Debated in Parliament on 13 Nov 2024.
Debate resumed.
Mr Keith Chua.
Mr Speaker, Sir, firstly, allow me to declare my interests in this matter. Currently, I serve as a member on the National Heritage Board. I am also currently Vice President of the Restaurant Association of Singapore and also Executive Chairman of a food service business.
Hawkers play a key role in the F&B landscape. They continue to provide tasty and affordable meals for all Singaporeans. An NEA study in 2023 suggests that over 80% of Singaporeans consume hawker centre food at least once a week.
Hawker food continues to remain largely affordable owing to a variety of factors. In F&B, the three main cost components are cost of space, that is, rental; cost of food, that is, the raw materials that go into the dish; and manpower. Hence, an F&B business thrives or survives when it generates sufficient revenue to cover all operating expenses.
Government policy thus far has recognised the value and place of hawkers in our society, and it would seem the majority of hawkers benefit from generally low and manageable rentals in the 100-plus hawker centres. Older hawkers continue to benefit from the Subsidised Rent Scheme. NEA data estimates this at about 40% of cooked food stallholders. NEA also reports that the average successful monthly bid for cooked food stalls continues to be lower than rental at food courts and coffee shops. Thus, on the issue of rents, can there be a better way to support hawkers moving forward?
Recent high bids in popular centres have raised the question of whether the bidding system is still the correct approach. If we look at the hawker centres, in many hawker centres there will be a few stalls with long queues and many where we can just walk up and order. It is the same pattern in other F&B concepts, whether these are food courts, quick service restaurants or full service restaurants. Some will have waiting lines, while others, you can be seated almost immediately. There are also variations in revenue levels for the same concept over various geographical locations. So, one particular brand in one particular location may attract a certain level of revenue and be different in another location. Some malls, where the foot traffic is high, the F&B outlets located there enjoy proportionately stronger sales. But this comes at a cost – higher rents.
In the case of private landlords, private landlords set the rental and the tenant decides whether to accept it or not or negotiate over the best available rental. In Government hawker centres, the potential tenant offers the landlord what is considered affordable. A seasoned or experienced hawker will know the potential of the business and would have done the maths on what to bid and what is affordable.
The alternative to the bidding system would be a balloting system where the rent is fixed and the variable then becomes the luck of the draw. And this has been proposed by hon Members Mr Leong and Ms Poa. This, too, will not be perfect and could result in potential vacancies, whereas the current bidding system will still award a stall for a minimum of $1 rental if this is the highest bid. I, therefore, feel the Government is addressing the issue of rental costs at hawker centres in a reasonable and fair manner under the current circumstances.
The next big cost item for all food businesses is cost of raw materials. In recent years, we have seen food costs escalate, owing mostly to external factors. Inflation and higher costs have impacted many industry sectors, not just the F&B sector. Food is a necessity. Hence, higher food costs would naturally hit us more noticeably and directly.
Typically, a business will raise selling price to retain operating margins. However, for F&B, this is often not so clear-cut. We are truly spoilt for choice in F&B. Hence, operators, myself included, would need to be judicious in raising selling prices. The similar cautious approach is taken by hawkers who are concerned that a price increase will result in loss of customers. Recent reports suggest that many hawkers prefer to accept the lower operating margins rather than risk losing business through a price increase.
Some suggest that public perception of hawker food is low price and hence, this makes it more difficult for customers to accept price increases.
Mr Speaker, Sir, F&B is a competitive business. The discerning customer will make choices, weighing price, quality, convenience and a variety of other factors.
There are many initiatives to raise the profile of hawker food, with the intention to get the general public to accept paying more for hawker meals. It should be noted though that there are some hawkers who do not intend to raise prices. Some feel that they want to keep the meal affordable for those who would be adversely affected by price increases. Others would feel that they have comfortable earnings even though margins are down.
In this cost area, the Government has been managing inflation at the macro level and, as mentioned by hon Members earlier, provided supplementary efforts, such as the CDC Voucher scheme. The CDC Voucher scheme has the dual impact of helping households meet higher rising costs and supporting spending at selected merchants, including hawkers.
The third cost component, manpower, is a continuing challenge for the F&B sector. While some hawkers work as a family unit, there are those who will need to hire assistants and the cost of this has increased. There is also the issue of supply of manpower. Manpower costs are not as key a cost component for hawkers as other F&B concepts. But where margins are challenged, any increment eats into the bottom line.
Consumer spending does flow with the economic tide. During better times, it is possible that consumers will be willing to spend more on F&B and, therefore, replace a hawker meal with one at a higher cost option. Similarly, when we need to tighten our belts, the demand for hawker food may well increase.
On a national level, there has been the successful inclusion of hawker culture in the UNESCO Representative List of the Intangible Cultural Heritage of Humanity.
Mr Speaker, Sir, the Government has not been short of efforts and allocation of resources toward the support of hawkers. I believe these will be constantly reviewed and enhanced, where appropriate. The support during and post-COVID-19 would have brought welcome relief to many hawkers, though some hawkers will have been impacted more negatively than others. Hawkers also have opportunities to improve processes and these include grants for equipment and going digital.
One big challenge for the hawker industry is that of succession. While some hawkers have moved into second and third generations, many cease operations when there is no opportunity for succession. F&B operators have been seizing the business opportunity for some popular stalls and scaling these to multi-outlet operations. It remains to be seen how this will feed into the continuity of our hawker culture.
