who buy them, the market price of similar resale flats in the vicinity and the attributes of the flats including their size and location. He said that HDB applies a discount to this price and gives housing grants to eligible buyers. Could the Minister share with us what is the exact pricing formula used to string all these factors together to determine the selling price for new flats? More specifically, what is the formula used to calculate the discount or "market subsidy"?

For future launches, could HDB publish the price of the new flat before and after the discount, so that home buyers will have a clearer picture of the market price of the new flats, and the discounts that they are receiving from HDB?

Now on to my next cut on the Parenthood Priority Scheme (PPS). In January 2013, HDB introduced the PPS to give priority allocation for new flats to "first-timer" married couples with children. Under this scheme, 30% of BTO (Built-to-Order) flats and 50% of SBF (Sale of Balance Flats) flats will be set aside for this group.

Page: 125

I agree that Singaporean couples with children should get priority in flat allocation, because they not only have to house themselves, but also their children. However, the proportion of flats set aside for all first-timers remains unchanged at 85% for BTO flats in non-mature estates. This means that other first timers, including married couples who do not have children yet, will effectively have a lower proportion of the flats set aside for them.

If the goal of the PPS is to raise birth rates, then it might be necessary to also include married couples without children, because many of these couples may be waiting to get their own home before having kids.

The Minister has said that once the HDB clears the backlog of first-timer married couples with children, the HDB can then extend the PPS to married couples without children. Will this mean that all first-timer married couples — with or without children — will be allocated 30% of BTO flats and 50% of SBF flats, or will married couples without children have a separate allocation? More clarity on this will help prospective home buyers better plan their flat applications.

To get a sense of the size of the backlog, for the BTO launch in January 2013 during which PPS was first offered, what proportion of PPS applicants had unsuccessful applications for previous BTO launches? Can the Minister provide an estimate of when this backlog of married couples with children is expected to be cleared, and when married couples without children can start to benefit from PPS? And, lastly, will PPS be a permanent scheme or will it only be in place until the current backlog of flat applicants is cleared?

Sir, MND and HDB have worked very hard to redress the mismatch between supply and demand in the housing sector. Some 110,000 units of new residential public housing will be completed in the coming years, with at least 23,000 of those units to be launched this year in 2013. The ramped-up supply, together with the recent cooling measures, has also combined to keep public housing costs affordable to Singaporeans.

In addition to generating more supply, the HDB has also put in place many new programmes and schemes which have been carefully calibrated to meet

Page: 129

the needs of certain targeted and specific groups of people. There have been several schemes aimed specifically at promoting parenthood to ease the anxieties of parents who are concerned, to ensure that they and their children will have a roof over their heads. Two examples of the schemes are, first, the PPS which my colleagues have mentioned earlier, and, of course, the Parenthood Provisional Housing Scheme (PPHS) as well. These are just two examples of the several schemes available which have been very well received by Singaporeans.

I take this opportunity to commend the Ministry for the work that has been done in improving the overall supply of flats in Singapore. It is also obvious that the Minister and his team have been very careful, very deliberate and thoughtful in the way they have gone about designing the various schemes to provide targeted assistance and priority. In particular, the schemes which I have outlined above underpin the broader national agenda in promoting family and parenthood.

However, Mr Chairman, despite best efforts, not all marriages work out. Some marriages, unfortunately, come to an end. Sometimes, there could also be young children involved and, in such a situation, it is their interest which is paramount. In this context, I would like to ask the Minister to look into how we can better assist in giving a divorced parent with custody of the children priority in the reallocation of another flat. Let me just briefly describe the circumstances.

A matrimonial home is usually jointly held in the names of both the husband and the wife. When the couple undergoes a divorce, the usual court order, in relation to joint property, provides for the HDB flat to be sold on the open market and the proceeds distributed to the couple after the CPF funds are repaid. This is usually also ordered to be done within a prescribed timeframe. Once this sale is made and the proceeds are apportioned, very often, the wife – of course, I am generalising but not all situations – usually with custody of the children, will be left with some cash but with no flat. It is, of course, possible for the wife to buy out the husband's share, but this requires a substantial disposable income which the wife is unlikely to have available.

The sale could be deferred so that the wife and the children could continue to stay in the matrimonial home. But for how long? And this would effectively only be kicking the problem down the road and would probably also be detrimental for both parties in a falling market. Very often, the husband himself would also want the matrimonial home sold quickly so that he gets his share of the cash and moves on with his own life. So, it is likely that the wife will have to buy or rent, leave aside an open market purchase, which is possible but will

Page: 130

require a stash of cash.

If she approaches the HDB, she will no longer be a first-time buyer and there will be restrictions and a debarment. And there will also be considerable time pressure on the wife because, once the sale is complete, she and her children will have no roof above their heads. It is not possible for her to join the queue for another BTO or SBF or wait for an allocation even after taking into account the debarment period. And even if you overcome that, the normal rental housing queues would be so long that by the time that allocation takes place, it is likely that the matrimonial home would have long been sold.

So, in that connection, I wish to ask if the Minister would be prepared to consider designing another scheme aimed at extending to this group of persons a priority allocation either for the purchase or rental of a flat, depending on the financial position of the wife. I end by asking the Minister to bear in mind that this is a very vulnerable group of persons, normally a single parent with one or maybe more young children. So, I hope that this can be favourably considered.

Sir, the gist of this cut is to understand the HDB's plans for larger BTO flats going forward and, separately, the size of flats for Singaporeans in future. The latter issue continues to be discussed even more so in the aftermath of the discussion covering the Population White Paper and with the high cost of private housing in mind.

Parliament has also seen a similar range of queries dealing with Executive Condominiums (ECs) and HDB's Executive Maisonettes (EMs), amongst others, in this session of Parliament. In October 2012, the Minister stated in a Parliamentary reply that the HDB stopped building EMs in 1995 and that ECs have effectively replaced this segment of flats that seek to accommodate buyers who want to purchase other flats. While the old HDB EMs range from 138 to 243 sqm, ECs have unit sizes ranging from 69 to over 300 sqm, but this was reduced to 260 because of ECs that were priced closer to the $2 million mark.

The Minister also said not too long ago that ECs are better placed to meet the diverse needs of Singaporeans and there is no need to introduce executive flats even though the idea of ECs, as mooted in 1995, was a means to shorten the queue for HDB executive flats and to meet Singaporeans' demand for affordable private property.

In view of the high cost of executive flat size apartments in new EC launches, can the HDB consider a pilot scheme, in fact, building a small number of larger apartments in new BTO launches built in mature or non-mature estates? So, second- or even first-timers who want to purchase apartments larger than 5-room flats are not restricted from doing so by the price deferential that comes with ECs of the same size.