There are also examples of hawkers who have grown into full scale restaurants on their own and not just one restaurant, but several outlets. KEK Seafood is one example of a family that has successfully transitioned into the second generation, having grown from a stall to now, a multi-outlet restaurant business.
Hawker culture as we know it will need to evolve. The case study, entitled "Cooking or Cooked: The Future of Singapore's Hawker Culture" by Khor Jia Wei and Kenneth Tan, helpfully lists the multiple issues and factors feeding into the sustainability of the hawker industry. Public policy is just one of the factors. Public perception of hawkers and the expectation of cheap food may well need to evolve.
However, we also want to try to ensure that access to good and affordable meals remains available and accessible for those who need this option, as we work on raising income levels. As we reframe our definition of success, there may well be a rethink on where providing good and affordable food, or taking on a thriving hawker business into the next generation will be on this list. Mr Speaker, Sir, I therefore intend to support the amended Motion.
Mr Liang Eng Hwa.
Mr Speaker, Sir, I felt compelled to speak on this Motion, having pushed the Government to resume building hawker centres since I became a Member of this House in 2006. The perfect opportunity came in 2011, when Minister Vivian Balakrishnan became the Minister for Environment and Water Resources. And I know him to be a Minister who has always been open-minded about new policy ideas or policy changes, and that he has no hesitation to move if he feels that it is the right thing to do.
Hence, on our first Environment Government Parliamentary Committee (GPC) meeting with him in 2011, I remember my first ask to him at that meeting was to review the hawker centre policy and to consider resuming the building of new hawker centres.
My arguments then were, firstly, coffee shops were changing hands at very high prices at the time, in the tens of millions, which had direct flow-on effects on stall rentals and added upward pressures on food prices. There was a need for the Government to intervene, so that the mass retail food market would continue to be affordable.
Secondly, we need to lower the barrier to entry for hawkers to enter the trade so as to keep the hawkers' trade alive and going. The inadequate supply of affordable hawker spaces then would be a major impediment to would-be hawkers. So, we needed to tackle the insufficient supply of hawker stalls.
My third argument then was, it may not be intended that way at its inception, but today's hawker centres have become our unique social melting pot. There is huge social value in having a publicly-run, not-for-profit common eating spaces, where people from all walks of life can come together, under one roof to dine.
Sir, hawker centres came about in 1971 when the Government relocated 18,000 street hawkers that operated under unhygienic and unregulated environments, and moved them into modestly built and inexpensive premises that comes with stricter hygiene regulation and proper licensing.
Upon completing the relocation exercise in around the mid-1980s, the Government stopped building new hawker centres. And the reason is that the Government felt that the provision of eating places and food can be left to the private sector, such as coffee shops and food courts business operators.
There is good reason for that, a good position to begin at that time. Indeed, the Government should not be the sole or dominant retail F&B space provider and manager. The private sector can and should have a role in this F&B ecosystem and besides, the Government also need to focus on its role as a regulator too.
However, what happened around 2011 and prior was that the market mechanism had not worked out in the way as intended. Coffee shops and food court spaces were traded at bubbly high prices. It would have direct bearing on the stall rentals and thereafter, the cooked food prices. This would not be sustainable to the hawker trade and would impact the overall affordability of cooked food prices.
So, my point here is that, while we leave it to market forces to sort out most of the things, there can be situations where the market forces can bring us to the wrong place, such as runaway coffee shop prices, unhealthy market power and monopolistic behavior by dominant players, or that where coffee shops or retail F&B spaces have become speculative assets for trading.
There is a need for the Government to intervene by way of supplying more hawker spaces then to stabilise the markets, no different from how the Government intervene to manage, say, our currency, the Singapore dollar, to keep within a trading band or the cooling measures to tame the hot property markets.
Hawker centres are relatively low capital expenditure infrastructures, they are mostly non-air conditioned and built with a pretty unsophisticated design deliberately, with the purpose to keep maintenance costs low. Because of the typically large floor spaces, it can accommodate more stalls under one roof and offer a wide selection of food choices. As a result, hawker centres are a more competitive marketplace, which helps keep prices of food in check.
With lower barrier to entry and lower running costs, it helps improve the viability of hawker trade businesses and keeps the hawker trade and its food culture alive.
So, I am glad, in 2011, that then-Minister Vivian was able to finally persuade the Cabinet to resume building hawker centres and the first 10 new hawker centres were announced – with the first one being built in Bukit Panjang, although I must declare, I was not the Member of Parliament there yet. But after some wait, I finally have one at my then-constituency, in the Senja area.
And that is how we entered the new era of hawker centres development. I would call this the Hawker Centres 2.0, where a new generation of modern hawker centres sprouted up across the island. At my last count, we have added 14 new hawker centres since 2011, with six more in the pipeline to be built by 2027. NEA still directly managed the existing 121 hawker centres and markets.
While I am glad that the Government has decided to resume building hawker centres and giving the hawker trade a new boost in life, we also know that it comes with both new and old challenges.
First challenge, succession. Our first-generation and even second-generation hawkers are catching up in age. It is understandable that the younger generation may not see hawker trade as their first career choice, although I have also met quite a number of younger ones as well, including at Bukit Panjang. Mr Walter Tay is one of them and he runs "Father and Son Carrot Cake".
But clearly, the numbers are still not enough to replace the earlier generations of hawkers. This is a serious challenge to the hawker trade and to our hawker culture. In recent years, the Government introduced a number of programmes with the aim to encourage more to join the hawker trade, such as the Incubation Stall Programme to assist aspiring hawkers with pre-fitted equipment to lower the startup cost; Hawkers Succession Scheme, which aims to assist veteran hawkers who intend to retire but are unable to find successors, to pass down their skills, recipes and hawker stalls to aspiring hawkers and which also come with a generous $23,000 ex-gratia payment as well as monthly stipend in the initial months. There is also the Hawkers' Development Programme, which helps to equip aspiring and existing hawkers with the relevant skills and competencies to run a hawker business.
We have to keep reviewing these programmes to see if it achieves the intended outcomes and if need be, to introduce new schemes to encourage new hawkers to join the trade.
Sir, the society at large can also play a part to keep the hawker trade going by not only consuming at the hawker centres, but also respect hawker trade as a profession of choice. Many enter the trade as a calling and because of their passion for culinary and local food culture. We should show appreciations and cheer them on, including their stall assistants and the cleaners and the dishwashers at the hawker centres.
The second challenge is insufficient manpower. Hawker cooked food businesses are labour intensive work. The number of meals served and how long is the stall opening hours are, are dependent on the number of stall assistants available at the stalls. These days, it is difficult to find local stall assistants. Among the reasons, the work at hawker centres is physically demanding and the work environment not so appealing.
The policy position has always been that hawker stallholders should be reserved for Singaporeans and PRs, to safeguard the local identity of our hawker culture. Senior Minister of State Dr Koh Poh Koon announced last month that NEA will be relaxing the manpower policy to allow hawkers to hire LTVP+ holders in January next year. I hope that can, in some way, alleviate the manpower situation.
Of course, the other aspect to help hawkers improve productivity is also important. I understand that hawker centres have tapped the various productivity support programmes, such as the Productive Hawker Centres programme, to enjoy the 70% tiered subsidies for centralised dishwashing. The Hawkers Productivity Grant has also helped individual hawkers with 80% co-funding to purchase kitchen automation equipment and digital solutions.
There are also other bulk-purchasing services initiatives to reduce the toil on the workers. Having a larger pool of available stall assistants and to continue to work on improving productivity hopefully can move the needle and alleviate the situation faced by the hawkers.
The third challenge is about the rising input costs and the food price tensions. Hawkers, like all of us, wants a decent wage. Consumers also want affordable or value-for-money food. So, how do we achieve both and where is the balance?
Indeed, prices of cooked food have risen in the last few years, primarily due to rising input costs. Data from the Department of Statistics showed that hawker food prices rose by 6.1% in 2023 and the increase is broad-based. Raw food ingredients among the key components, which are pricier today due to higher global food commodity prices, the extreme weather also has an impact, and the knock-on effects from the higher energy and transport costs.
In response to a recent PQ that I filed, MSE replied that based on NEA's surveys, the main cost drivers for stallholders were ingredients and manpower, which combined, account for 70% to 80% of the hawkers' expenditure.
Over the weekend, I had a chat with Mr Ong Chye Lai, who runs the popular lor mee stall at Bukit Panjang Hawker Centre, to validate NEA's numbers. And he shared with me that, indeed, a major bulk of the cost increases come from his ingredients, such as the fish and meat that he serves, as well as the spices for his lor mee. He added that post-COVID-19, the prices of these ingredients have fluctuated at a wider range and he is trying to cope with the volatility.
How do we fight rising prices that are externally driven, such as supply chain disruptions, the war in Ukraine, the weather, the volatility in the global food commodity markets and that we import almost all of these inputs? Fortunately, in the case of Singapore, we have some very helpful levers to mitigate the impact to our domestic economy.
Firstly, of course, is our strong Singapore dollar. Most of what we consume are imported and if our Singapore dollar is weak, it will be a double whammy to everyone of us. We know that a strong Singapore dollar is not a given and should not be taken for granted. Markets have to see the value in the Singapore dollar, on the basis of fundamentals – do we have a strong and sound economy, are we a strong and cohesive society and how are we as a country?
Secondly, while we use the exchange rate to reduce the impact on imported inflation, it is not possible to totally negate rising costs. Hence, it is also important to work on the other side of the equation as well, which is income. We need to keep on working on income to rise so that it can help us mitigate inflation. And here, again, we need to keep our economy strong and attract investments so as to keep having good jobs and incomes for our people.
The third lever is that we must always have a competitive, efficient and vibrant business ecosystem, where consumers have choices as to where they want to consume. In Chinese, it is called "货比三家". A consumer must have a choice of at least three places to go to consume so that there is always competition. A competitive business landscape helps keep costs and prices in check and help eradicate potential profiteering.
Fourthly, there is the need for the Government to continue to give direct assistance to help Singaporeans cope with the rising costs. And we do have a whole range of assistance schemes like GST Vouchers, U-Save vouchers, service and conservancy charges rebates, the Cost of Living payouts, CDC Vouchers, Workfare, Silver Support and so on. Some of these assistance measures are permanent in nature and adds up to the billions of dollars from our Budget allocation.
Again, we are fortunate to be in this good fiscal position to help Singaporeans households directly and very extensively, to directly assist Singaporean households to cope with the cost of living.
The fifth lever is everyone of us – the community support initiatives. We know in various constituencies, we all do have our ground-up initiatives to help our fellow residents cope with cost of living. For example, at Bukit Panjang Town, we have what we call the monthly "$1 Deal" initiative, "一元为定", to help reduce the impact of cost of living to our fellow residents. We use funding from the community or from donors and not imposing it on the stallholders or hawkers.