As most BTO flat applicants today are younger couples and smaller families, it may be argued that there is a risk of oversupply if larger flats are built again. But in light of modern construction techniques, it will be helpful if BTO flats could be designed in such a way that two adjoining flats can be easily converted, as it were, to form an executive apartment and for allowance for this to be made prior to construction. For example, the HDB can set aside a percentage of any new launches for such flats, let us say, 10%, and in the event that demand is not

Page: 132

met, then the flats can be easily converted to 3-room flats without significant cost implications.

Sir, it is also quite common to hear of middle-aged Singaporeans talking about how small new 3-, 4- or 5-room HDB flats are. This is an old issue, but it still requires the Government to say not too long ago that the size of HDB flats has not shrunk since 1997. Nonetheless, the Government's commitment to plan for a 6.9 million population in future does bring this issue back to the fore. The Government has previously said that smaller flats do not have to mean a lower quality of living because the living space per person has actually increased over time due to smaller families. But after the passing of the White Paper, there is an irony in this position. In light of our urgent need to raise our TFR and encourage families to have more children and, separately, the Government's stated intention for a larger population, would there not be an argument for the Government to consider building flats which are of the size of those built prior to 1997 so as to plan for flat sizes that anticipate and even encourage a rise in TFR?

Finally, I would be much obliged if the Minister could give us an update on the Government's plan on the DBSS scheme, in light of the suspension of the DBSS land sales for the last six months.

Sir, the last three years have been a trying time for home buyers. High COVs, long waiting time for BTO flats, and the fear of being caught behind the curve as property price rises were real concerns and anxieties many Singaporeans live through.

Credit to the Minister for National Development, I think we are on our way to resolving the public housing imbalances in the next two to three years. More new BTO launches are coming and there are record numbers of completed flats in the next few years. The slew of demand management measures and the massive ramping up of housing supply have since begun to show some stabilising effects in the property market. I think we have probably seen the worst of the housing imbalances.

All that we are hoping for now is for a nice soft landing in the next few years. But with housing prices at this level, we cannot rule out the risk of a hard landing though, which could be triggered by, among other things, unexpected change of market sentiments, sharp rises in interest rates or the abrupt unwinding of

Page: 133

liquidity easing.

Now that we have largely met the demand of first-time buyers, and soon able to satisfy the demand of second- and third-time buyers, I believe it is timely now to take stock of our housing programme, carefully study the lessons learnt from this cycle, and refresh the intent and purpose of our public housing policy.

HDB housing started in the 1960s as a low-cost model with the aim of accommodating Singaporeans in the shortest possible time.

Over the years, as the country progressed and became more affluent, the quality and aesthetics of public housing have improved to meet the changing lifestyles and rising aspirations of Singaporeans. HDB flats then became more expensive in tandem with the rising private property market. Flats today are still affordable but not as affordable as they used to be. HDB prices have risen sharply in the last 10 years but household incomes were unable to keep up with the same pace and magnitude.

Public housing should not be like any asset class where those with cash liquidity can take a view on property and hoping to profit thereafter. We have to keep HDB home prices within the comfortable reach of our low- and middle-income Singaporeans, regardless of the property cycles. While there is still room for the private property market and the resale market to discover their price levels, I agree with Minister Khaw that new flat prices should be delinked from the market and not be at the mercy of swings in the private property markets or the resale market.

HDB should also look into building a small reserve stock of flats; some new and some resale from the resale market; and release them to the market from time to time should the HDB resale market or the COV run ahead of its fundamentals. There will be obviously carrying cost for holding such a stock but, as HDB covers more than 80% of the housing market, it will be in a better position to manage such costs.

In the years ahead, let us bring more stability to home prices, especially in public housing, so that Singaporeans can have peace of mind that HDB homes will always be affordable to our citizens.

What it means is that prices of new HDB flats should be directly linked to incomes of the different median household groups to ensure affordability for

Page: 134

each segment.

In addition, we should also re-look at this concept of affordability. Currently, HDB uses the Debt Service Ratio (DSR) as an indicator of housing affordability. The DSR refers to the proportion of the monthly household income set aside to pay for the housing instalments. It is based on a 30-year loan, and it includes interest payments. So, if the interest rate moves up and the tenure of the loan changes, it would affect the DSR if your income remains unchanged.

Currently, HDB flats are priced at DSR of about 25% or thereabout so that most buyers are able to pay for their monthly instalments using CPF, with no or minimal cash outlay. However, we need to study further whether the 30-year-tenure loan is too long for our life cycle. Also, are too much of our CPF savings being channelled to housing and too much of our savings are into property investments?

Some countries use the Home Price-Income Ratio (HPI) as an indicator to determine affordability. It essentially measures the number of times the property price purchased is priced over the median household income.

In a The Straits Times' article in February 2010, Professors Tu Yong and Yu Shi Ming noted that Singapore's HPI for resale flats in non-mature estates is 5.8, compared to Hong Kong's 19.8 and London's 7.1. That means Singaporeans generally need 5.8 times of their household income to buy a resale flat in non-mature estates, whereas a Hong Kong resident needs more than three times that amount. I want to ask the Minister: what is our HPI ratio now and what would be an optimal HPI ratio we hope to achieve going forward?

Sir, another factor is land cost. Due to the rising private property market, it has directly impacted the Chief Valuer's valuation of land cost for public housing. I would like to ask the Minister whether we should review this entire approach of public housing so that we can reduce the land cost so that the financing cost for individuals to buy HDB flats can be further reduced.

Sir, yesterday, in The Straits Times' Forum page, a Jolly Wee wrote titled, "Best live within our means". Wee described how some people have lifestyles that are beyond their earning powers, and make themselves miserable. I showed it to a friend and he said, "This is logical, don't people already know?"

Statistics show that more people are getting into debt at an earlier age, mostly consuming what they cannot afford. Needs and wants are less blurred, as materialism becomes a norm.

Financial literacy, planning and prudence need to be instilled, especially when buying big-ticket items. Most people shun it. When they cannot make ends meet, they say they have no money to plan. And when they have extra, they say they are doing okay, so there is no need to plan. Hence, could the Minister consider incorporating financial literacy as part of the existing financial counselling which is administered ahead of house purchase?

Today, the process itself considers the person's current finances, but not the impending expenses, like children's education, car purchases, and so on. I suggest that we use a life cycle and life goals approach, together with a financial health ratio check, and setting aside emergency funds, so that prudent decisions can be made to avoid fire sales and pitfalls in a downturn, or when one loses a job.

Corollary, can the Minister consider lifting the income ceiling for direct purchase of HDB flats? If people are frugal enough and genuinely want to live in HDB flats despite higher income ability, we should not penalise them. It will be a less stressed and happier life when one practises financial prudence and lives within one's means.