There are also the private sector initiatives in the neigbourhood such as DBS’ "5 Million Hawker Meals" scheme and the various grocery support schemes such as by Hao Ren Hao Shi, "好人好事", New Life Community Service and also organisations like the Association of Banks of Singapore who bring volunteers and offer groceries to our residents.
Sir, before I end, I want to speak on another issue, with regard to the outlier high rental bids during the monthly tender exercises by NEA. Out-of-the-norm high rentals do attract a lot of attention and may influence future would-be stall bidders to bid higher and thereby, push up overall average rentals. So, we need to figure out how we can prevent that from happening.
Senior Minister of State Koh Poh Koon had taken pains to explain to the House at last month’s Sitting that outlier high tender bids are not the norm and that the median rent typically average around $1,200 per month in the last 10 years, as per his recent speech, And some subsidised stallholders pay about $300 per month. NEA allocates stalls on price-based tender basis, with no reserve bid price. So, stall rentals can go below $100 per month, including to as low as $1 in the past, as it had happened before in the past. I note the announcement last month that NEA will stagger the downward rental adjustments over a longer period, after three years, referencing the Assessed Market Rent.
Let us keep a close watch in the subsequent biddings whether the change has any effect in discouraging outlier bids. I also welcome NEA move to make available more information and make available the online business cost estimation tool to help tenderers make more informed and realistic bids.
Having said that I would still want to come back to my suggestion that I raised in last month's Sitting, which is that besides tender price, we should also look at the quality of the bid or what we call the price-quality method, or PQM.
For example, in the event that of top bid rent price, that significantly deviates from the Assessed Market Rent, NEA can carry out a deeper evaluation on the bidders on whether the bidder really has the means and the capability to sustain their business with such a high rental rates? In that way, we can remove some of these unrealistic bids and reduce the incidence of outliers in the rental bid price.
Sir, in conclusion, since the policy change to build hawker centres about 10 years ago – credit to MSE, NEA and the various Government agencies – we have seen concerted efforts and significant resources being allocated to support the hawker trade. We now see really modernised hawker centres, better facilities, better ambience – this is a good thing for the hawkers ecosystem.
Besides the various support schemes to support individual hawkers, there is also the Hawker Centre Upgrading Programme to upgrade older hawker centres, there is the Toilet Improvement Programme which the Ulu Pandan Hawker Centre just recently benefited from, and there are the CDC Vouchers to support hawkers as well as heartland digitalisation packages to help support the overall hawker centre ecosystem.
Of course, there will continue to be challenges to the hawker trade, but as Mr Edward Chia stated in his amended Motion, we must continue to support our hawkers by regularly reviewing the policies and to sustain our hawker ecosystem, so that both the hawkers can earn a fair livelihood and Singaporeans at large can enjoy good and affordable hawker food.
Sir, with that, I support the amended Motion in the name of Mr Edward Chia.
Mr Ang Wei Neng.
Mr Speaker, Sir, in the early hours of 11 October 2016, I received an urgent call from my volunteers: a fire had broken out in a market in Jurong Central. Rushing to the scene, I found the wet market and an adjacent eating house completely destroyed. Another nearby coffee shop was also severely damaged and would remain closed for months.
Immediately, we rallied our volunteers to support the affected hawkers, who were devastated by the loss of their businesses. I reached out to NEA for a list of alternative cooked food stalls and market stalls at nearby hawker centres in the West, offering the hawkers a temporary place to continue their livelihoods while we began to explore options for rebuilding. With the help of South West CDC, we were able to quickly provide emergency relief funds to support them through those first difficult days.
But the challenge was far from over. We faced two options: either construct a temporary market within six to 12 months or undertake a faster rebuild of the burnt market back to the original condition, which would take 12 to 18 months. Building a temporary market would cost about $750,000 – a daunting figure that we would have to fundraise. After consulting with the hawkers, nearby residents, volunteers, construction experts and the Government agencies, we chose to go ahead with a temporary market for several reasons.
Firstly, the hawkers wanted to stay close to their original market location to continue serving their loyal customers. They needed to earn their livelihood. Secondly, residents valued the convenience of having their favourite stalls nearby. Lastly, we saw an opportunity not just to restore what was lost but to create something better for the hawkers, the community and the residents.
Together, we took on the challenge and, against all odds, raised the funds and built the temporary market in just six weeks – much faster than industry experts had predicted. By the end of 2016, the stallholders were back in business. And on 1 January 2019, we opened the new market and eating house known as the Jurong Central Plaza, a two-storey complex that also includes a Senior Day Care Centre on the upper floor, providing valuable services to our elderly community members.
The reason we were able to build the temporary market in just six weeks, instead of six months, was the unwavering commitment of the entire Government to support the hawkers during this crisis. This extraordinary achievement would not have been possible without the dedication and collaboration of our partners. I want to express my heartfelt thanks to the donors, HDB, NEA, the Public Utilities Board (PUB), the Singapore Civil Defence Force (SCDF) and all the Government agencies whose collective effort made this a reality.
During this period, from 2016 to 2018, my team and I effectively became the developers and operators of the temporary market. We gained a deeper understanding of the hawkers’ challenges and the nuances of operating a hawker stall. I recall that when we first provided the list of available stalls managed by NEA to the cooked food stallholders affected by the fire, their initial concern was rental rates. When they learned that some stalls could be rented for as low as $1 per month, they were immediately skeptical. The hawkers were forthright, expressing that while rental rates were important, their primary concern was foot traffic and community reach.
The experience of managing a temporary market and overseeing the rebuilding of a new market and eating house proved to be invaluable when I later worked with the NEA to reopen the Jurong West Hawker Centre in West Coast GRC.
The old Jurong West Market and Hawker Centre faced significant challenges to stay afloat, battling fierce competition from a nearby food court and a 24-hour supermarket. The isolated location of its cooked food stalls on the second level, hidden away from the public eye at street level, gave them more challenges.
To ensure the success of the new centre, we conducted a survey of over 2,000 nearby residents to better understand their preferences for wet market stalls, cooked food stalls, or a combination of both. The results revealed that more residents preferred a combination of both. However, when we examined the responses more closely, we found that many of those who expressed a preference for wet market stalls had rarely, if ever, shopped there. And some had visited only once in a blue moon. This insight gave us valuable perspective on the real needs and habits of the community. With this insight, we made the decision to focus solely on cooked food stalls, making use of both the ground and second levels with easy access via escalators.
Today, the revitalised Jurong West Hawker Centre is doing much better than before. The tenants pay a fixed rental fee to the SEHC operator of the Jurong West Hawker Centre, Chang Cheng, rather than through a price bidding system. The tenants also received rental discounts in the first couple of years of operations. The operator organises fringe activities periodically to bring in the crowd and plans to offer discount vouchers to vulnerable families.
In addition, many of us have local schemes to help our residents better cope with the rising cost of living. In Nanyang division, for example, blue CHAS card holders can apply for multiple $1 breakfast voucher to exchange for a $3 breakfast set from two main coffee shops at Blocks 815 and 959 Jurong West. At Ayer Rajah-Gek Poh, low income residents receive $50 WeCare vouchers monthly to spend at local shops, including local hawker centre.
The above experiences underscore the Government’s steadfast support for our hawkers as well as our support to our vulnerable residents, to mitigate the impact from rising food costs. The very concept of hawker centres was championed by the PAP Government and today, Singapore’s hawker culture is recognised on UNESCO’s Representative List of the Intangible Cultural Heritage of Humanity.
Are we perfect? Certainly not. Nothing is. But we continue to listen, adapt and improve to support our hawkers and Singaporeans who are patrons of the hawker centre. Mr Speaker, Sir, in Mandarin, please.
(In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] Mr Speaker, in October 2016, when a fire broke out at the market and food centre in Jurong Central, 56 stallholders instantly lost their livelihoods. Faced with this sudden incident, I immediately gathered grassroots leaders, volunteers and affected stallholders to engage in urgent consultations with relevant agencies, such as HDB and NEA. We decided to quickly set up a temporary market for the stallholders. What was originally estimated to take six months of construction was completed successfully in six weeks. From the fire in October to around Christmas at the end of December, the affected stallholders were able to reopen their businesses.
The smooth completion of this project was due to the full support from HDB, NEA, SCDF, PUB and other Government agencies. At the same time, we also received donations from many kind-hearted individuals which enabled the temporary market to be completed so quickly. After a two-year transition period, the new two-storey Jurong Central building finally officially opened on 1 January 2019, providing hawkers with a brand new and more spacious business venue, as well as a more comfortable shopping and dining environment for our residents.
Between 2016 and 2018, my team and I not only had to operate the temporary market, but also prepare for the construction of the new market and food court. This process was full of challenges and complexities. However, it was precisely this experience that gave us a deeper understanding of the hard work and difficulties faced by hawkers in their daily operations.
This valuable experience was very helpful later when I joined the West Coast GRC to assist NEA in planning the re-opening of the Jurong West Hawker Centre. The new Jurong West Hawker Centre broke away from the previous design of having cooked-food stalls only on the second floor and instead placed them on both the first and second floors, offering more diverse choices and better visibility. The new Jurong West Hawker Centre has been operating for over a year now, attracting a noticeably increased footfall, making it more convenient for everyone to enjoy good food.
These two examples fully demonstrate the joint efforts of the Government and civil society in improving the environment for hawkers and enhancing the diversity of our local cuisine. At the same time, the tripartite partners have been working tirelessly to ensure that Singaporeans can enjoy high quality and more diverse local food.
(In English): Mr Speaker, Sir, the examples cited above showcase our continuous support for our hawkers. Thus, I fully support the Motion as amended by Mr Edward Chia.
Ms Denise Phua.
Hawker culture, recognised by UNESCO as part of our intangible cultural heritage, is not just about food. It is about a way of life that brings together Singaporeans from all walks of life, around the humble dining table of our hawker centres.
First, on Singapore's support-hawker measures. In recent years, we have the Singapore Government, including MSE and NEA, stepping up significantly to support and preserve hawker culture. During the COVID-19 pandemic, for instance, the Government implemented several measures to protect hawkers. Rental and table-cleaning waivers and salary subsidies through the Jobs Support Scheme were granted to ease the financial strain during these uncertain times. CDC Vouchers were also introduced to encourage locals to support their neighbourhood hawkers. These initiatives were designed to help hawkers sustain their livelihoods through challenging times, such as the COVID-19 pandemic.
Post-COVID-19, the support continues. Policies aimed to sustain the hawking industry were introduced. Some have been fairly successful and some not so, but I know the Government is closely looking at these. These include the revised rent control measures, a suite of hawker training programmes to increase the replacement rate of hawkers, the Hawkers' Productivity Grant and the Hawkers Go Digital Programme; and of course, the ongoing CDC Vouchers.