Page: 140

Sir, as Members can see, my portfolio is not an easy one, but I do enjoy the many cuts inflicted on me and the many speeches. It is an important Ministry because millions of people's lives are affected – where they stay. If I can make a little contribution to make their lives better, I do not mind a few more cuts.

This is my second MND Committee of Supply (COS); I have been here almost two years now. I think we have achieved a few things. So, to the many cuts, I have some answers. But to many others, I do not have the answers yet, but I would share with Members how I think we can go forward on them.

Sir, we had an intense debate in Parliament just last month. Let me share my two takeaways. First, Singaporeans continue to be unhappy with the current infrastructure crunch, including the housing imbalance. We are addressing this aggressively. Second, Singaporeans care deeply about Singapore and its future. They want to help build a vibrant and inclusive Singapore for future generations to come. We will facilitate such participation. In the area of housing, I will involve fellow Singaporeans in working out some housing policies together. Let me elaborate on these two takeaways.

First, the current housing imbalance. It is temporary and, given sufficient time, can be solved. This, I am confident. As I have said, I have been in MND for almost two years. So, I thought I would use this occasion to report to Members on the progress in these two years.

First, we increased supply dramatically. An exceptionally large number of new homes are currently being built. We will begin to feel the impact this year when 30,000 units are completed and families get the keys to their new homes.

Page: 142

The full impact will kick in from next year, when 50,000 units are completed, followed by 54,000 units in 2015 and 63,000 units in 2016.

For public housing specifically, the ramped-up programme has statistically cleared our backlog of married HDB first-timers. With 15,000 marriages each year, family formation is well within this building programme of 25,000 per year. But some of them have lost out during balloting to couples yet to marry under the Fiance/Fiancee Scheme, who outnumber them in BTO applications. We are correcting this through the PPS. In the recent exercise for non-mature estates, most of the 600 married HDB first-timers with children who applied will get the chance to select one.

Mr Seah Kian Peng proposed that we should extend PPS to pregnant mothers. I agree and we can do so from the May BTO launch. By the way, Mr Seah was the first who suggested giving housing priority to young couples with children – this was some three years ago. I would like to record his role as the "father" of the PPS. I am just the "midwife". After we have cleared this backlog, we will extend the scheme to cover those already married but without children yet. I hope to be able to do so next year.

Mr Gerald Giam asked whether, when we do this extension, the quota will be amended. Yes, certainly. Otherwise, we would not be able to clear the backlog of the targeted population. Just to share with Members, if we look at the profile of the BTO first-timer applicants, it is quite interesting. From memory, about 55% are not married yet. These come under the Fiance/Fiancee Scheme. That was what I meant when I said that they outnumber the married couples. Those with children form about 20%; and those married but not yet with children, the remaining 25%. We can easily adjust the quota in order to achieve the purpose of clearing the backlog. To me, this is the clear ranking priority which I think is fair. Those who are already married and with children, we will try to give them their flats as fast as we can. Those who are married but do not yet have children, give the flat to them and then they have to deliver the "deal", which is the baby, next year! And then, those who are not married yet, get them to get the keys to their flats quickly, get married and have babies.

We have complemented the PPS with the PPHS. This provides an additional housing option to first-timer married couples with children who need to rent while they await completion of their new HDB flats. And the "father" of this scheme is Minister Lim Hng Kiang. He proposed this to me a couple of years

Page: 143

ago and I kept it in mind. So, now the "baby" is delivered.

The scheme has attracted 200-plus applicants. All the 200-plus families can soon move into these interim flats after they have been retrofitted. Mr Yeo Guat Kwang suggested that we extend the scheme to married HDB first-timers without children. As we still have a few hundred vacant units, I am able to say "yes" to Mr Yeo. In other words, all married HDB first-timers, with or without children, will be eligible for such interim rental flats, while they wait for their new flats to be completed. In the process, if demand were to exceed supply, we must still give priority to those with children.

Second, we stabilised BTO prices by de-linking them from the resale market. This is done by increasing subsidy and keeping BTO prices steady, even as resale prices go up. We are committed to continuing it until the market stabilises.

Mr Giam asked what I meant by stability. We will assess it by examining, for example, the Resale Price Index. He also asked about how we compute market discount. This is not difficult to calculate because the resale prices of most flat types are widely available. In fact, we publish them on the HDB website. But, of course, it is not so easy comparing two flat units because local characteristics have to be factored in. So, there is some subjective element – is it near to MRT; is it not; which level – is it level 15 or level 40, and so on. I think those are the adjustments that one needs to make.

In the last two years, 38,000 HDB first-timer families have benefited from this new pricing policy. The attractiveness of the new BTO prices has been noticed. Almost all HDB first-timers now buy their new flats instead of resale flats. This is quite a big change. In the past, it used to be more bought direct from resale market because they are immediately available. Now, almost all got it from us. This has diverted significant demand from the resale market and has helped to moderate the rise in resale prices.

But we know that this is not enough to tame the resale market because resale flat prices, like those of private properties, are determined by the market and they are heavily influenced by market sentiments. And this is where the media do play a role to guide the sentiments. Mr Ang Wei Neng mentioned a Channel NewsAsia report last night about some $900,000 resale flat units. Yeah, I was watching the news and I noted it, too. So, this morning, I flipped through The Straits Times to see how it reported on the same story. It correctly highlighted that resale transactions have plunged, which is the main story. Unfortunately, Channel NewsAsia chose to forget about the main part of the

Page: 144

story but focused on this $900,000 unit, which, obviously, is an outlier, and is in a resale market, which is beyond my control.

So, I hope the media can help us here. I think we are in a collective exercise here. I think nobody wants the property market to continue to escalate and build up a possible bubble. Nobody will benefit. So all of us are in this boat together. We want to calm down the property market. The way The Straits Times reported on this story had a calming effect. The way Channel NewsAsia did so, unfortunately, had an alarming effect and should not be repeated.

Third, we acted to curb speculative demand in our property market. Sub-sales, as a proportion of all private housing sale transactions, have fallen to 7%. We have gone on to curb investment demand, especially with the recent cooling package. It is still early days, but we observe that some developers have lowered their prices. Most analysts expect the measures to impact both sale volumes and prices.

These cooling measures are necessary as we do not want Singaporeans to over-stretch and expose themselves to unforeseen changes in the property market. Yesterday, hon Member Ms Tan Su Shan gave a good speech when she talked about her worry of a double-whammy in the property market. She is worried that if there was this perfect storm or double-whammy, that is a global economic slowdown and interest rates go up, then what will happen to those who go in now, hoping to buy their second or third property as investments and hoping to make a killing? They may get killed in the process because we are vulnerable to external shocks, such as a global economic downturn or a rise in interest rates.