In fact, the budget for CDC Vouchers, originally intended only for lower-income households, was substantially increased after the Mayors appealed and worked with the Ministry of Finance to extend them to every Singaporean household. So, big thanks to the Ministers for Finance – then, Deputy Prime Minister Heng Swee Keat and now, Prime Minister Lawrence Wong. A unique feature in the safety net, the CDC Voucher scheme has the dual purpose of supporting both Singaporeans and the heartland businesses, especially hawkers. This support is still ongoing. I thank PSP and PAP MPs alike for agreeing that the CDC Vouchers are, indeed, useful.
Next, on the importance of infrastructure improvements. Infrastructure improvements are another critical element of preserving hawker culture. Over the years, NEA has initiated several programmes to modernise and maintain hawker centres. NEA-managed hawker centres have seen substantial upgrades in facilities, cleanliness and ventilation, ensuring that patrons can enjoy a pleasant dining experience. These physical improvements are not merely cosmetic. They are essential to the continuity of hawker culture. A clean, safe and well-ventilated environment encourages patrons to return and also helps retain hawkers to stay on in their trade and jobs.
Let me touch a bit about NEA-managed and Town-Council-managed hawker centres. Besides social enterprises which manage hawker centres, the Town Councils also manage hawker centres.
NEA, with its resources and expertise, has been able to uphold high operational standards in the NEA-managed hawker centres, whereas the Town Councils face some limitations, due to their smaller budgets and also fewer specialised resources, as they were primarily set up to serve residential estates. Town Councils primarily rely on S&CCs from stallholders, which are usually insufficient to cover the extensive maintenance costs required to match NEA standards.
This resource gap is particularly evident in our Central District hawker centres, such as People's Park Complex, Albert Centre and Chinatown Complex, which serve not only local residents but also a significant number of tourists. These prominent centres managed by Town Councils require substantial maintenance to uphold the standards expected of national landmarks, yet the Town Councils often lack the necessary funds and specialised management expertise.
So, in light of these challenges, I propose that NEA categorise or tier the types of hawker centres and even coffee shops and allocate its resources and expertise accordingly. I do not think that NEA should take over the running of all hawker centres, but I do urge NEA to assume responsibility for managing and maintaining key national iconic hawker centres, such as Albert Centre, People's Park and Chinatown Complex, that serve mostly non-residents versus residents. By doing so, NEA can apply its specialised expertise and substantial resources to ensure that these centres continue to reflect the high standards associated with Singapore's hawker culture.
Alternatively, if taking over these iconic hawker centres is too daunting for now and actually needs further review, then I urge NEA to consider providing a resource package or support framework for these specific centres, acknowledging the unique demands placed on them as tourist hotspots and cultural icons.
Next, on the need to look beyond financial incentives to sustain and grow Singapore's hawker culture. In a survey quoted in a 2024 Lee Kwan Yew School of Public Policy article, "Cooking or Cooked: The Future of Singapore's Hawker Culture", 87% of respondents stated they do not want to be hawkers, quoting long working hours and lack of interest. Hawking is also perceived to be a job that reaps modest income.
These root causes are not easy to solve and will take more than financial resources and incentives. Are all hawkers and hawker centres equal? Which ones should be managed by the State and which ones by Town Councils or social enterprises? If the Government were to subsidise the costs of operating hawking businesses, especially in housing estates with predominantly Singapore residents, then can or should they reserve the right to at least control the rental and ensure budget meals for Singaporeans? "Budget meals" is not a dirty term. Actually, it is quite useful. These are some of the questions that we have to and need to be reckoned with, as we review how to support and promote hawker culture.
In conclusion, Mr Speaker, Sir, hawker culture is a cornerstone of our heritage. The root issues of declining margins and the reluctance of younger Singaporeans to enter this industry are not easy to resolve and need to be recognised. So, let us work together – Government agencies, Town Councils, social enterprises, hawkers and citizens – to ensure that this heritage remains accessible and affordable for generations to come. With this, I support the Motion as amended by hon Member Edward Chia.
Ms Mariam Jaafar.
Mr Speaker, I thank the Member Leong Mun Wai for raising this Motion and Member Edward Chia for his amendments. We all care about our hawkers.
What has been made clear in the debate thus far is our collective passion for sustaining our hawker culture by ensuring that hawker centres remain affordable and accessible, helping hawkers address current operating challenges, such as the increasing cost of ingredients, the rising costs of running a stall and a manpower crunch. We also need to put focus on attracting and empowering the next generation of hawkers to continue this tradition as ageing veterans retire, preserving our culinary heritage while innovating to meet evolving tastes.
It is also clear that the experiences of our hawkers are varied. Different SEHC managers, different locations, different rental rates, different offerings and pricing strategies and, indeed, different hawker aspirations and expectations, lead to different experiences. So, there are no silver bullets. The Government has introduced many programmes to help, such as, on the supply side, the Hawker Development Programme, Hawker's Productivity Grant; and targeted rental, financial and skills development assistance; on the demand side, we are all familiar with the CDC Vouchers scheme.
We can see the Government continuing to invest in new and upgrading hawker centre infrastructure and refining its policies to sustain our hawker culture. For example, the recent move to allow hawkers to hire workers on LTVPs in order to relieve manpower shortages.