Interest rates now are extraordinarily low, both globally and in Singapore. They could return to the norm quickly. An increase of two to three percentage points, which is conceivable, could increase mortgage payments by up to 40%. If homeowners fall behind on their mortgage payments, they could lose their homes. This had happened to many Singaporeans not too long ago. We will do all we can to prevent a property bubble because no one benefits and many will be hurt when a property bubble bursts. We continue to watch over the property market and will harden the cooling measures, if necessary.

Lastly, we increased access to public housing. We raised the BTO and EC income ceilings in 2011. Eight in 10 households now have access to new, affordable flats directly from HDB. As we reduced the first-timer backlog, we tripled the second-timer quota for BTO flats in non-mature estates last year. We

Page: 145

share Er Dr Lee Bee Wah and Mr Hri Kumar's concerns on ECs, and, in January, we tightened the EC Housing Scheme to nudge it back to its original policy intent. I am ever ready to tighten the scheme further if necessary.

So, this is, briefly, the progress in two years. I think the immediate phase of fire-fighting for first-timers is over, but there are still some hotspots to tackle. The temperature has come down a few notches, but it is still uncomfortable, I know. The progress has, however, gained us some breathing space to take a pause and review the priorities for the next two years. In addition, I am taking the opportunity of this COS to begin the process of a public discussion on our longer term housing policies.

Let me first discuss the housing work plan for this financial year, my third year in MND. This year, we will maintain the ramped-up construction programme and launch another 25,000 BTO flats. A couple of months ago, HDB announced that they were planning about 23,000 BTO flats. I decided to tell them to up the figure to 25,000 because I wanted to decisively clear the backlog of all married HDB first-timers this year. This will allow us to begin to meet the housing needs of other segments of the population, besides the first-timers.

First, singles. While families will continue to be our top priority, singles have housing needs, too. We know this. Currently, singles aged 35 and above can buy resale flats. And each year, about 4,000 do. However, rising resale prices have made it more difficult for them. Er Dr Lee Bee Wah and Mr Lim Biow Chuan spoke about their difficulties and asked that we allow singles to buy new BTO flats direct from HDB.

We will do so. We will allow first-timer singles aged 35 and above to buy new 2-room flats directly from HDB to meet their housing needs. These will be singles earning up to $5,000 per month as they face more financial difficulty owning a home. These new flats will be built in non-mature estates. In order to keep the prices down, it will come in two sizes – 35 sqm and 45 sqm – and we leave it to them to choose according to their needs and budget. A couple of other important details are still being finalised. For example, how much should we subsidise the flats, as compared to married couples? What should the relative priority be between singles and married couples applying for these flats? We will settle these outstanding issues as quickly as we can, so that the first batch of eligible singles can apply in the July BTO launch, most likely in Sengkang.

Page: 146

Second, second-timers. This is a diverse group and most of them already have a home, but they are looking for a change, either upwards, downwards or laterally. Their needs vary and, typically, they buy from the resale market as they should. But many have sought to get it directly from HDB. In the last two years, because of our attractive BTO prices, second-timer applicants have doubled to 30,000 in 2012.

To help more second-timers, we tripled the second-timer quota in non-mature estates from 5% to 15% in March last year. This has reduced second-timer application rates in non-mature estates significantly, to about 10.

Some have difficulties paying the Resale Levy, as commented by Er Dr Lee Bee Wah and Mr Muhamad Faisal. We try to help, for example, by including the Resale Levy in the price for the flat, so that it can be paid for as part of the housing loan. This has to be on a case-by-case basis. So, do appeal if you feel that there are genuine cases of difficulties and we will, as always, try to be as compassionate as we can.

This year, we will take further steps to help two vulnerable groups of second-timers. We will double the second-timer quota for 2-room and 3-room flats in non-mature estates from 15% to 30%. This will help second-timers needing to downgrade. I have given priority to those who are looking at smaller units obviously with a view to downgrade, presumably with financial difficulties. This will help them downgrade and address some of their financial difficulties. In addition, in line with Mr Edwin Tong's feedback, we will reserve 5% of this 30% quota for divorcees or the widowed who have children below 16. This will almost guarantee their ability to select a 2-room flat, and significantly increase the chances of those who apply for a 3-room flat. These changes will be implemented from the May BTO launch.

We will further help those divorcees who face debarment from subsidised flats, by shortening the debarment period from five years to three years. I think this will help them move on with their lives, especially those with children. As a further measure of assistance, Dr Teo Ho Pin suggested selling balance flats, on a daily basis, as and when they become available. This one I have some problem with because we have been actively clearing our stock of "balance flats" through the various SBF exercises. Currently, there is only a small outstanding stock of about 5,000 flats at various stages of construction.

Page: 147

We will put those nearing completion – and there are about 3,000 such units – to market soon. There are significant benefits in bunching them for sale under SBF. Small batches inevitably attract disproportionately large numbers of applicants, resulting in repeated disappointment and intense frustration. I hope Dr Teo can accept this explanation. His suggestion of giving them on a first-come-first-served basis does not quite work. If you put them on a first-come-first-served basis, it may not reflect the correct order of needs priority. Moreover, if it is based on first-come-first-served basis, when it comes to your turn to choose a flat and if it is a unit that you do not like, you will reject the selection and go back to the back of a very long queue. There will be more unhappiness, I think, if done this way.

Third, seniors and retirees. I agree with Ms Foo Mee Har that many of our seniors have significant assets in their houses. This opens up opportunities for them to get some retirement income, for example, by subletting their flats or rooms. This year, we have increased their options by implementing the new Silver Housing Bonus (SHB) scheme to facilitate right-sizing, and the Enhanced Lease Buyback Scheme (LBS) to support ageing-in-place. But many may still not be aware of the schemes or they may not have accurate information. We will step up public outreach and financial counselling to those who may benefit from these options.

To support right-sizing, we are building more studio apartments for seniors and in various towns. I know many are prepared to right-size, provided they do not have to leave their neighbourhood. So, we are introducing a new scheme, the Studio Apartment Priority Scheme (SAPS), and we will reserve half of the supply for seniors who apply for one either near their current flat, that is within the same community, or near where their children live. This is a further enhancement to the current Ageing-in-Place Priority Scheme or the Married Child Priority Scheme which award priority through giving the seniors more ballot chances. The new Studio Apartment Priority Scheme will replace these two priority schemes. This will be implemented from the May BTO exercise.

I agree with Dr Teo Ho Pin and Mr Gan Thiam Poh that many multi-generational families prefer to live together or close to one another. That is why, last year, we introduced the Multi-Generation Priority Scheme to allow them to apply in the same BTO project so that they can live close by. More than 60 pairs of families have benefited from it, not that many. But for the 60 families, they were most happy.