Sometimes, the issue is not the policy, but the implementation. For example, improvements are probably needed in the operating processes and practices of specific SEHCs. Perhaps, we could incorporate 360 feedback from customers and especially hawkers, to become inputs into PQM tenders and ongoing performance assessment of SEHCs, to help them improve. After all, hawkers are very important stakeholders in the ecosystem.
I will focus my speech on the community aspect of hawker culture. Beyond the good and affordable food, our hawker centres have long been about community. Places where people from all walks of life come together with their friends and families, share stories, celebrate milestones – except perhaps a first date for Gen Zs, by the recent report – and enjoy our culinary heritage.
As a Woodlands resident and third-generation hawker, Deen, observed, the veteran hawkers like his grandmother are the salt-and-earth people. Their fellow stallholders and their customers, whom they know by name, are their community. Sure, sometimes, there would be disagreements between hawkers, especially when they sell the same type of food, but, generally, hawkers within a hawker centre get along. They give back, too, as a community, to the community.
Deen shared how when a hawker wanted to give free meals to, say, a mosque, the whole row of stalls would chip in. It is their way of doing good while also gaining goodwill within the community and marketing their hawker centre and their own food. Even today, many of us have probably seen hawkers quietly dishing out meals to needy residents for only a few coins in return, without much fanfare, affording them dignity along with their food.
Given this community spirit, it is only right that beyond Government policies, beyond actions to be taken by NEA, SEHCs and other ecosystem players, we look to the wider community to be engaged in sustaining our hawker culture. There is much that we, as a community, can do to support hawkers while ensuring that anyone, regardless of their circumstances, can enjoy a good meal.
In Woodlands, during the COVID-19 pandemic, I started our Belanja-A-Meal @ Woodlands or BAM@Woodlands programme at Kampung Admiralty Hawker Centre and coffee shops in my division. It is a Pay It Forward programme. People can buy extra meals at over 30 participating hawker stalls or make an online donation, while low-income residents can redeem free meals of their choice – 10 meals a month for each member of their family. Volunteers top up the available meals at each stall every week to ensure that residents always have a good selection. All of this is facilitated by a nifty little app built by volunteers in our Woodlands Digital Office.
This short summary belies the community spirit that underpins this programme. The relationship is not at all transactional. Many of our hawker stalls give more value than the $4 we pay them for each BAM meal. Our stallholders refer to us customers who they believe would benefit from the BAM programme. We sign them up and also get them other help that they can benefit from beyond BAM. They also tell me when their customers share with them their problems and encourage them to approach me for help at my Meet-the-People Sessions. Many of our stallholders are regular contributors to BAM@Woodlands themselves, especially after a few big redemptions in a day can wipe out their balance of free meals. And the community has really rallied behind it. Let me share some of the heartwarming reasons people wrote on why they were donating.
Mak Kai Chong, a regular donor donating $10 to $20 each time, wrote: "I want to contribute to my community and I find the BAM idea fantastic. If I have a little more than I need, I try to live kindness and care through action rather than being an observer."
Yong Sit Lin, who donated $100, wrote: "I donated so that people in need can have a good meal."
Marie Ong, who donated $1,000, wrote: “I always believe that to be able to help others in need or to create positive change is a beautiful thing! I love to see the smile on everyone’s faces and spread love and joy around.”
Amalina Mutalib, who donated $10, wrote: “I donated because I know what it feels like to feel hunger.”
An anonymous donor who donated $20 wrote: “I have the tendency to lose my wallet and forget where I put it. I found my wallet today and I take is as a sign that God wants me to donate!”
Muhammad Faqih Karamy, who donated $10, simply wrote: “I sayang Sembawang.”
Finally, an anonymous donor who wrote: “I like MP Mariam as I have been following her on Facebook and her projects have shown how much she cares for people, not just her constituents. Way to go, Ms Mariam!"
I had to think twice about reading that last one out, but the point is really not to toot my own horn, but to share the insights, that Singaporeans care and are happy to help others enjoy good hawker meals. We just need to provide the platforms. Beyond the general public, we had great support from Northwest CDC to start it up, and corporate donors and patrons who made significant donations.
In addition to helping our residents in need, BAM@Woodlands was a great help to our hawkers during the dark days of COVID-19 when business was low and continues to be a source of business today. It has also strengthened the bonds between hawkers and the community. I will share some examples.
Mdm Suryati Pokol, who until recently ran Warung Lorong Fatimah at Kampung Admiralty, wrote: “Thank you for being with me when the times were down... You bring the BAM plan to us. It was a splendid thought that I will make it happen for the Woodlands residents and make customers to be my new friends, and they supported me very well”.
In 2021, a stall assistant at Woodlands North Plaza met with a horrific car accident that left him in a coma for months and huge hospital bills. Not knowing where else to turn to, his colleagues spoke to our volunteers who had been engaging with them on BAM@Woodlands. Our volunteers helped them to set up a crowdfunding appeal. Within a week, it raised $200,000 to help Ah Ji pay for his hospital bills and rehabilitation.
Two of our stallholders at Kampung Admiralty, Mr Peh and Ms Chen, have even become our patrons, contributing to our Building Fund for the upgrading of Woodlands Community Centre which, when opened, will serve our community for years to come.
Now in its fourth year, BAM is still growing and has been expanded to other parts of Sembawang GRC, including to my colleague Ms Poh Li San's ward in Sembawang West. To date, more than 70,000 free meals have been redeemed, with more beneficiaries joining the programme every month. Despite their own costs going up, many stalls have absorbed the price increases without requiring our BAM@Woodlands beneficiaries to top up the difference. But I do not take our hawkers for granted and will be revising the $4 we pay them for each meal in the new year.