Er Dr Lee Bee Wah suggested that we go further and build some multi-generational flats, say, with four bedrooms, to help such families live in the

Page: 148

same flat. I heard her – she has advanced very strong arguments on how such families could better support, especially the newlyweds, both financially as well as transmitting important cultural values. I agree with her. I believe there is some demand because some of my residents come to me, too, for such multi-generational flats. But I really do not know how big the demand is. Anyway, I have asked HDB to consider doing so in some BTO developments to test out their demand. If we can, we will try to do one in Yishun.

On a separate point, Ms Foo Mee Har spoke about the growth of foreigner enclaves in some HDB blocks. I agree with her that we should avoid such enclaves. Ms Foo suggested that we cap the number at, say, 10% of each block. Let us do some analysis to see if 10% is the appropriate cap. I find that figure a little low; I think it is on the low side. In any case, let us do the analysis, and, in principle, I agree that we should impose one. While we sort out the implementation details, HDB will immediately cap approvals for all new and renewal of HDB tenancy agreements involving non-citizens to one-and-a-half years. Right now, it is three years. We shall halve it immediately. These changes will not apply to Malaysian tenants as they face less integration challenges.

Sir, for the rest of this speech, let me elaborate on my second takeaway of involving Singaporeans more in designing housing policies. After 50 years of public housing, it is good to re-examine some old assumptions and re-visit some key policies. I intend to do so, jointly with Singaporeans. For certain, the next 50 years will be different from the last 50.

First, home ownership has already crossed 90%. We have probably reached the limit of what is possible. Second, the days of high economic growth of 7%, 8%, 9% and, hence, strong wage growth are over. As property prices are closely correlated with economic growth, low growth means the huge capital gains that our parents and our generation made through reselling HDB flats will now become less likely. Third, Singapore's population was young and rapidly growing in the past, but future growth will severely moderate. Increasing singlehood and declining birth rates may persist though we will continue to persevere to reverse those trends. This has implications on family formation and household size. Fourth, the biological ageing of our population and the physical ageing of HDB towns will become the dominant themes that shape and colour our community life. HDB estate layout and designs will need to keep pace with such major social developments.

In short, our public housing system needs to evolve with the times. Which elements in our current system remain relevant; which require enhancement or strengthening; and which need to be overhauled? If some major changes are

Page: 149

called for, how do we implement them without adversely affecting the vast majority of Singaporeans who own those valuable assets and are quite comfortable with the status quo, especially the elderly, which was Ms Foo Mee Har's point about how to further monetise their asset? They will be most worried if their assets suddenly shrink because we bring about some policy to bring the prices down.

These are complex issues affecting millions of Singaporeans. While change is necessary to address these challenges, it is important that, in doing so, we do not forget the needs of the silent majority. We should give voice to those in our society who are less well resourced to make their interests, needs and concerns heard. Policies must benefit the larger good. As we make changes, we must be mindful not to throw the baby out with the bath water. We must implement these changes judiciously and with heart.

Er Dr Lee Bee Wah, Assoc Prof Dr Muhammad Faishal Ibrahim, Mr Liang Eng Hwa, Mr Pritam Singh, Mr Hri Kumar and Mr Yeo Guat Kwang have made thoughtful comments on this very important subject of housing policies going forward. I listened carefully and thank them all.

From their speeches and other comments aired during Our Singapore Conversations, I distilled four issues worthy of deeper reflection. First, at the ideological level, what should be the purpose for building HDB flats? Second, at the practical level, what kind of housing should the Government provide to meet future needs? Third, at the individual level, how do we address affordability concerns of HDB flat buyers, living in a global city with a high-end private property segment imposing upward pressure on mass market private home and HDB resale prices? Fourth, at the macroeconomic level, how should public housing respond to upcoming demographic changes and, specifically, how can we help elderly Singaporeans better monetise their housing assets? Let me elaborate.

First, what should be the purpose of building HDB flats? The HDB flat is first and foremost a home, where couples start their lives together, and build their hopes and dreams. This is fundamental. But it is also an asset, which they can use to build a better life in their prime and provide security for their retirement needs.

In the early years of Singapore's Independence, homelessness and squatter living were the norm. At that time, we were all HDB first-timers. Having basic, no-frills, low-cost homes was top priority. As Singapore progressed from Third

Page: 150

World to the First, the quality of HDB flats has improved dramatically and we have now become a nation of proud homeowners. The majority are HDB second-timers. HDB flats have become significant assets to most Singaporeans. A home is now also an asset. This is a proud achievement which citizens in many other countries could only hope or dream about.

We enabled this transformation through several important housing policy changes over the decades. I thought it useful to recount the key milestones. In 1971, we allowed HDB flats to be resold for a profit. Before that, flats could only be sold back to HDB at very low, pre-determined prices. In 1989, we allowed flat owners to retain their HDB flats even when they buy a private property. Before that, they would have to sell off their HDB flats. In 1993, we allowed buyers to take loans based on the prevailing market value of the flat, which allowed sellers to maximise the value of their assets. Before that, housing loans were based on HDB's historical selling prices. In 2003, we allowed flat owners to sublet their flats. Before that, the underlying principle was strict owner-occupation.

These policy changes have benefited many Singaporeans. Many were able to upgrade their homes and dramatically improve their quality of life. It has also allowed many to accumulate large nest eggs to fund their retirement needs.

Looking ahead, as we may no longer get the same kind of returns from reselling a HDB flat as in the past, how will its role as an asset be affected? If it is likely to diminish, how should we make the adjustments? How will any such adjustments impact different groups of Singaporeans with different aspirations and needs?

Second, what kind of housing should the Government provide to support future needs and at what size? I heard Mr Pritam Singh talking about this particular aspect just now. I do not have an immediate answer. I think we have to search for the answer together. Over the years, we have widened the range of choices, in terms of flat types and designs to meet a wide range of aspirations. Many are clamouring for HDB to return to basics and its original mission of helping Singaporeans own a basic home. But what does "returning to basics" mean?

Does returning to basics mean that we should focus only on HDB flats? Then where should we set the income ceiling for HDB flats? Should we lower it, raise it or lift it altogether? What about the upper middle class? Should we, for example, stop offering ECs, as suggested by Mr Hri Kumar and Er Dr Lee Bee

Page: 151

Wah?

Does returning to basics mean that we return to pre-2003 days of strict owner-occupation? How will this affect the many retirees who rely on the income from subletting or the younger homeowners who use it to help support their lifestyle?

Does returning to basics mean that we return to pre-1989 days when we required HDB flat owners to sell off their flats when they buy a private residential property, as suggested by Mr Hri Kumar? How will this affect the plans of many Singaporeans who aspire to live in a private condominium and use their HDB flat for additional rental income?

Third, how do we ensure the affordability of new HDB flats for a new generation of newlyweds? Global liquidity and low interest rates since the Global Financial Crisis of 2009 have caused house prices to appreciate sharply, more than income growth. Affordability has worsened. Whilst high prices make homeowners happy, it has caused anxiety amongst young buyers as well as their parents. Some can look to their parents for help, but this may be at the expense of their parents' retirement savings.

We will do more to reduce BTO flat prices relative to incomes, and reduce the financial burden of housing on our young. One way is to increase housing grants for families with children to partly improve affordability and reward parenthood, as suggested by Mr Gan Thiam Poh. Mr Ang Wei Neng suggested the same thing, but not looking at it from the parenthood incentivisation point of view. But there may be other ways. However, even as we make new HDB flats cheaper, we must continue to encourage prudence and avoid over-spending on housing, which is a point very well emphasised by Miss Penny Low. So, I agree with her and Mr Yeo Guat Kwang that more must be done to help Singaporeans buy within their means. Higher housing grants must, however, not lead to more people buying larger flat types than they can afford. I hope this is a principle that we can have consensus upon.

In the earlier days, a 3-room flat was acceptable to many. Now, I think it is a 4-room flat; some a five-room flat; and some maybe an EC. What can a young graduate couple in the workforce for two years reasonably aspire to? What about a lower income household? Are these aspirations within their means? Will they get into trouble if individual circumstances change suddenly or when

Page: 152

the economy heads south? As a Government, how can we help meet newlyweds' aspirations, while also ensuring that they make prudent and sustainable purchases?

Fourth, how should public housing respond to the ageing of our population? When our population was young and incomes were rising across the board, public housing was an effective way of sharing the fruits of economic growth. But as our population ages and economic growth moderates, I agree with Ms Foo we have to be much more proactive and creative in working out options to help our seniors unlock their assets in the HDB flats. We have tinkered with the Lease Buyback Scheme, and introduced some right-sizing incentives. What else can we do?

Sir, our public housing policies have been highly successful in enabling the vast majority of Singaporeans to own their homes. The opportunity to own homes has not been confined to those in the higher or middle income groups. Low-income Singaporeans, too, have benefited. This is quite unique in the world and our achievement has been the envy and the subject of many studies by many countries. I know, because I receive these visitors almost every other week.

A relook is, however, necessary in the light of significant demographic and economic changes. The primary mission of HDB to offer an affordable flat for the majority of Singaporeans will remain unchanged. Fortunately, this is within our control, as we set BTO prices and HDB is the largest housing developer. We have stopped BTO prices from rising by delinking them from resale prices. We can now pause and see what else we can do to bring BTO prices in non-mature estates to, say, around four years of salary as it was before the current property cycle started. We will do so partly through cooling measures to nudge the property market down, and partly by seeing if an alternative housing option can be designed. One thing is clear: we are committed to restoring and maintaining the affordability of new HDB flats to the vast majority of first-timer Singaporean households. Their Singapore Dream of owning their own homes, just like their parents, is safe. We will make sure of that. At the same time, with the ageing population and the bulk of the seniors' savings tied up in their HDB flats, we have to press on with more options for the seniors to unlock their assets.

I have earlier posed quite a number of questions which we need to find answers to. They are not trivial questions, and forging consensus on what the answers should be will be challenging. But they are useful food for thought, I thought. Post-COS, I agree with Assoc Prof Dr Muhammad Faishal Ibrahim that we should organise several Our Singapore Conversation discussions to explore

Page: 153

some of these issues with fellow Singaporeans. I hope some Members can join in such sessions. As public housing impacts the lives and well-being of many Singaporeans, we will need to deliberate over these issues carefully. I invite concerned Singaporeans of all ages to mull over these issues with us. Share with us your worries, fears, hopes and dreams. We hope to hear many views and ideas so as to better inform our housing policies. Let us work on the challenges together, and let us help shape our future housing policies together.

Mr Chairman, last year, MND announced its plans to build lifts for all HDB multi-storey carparks, with the project expected to be completed by 2017. The Minister also stated that priority will be accorded to multi-storey carparks with high parking demand and that HDB will dovetail the lift installations with upcoming improvement works in the precinct, so as to minimise inconvenience for residents. Some of the blocks in my ward, specifically those at Jalan Damai between Block 650 and Block 672, are less than 20 years old. As it stands, they are not likely to be eligible for major upgrading, as there are other older blocks in the town that are in more urgent need of upgrading.

As the precinct I mentioned is only by multi-storey car parks and not open car parks like in older HDB estates, it is inevitable that the parking demand is very high – a point that is repeatedly made to me by residents during house visits. Can I ask the Minister if HDB has a plan or a schedule when the multi-storey car parks in such precincts throughout Singapore will get their lifts?

Sir, I understand that HDB has launched the Greenprint initiative last year and that works under the scope will be carried out in 2013 and 2014 under the pilot project at Jurong East. I would like to request MND to consider rolling out the following initiatives as soon as possible to all eligible HDB towns in view of the national push towards productivity and escalating costs of town maintenance.

Page: 157

I think many precincts could benefit from the following Greenprint initiatives:

(a) Pneumatic refuse collection system. The old design of individual bin-chute system in older HDB estates with daily manual collection is a low-productivity design and is not cost-effective. Residents also often have to live with foul smell during the collection. A modified centralised refuse collection system would increase productivity in town maintenance and reduce the cost of manpower in conservancy work.

(b) Energy and water-saving solutions for common areas. Water and electricity cost is one of the big expenditure items in Town Council management. The initiative on water-saving devices and exploring new sources of energy for common areas can not only achieve the green effect, but also save cost.

I would like to ask MND for its future plans for the Greenprint initiative. Will there be more pilot projects to be conducted and, if so, what are the criteria for the selection of precincts for such pilot projects as it could save the Town Councils some costs? What is the timeframe to roll out the initiative?

Sir, the void decks of our HDB flats are a uniquely Singapore space. Minister Dr Yaacob Ibrahim put it eloquently when he once said, "The void deck carries fond memories for many of us where the residents can gather to meet friends or where our children can run around, rain or shine."

Recently, our void decks have come under threat of being encroached by childcare, wellness activities, elderly centres, shops, eateries, and so on. I am sure residents appreciate the importance of these centres to the community. The question is: why are they encroaching into void decks which are used primarily for residents' interactions and bonding? Residents feel that there is now very little of what counts as community spaces. It is hard for them to get a slot to hold a wedding or a funeral wake at their own void decks.

The issue is not just void decks in Potong Pasir or other estates. Allow me to also cite the incidents surrounding the decision to build the nursing home in Bishan Street 13. Some residents hold a not-in-my-backyard mentality which I do not condone. But the site for the nursing home was an important community space that residents valued. It was a soccer field for children to play. There was

Page: 158

no replacement for this. We understand the need for a nursing home, but why must it be here?

Sir, let me first thank all the Members for speaking and making very thoughtful suggestions. I will respond to them accordingly.

I have two favourite towns. One is Toa Payoh in which I grew up. Over 20 years, from kindergarten to university, from a 1-room flat to a 4-room flat, I saw a new town created. I knew every lorong of Toa Payoh because, as a child, I used to run around the estate. Life improved significantly for my family in the two decades, and so it was for a whole generation of Singaporeans growing up with our first batch of new towns.

Another favourite town of mine is Bedok. Like Toa Payoh, it is also an old town that was deemed too far and unpopular when it was first launched in the late 1970s. But, today, it has become one of the most sought-after mature towns amongst flat buyers. It has great amenities, is very well-linked and self-contained. Yet, under HDB's Remaking Our Heartland plans, Bedok Town Centre will be transformed into a vibrant new hub. A modern shopping mall, a condominium integrated with a new bus interchange next to the MRT station and a hawker centre, are being built as we speak. And not too far away, a new

Page: 161

super Community Centre, integrated with a swimming pool, indoor courts, a fitness centre and F&B outlets, is also being planned. We are even working to develop new dedicated cycling and pedestrian paths linking the two major recreational destinations in the East Coast – the East Coast Park with Bedok Reservoir through Bedok Town Centre.

Our mature HDB towns may be old but are never outdated. We keep them young by injecting new ideas and amenities into their renewal programmes. Many Members in the GPC and in this House have contributed ideas to the upgrading of old towns, too. Increasingly, we are involving the community and residents to co-develop these ideas.

As in the example of Bedok, we rejuvenate old towns in a number of ways. First, we refresh the old towns through our various upgrading and estate renewal programmes to make them more elderly- and family-friendly. Second, we green our towns through our Greenprint initiative, rooftop gardens and other greening efforts. Third, we test-bed and apply new technologies to improve liveability. Let me elaborate.

Estate Upgrading and Renewal. As our population ages, we will need more elderly-friendly fittings in homes. This is why we rolled out the Enhancement for Active Seniors (EASE) programme last July. Since the launch, 40% of the residents living in older flats undergoing the Home Improvement Programme (HIP) have opted for the EASE package. The pilot project to offer EASE directly to flats with elderly in Bukit Merah and Kallang/Whampoa towns have also received good responses. Residents are appreciative of our efforts to make their homes more elderly-friendly. In addition, HDB has received more than 600 applications for EASE from outside the pilot towns. Encouraged by the good response, we will extend EASE nationwide for direct applications from March 2013 – meaning this month.

To reach out to seniors who might be at risk of falls, HDB is also working with some hospitals and grassroots organisations to refer to HDB cases that need the EASE improvements most, so that these seniors can get to enjoy the benefits of the EASE programme earlier. In a recent case, Er Dr Lee Bee Wah had contacted HDB regarding a resident who was hospitalised due to stroke and requested for EASE improvement items to be done in his flat so that he could enjoy the benefits of the EASE soon after his discharge from the hospital. I am happy to report that the HDB Yishun branch promptly assisted the resident and arranged for the contractor to carry out the works.

Page: 162

While EASE helps make our HDB flats more elderly-friendly, the Lift Upgrading Programme (LUP) aids our elderly in external mobility. Nearing the end, the $5.5 billion LUP has benefited close to half a million households.

For the remaining eligible blocks, the process of polling will commence soon. Mr Zaqy Mohamad asked if we could further extend the programme to blocks for which upgrading is not feasible with current technology. HDB will continue to look out for new technologies to bring lift access to these blocks. Meanwhile, residents who stay in non-eligible blocks, but need direct lift access due to medical conditions, can come forward to seek assistance from HDB. We will see how best to render help.

HDB's effort to install and upgrade lifts to make the HDB towns more elderly- and resident-friendly goes beyond LUP. Last year, we introduced a new programme to install lifts in older HDB multi-storey car parks (MSCPs). Mr Pritam Singh asked for an update on this. Following the announcement of the programme last year, HDB has commenced works to install lifts in 76 MSCPs. We will step up the pace of the lift installation in the remaining 445 MSCPs, after the LUP for residential blocks is completed. Given the scale of the project, we expect to complete the programme by 2017.

Another user-friendly initiative we introduced is the mandatory barrier-free features in the common areas of new buildings and their surroundings. To build a more liveable and inclusive environment, BCA is doing a fourth enhancement to the Accessibility Code to include more Universal Design concepts to address the needs of all age groups and people with different needs. To better understand their needs, BCA formed a User Consultation Group which included representatives from various voluntary welfare organisations, such as the Handicapped Welfare Association, Disabled People's Association, Singapore Association for the Deaf and Singapore Association for the Visually Handicapped, in the review. The team tirelessly went around visiting sites to conduct trials to re-examine existing provisions and proposed new enhancements.

The new Accessibility Code will also include child-friendly toilets and lactation room for nursing mothers in buildings frequented by families. To aid those with hearing impairment, the new Code will also spell out hearing enhancement requirements for function rooms, halls and auditoriums in buildings. BCA is also looking at making some basic accessibility requirements,

Page: 163

such as entrance ramps and at least one accessible toilet, mandatory in existing buildings. I am glad to announce that BCA will launch a public consultation in March on these proposals. BCA aims to finalise the Code in the second half of this year to give the industry a grace period of at least six months before implementing the new code in 2014.

Second, we will make our existing towns greener and more sustainable through the Greenprint initiative. Mr Low Thia Khiang asked for an update on this, and what are the selection criteria and roadmap going forward. Let me say that HDB launched the Greenprint initiative last year. Under this initiative, HDB will introduce the concept of green and sustainable lifestyles, to build Green Neighbourhoods, Green Flats and Green Communities.

The first Greenprint pilot is now being conducted in Jurong East to test-bed sustainable initiatives, including energy and water-saving solutions, such as the rainwater harvesting system and rooftop solar panels. We are also piloting a Pneumatic Refuse Collection System that will help to enhance cleanliness of the overall living environment, and increase the productivity of waste collection, as Mr Low Thia Khiang has pointed out, thereby cutting dependence on foreign labour. The system also comes integrated with recycling bins to promote recycling among residents. These pilots are just at the beginning phase. In fact, the tenders are being prepared and called. I could update the House in due course. HDB has also launched a $1 million Greenprint Fund to support test-bedding and seek new ideas for the Greenprint initiative.

Another new green initiative is the intra-town cycling project. Our plan is to facilitate intra-town cycling in two ways. One, we will work with LTA to grow and improve cycling connectivity in our towns. For example, as part of the "Remaking Our Heartland" plans for Jurong Lake, HDB and NParks will work with LTA to develop a 24-km cycling network over the next few years. This will connect the main nodes, including the regional town and neighbourhood centres, and transport nodes. Other towns, like Yishun, East Coast and Punggol, will also incorporate cycling networks as part of the "Remaking Our Heartland" plans. Punggol already boasts the North Eastern Riverine Loop, while the first phase of the tracks in Yishun, which connects Yishun and Khatib MRT stations, has been completed.

Two, we will also look into providing more bicycle parks at the void decks and key nodes around the town. Through this supportive infrastructure and the bicycle paths, we hope to make cycling within the HDB town convenient, safe and fun. This will facilitate residents to do short distance commutes to the shops, market or hawker centre on their bicycles. We will involve residents in

Page: 164

developing this project. For example, Yuhua residents are coming together to discuss the provision of secured bicycle parking facilities within their housing estate which supports the 24-km cycling network in Jurong Town I have mentioned earlier.

Third, we will test-bed and apply new technology to improve liveability. New technologies can help us overcome old constraints, and create new possibilities. One example I will highlight today is mechanised car parking. Last year, the Government Parliamentary Committee (GPC) for National Development and the Environment chaired by Er Dr Lee Bee Wah, offered to lead a study on mechanised car parking. As Members of Parliament on the ground, the GPC Members were keenly aware of the inconvenience caused to residents by localised parking shortages, and wanted to seek new solutions. The GPC set up a team to understand the different technologies available and study the implementation issues. They studied the experiences of Japan and South Korea. Arising from this effort, the GPC has recommended to HDB to pilot mechanised car parking in a few selected sites in existing HDB estates with parking shortages. The GPC Members have offered to continue to work closely with HDB to engage the local residents on this. I would like to thank Er Dr Lee's GPC for its leadership on this. HDB will work with the GPC on these pilots, and will announce the details when ready.

As you can see, we are doing a lot to rejuvenate the mature towns. However, as part of our efforts to build infrastructure and housing ahead of demand, we are developing plans for new towns, too.

Unlike retrofitting old towns, which faces many constraints, opening up new towns offers us greater latitude in design and planning. The outcome is often that each new town is better than the old, usually by a few notches. Punggol New Town is a great example. With waterways and boardwalks, green features and solar panels, integrated carpark and pavilions, Punggol has won the praises of many Singaporeans and accolades of many international judges in urban planning competitions. The fact is, we are going to build more "Punggols" whenever possible.

Punggol New Town itself still has room to grow. With the next phase of development, Punggol is poised to grow into one of the largest HDB towns, with about 96,000 homes, when fully developed. Later this year, HDB will also unveil its plans for Bidadari and Tampines North. These two developments are expected to yield 32,000 more homes, when fully developed.

Page: 165

In the longer term, however, a larger supply of BTO flats will come from our developing of Tengah. Tengah is a large site that offers a sizeable area for township development. With creativity and imagination, Tengah can be developed to be a township of the future with many exciting possibilities.

In all these developments, we challenge ourselves to create towns that are even more resident-friendly than we know today. We believe strongly in resident-centricity as the main philosophy to design and enhance the living environment. HDB will continue, therefore, to build well-designed and community-friendly new towns that are cost-effective and sustainable. At the same time, as emphasised by Er Dr Lee Bee Wah, HDB will work with the relevant agencies to ensure that the amenities, such as childcare centres, kindergartens and supermarkets, are in place at the same time or soon after the residents have moved into the new precincts. Besides pre-planned facilities that are built together with the residential blocks, HDB also safeguards space for future facilities to meet the needs of residents as the community grows and needs change.

Miss Penny Low made many suggestions on how we can better cater to different groups of residents and make high-density living more comfortable through thoughtful designs and a better understanding of their needs. We agree. We thank her for the suggestions, too. Today, HDB's Studio Apartments are an example of customised design and purpose-built housing to meet seniors' needs. Studio Apartments are of comfortable size, easy to maintain, and provided with built-in kitchen cabinets and wardrobes in a ready-to-move-in condition. It is also equipped with elder-friendly fittings, such as lever taps, slip-resistant tiles, and support hand-bars. For projects launched from November 2011 onwards, applicants for new Studio Apartments can choose whether they want the kitchen cabinets at the normal height, or at a lowered height catering for wheelchair users. They even have an alert alarm system to enable them to seek assistance during an emergency.

Our Studio Apartments are also integrated within communities amidst other flat types and are close to amenities, so the elderly can live side-by-side with young families and children, sharing common spaces and experiences. This is a good example of how we design our flats for specific groups. We will continue to adopt this approach for future flats.

Miss Penny Low also asked that we apply design thinking to help build social capital, particularly in our new housing estates. We thank Miss Low for her ideas, and have, in fact, sought her inputs for our community efforts in Punggol. For instance, the National Environment Agency, the Public Service

Page: 166

Division, People's Association and HDB, have worked on a joint project with Punggol residents to co-create the Punggol living experience. Called "Project Love Punggol", it aims to develop new ideas that will enable stronger community ownership by Singaporeans of their neighbourhood, community and environment. The enthusiasm of the residents and their readiness to take ownership to create a unique neighbourhood are most heartening.

Mrs Lina Chiam spoke about the need to provide adequate community spaces in our towns. We agree. Planning for communal spaces to facilitate social interactions and community bonding is a key consideration in the design of HDB estates. HDB does it at various levels, from the town plazas and neighbourhood parks, to precinct pavilions, rooftop gardens and void decks. We also have the 3-Generation (3G) family playground, consisting of children's playgrounds, adult fitness stations and elderly wellness exercise stations located in close proximity to provide children, adults and the elderly a common space to play, exercise and bond.

Indeed, as shown from our efforts in creating a liveable and inclusive environment for Singaporeans, the task of improving our living environment cannot be the Government's alone. Residents' participation is paramount.

To build ownership, it is important to encourage greater community participation and give residents more say in the running of their estates. In 1989, we set up Town Councils precisely to do this. The elected local Members of Parliament are given autonomy and authority to take charge of estate management and maintenance, and to shape the direction and character of their estates.

It is an example of local empowerment.

To further support resident involvement, MND, in recent years, introduced the Town Councils Management Report (TCMR). The TCMR provides residents with objective information on how their Towns are performing, and performances are graded in simple colour bands of "red", "amber" and "green" for easy interpretation.