To me, BAM@Woodlands embodies the kampung spirit of our Woodlands Community at its finest. Hawkers and the community supporting one another.
I believe we can do more to scale up such initiatives across Singapore. By working with local organisations, grassroots and hawkers themselves, we can launch programmes similar to Belanja-A-Meal in every constituency. Imagine a network of hawker centres where every meal bought could contribute to someone else’s meal, where acts of kindness ripple outwards, creating a culture of giving, of mutual support. By expanding programmes like this, we, the community, can help ensure that our hawker centres continue to be vibrant, inclusive spaces that reflect the Singaporean spirit. Mr Speaker, in Malay.
(In Malay): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] Hawker centres are part of our living heritage. We all have our favourite hawker stalls where our families will come together to catch up and enjoy a good meal, sometimes going across the country. When I was living overseas, every trip home meant through a list of our favourite hawker food, which included mee mamak at West Coast and satay at Haig Road.
We know it is not easy to be a hawker, with long hours and a less that comfortable work environment, always on your feet. Hawkers today face many challenges – increasing cost of ingredients, increasing operating costs and manpower shortages.
We must also support our younger hawkerpreneurs. These younger hawkerpreneurs want to bring new ideas and concepts that cater to the evolving tastes of their customers and dream of expanding their business. This is not new. How many of us had our first taste of Western food at a hawker center? One example is Mak’s Place, started by a Chinese Muslim couple. Their story tells of how they saw a gap in the market for Halal Chinese food and started with a hawker stall in 1999. After two years, they started Mak’s Place, the hawkerant in Changi, selling the same good food at reasonable prices, in a more comfortable ambience with air conditioning, while giving back to the community in many ways, including providing free food to the less fortunate, providing jobs and mentoring to ex-offenders, and food and medical care to community cats.
Many in our community want to follow in their foot steps. They want more flexibility to experiment with their menus and to make it easier for them to scale and expand their footprint and team, when the concepts are successful – whether it is opening stalls in other hawker centres, opening a hawkerant, cafe or restaurant. We must empower and support them.
The Government has launched programmes to support our hawkers, including young hawkers, and has continuously reviewed its policies to do so. But we in the community can also do our part.
One of the sources of inspiration in our hawker culture is how it has united the community, fostering a spirit of togetherness and generosity. Initiatives like BAM@Woodlands are a good example of this. We launched BAM@Woodlands during COVID-19 to support our hawkers whose businesses were impacted and to provide our residents in need with free meals of their choice. People can buy extra meals to be given away at participating hawker stalls or make an online donation that we would then channel to the hawkers.
This simple idea has been embraced by the community and continues to grow. We have now launched BAM in other parts of Sembawang GRC. Over the past four years, it has provided more than 70,000 free meals to hundreds of families. It has also strengthened the bonds between our hawkers and our community. Our hawkers regularly participate in our community initiatives, especially during festive occasions when everyone is always looking to do good and perform charitable works.
For example, Mdm Suryati Pokol, who ran Warung Lorong Fatimah at Kampung Admiralty Hawker Centre, donated more than 100 bottles of kuih raya to our kuih raya donation drive. Low-income families were able to choose their favourite kuih during the Sinar Ramadan grocery distribution at our community store, Store@Woodlands.
Deen and his young team set up Begerack at Bukit Canberra Hawker Center. He sells burgers and putu piring. They are a regular feature at our community events with their very popular putu piring. Begerack sponsored free hair cuts by skilled barkers from Sleek & Trendy Cut, set up by Upu, an ex-offender, to get our low-income residents ready for Raya.
For the past four Ramadans, Woodlands Community Centre has used the BAM platform to provide 1,000 free buka puasa meals every week at our halal hawker stalls. Ramadan BAM is open to people of all races and backgrounds, to share in the spirit of giving of iftar which as Muslims we believe multiplies our fasts and rewards. This programme has also helped to introduce new stalls to our residents, such as when the halal food court Cantine opened at Admiralty Place.
We can do more to scale up such initiatives like this across Singapore. By expanding programmes like these, we, the community, can help ensure that our hawker centres continue to be vibrant, inclusive spaces that reflect the Singapore spirit.
(In English): Mr Speaker, in conclusion, our hawker centres are a symbol of our shared history and values, where we find comfort and community. To sustain and grow our hawker culture, we must take a holistic approach. This includes Government support but also community initiatives and efforts to empower the next generation of hawkers. Let us not under-estimate what we, the community, can do. If we care enough about it, we must work together to preserve this precious part of our identity, so that future generations can continue to enjoy and contribute to a vibrant hawker culture. I support the amended Motion.
Senior Parliamentary Secretary Shawn Huang.
Mr Speaker, central to this Motion is the issue of cost of living and the important role played by hawker centres in ensuring Singaporeans have access to good, affordable food.
Senior Minister of State Koh Poh Koon will be speaking about the Government's policies to keep food affordable and enable hawkers to earn a living and fair income. Before he does so, I would like to share how the Government has been supporting Singaporeans with cost-of-living pressures. This Government understands Singaporeans' concerns and anxieties about high prices. We have taken decisive action to help and will not hesitate to do more if necessary.
First, the Government has taken actions to tackle inflation. A big part of the inflation that we are facing has external causes. The COVID-19 pandemic and the wars in Europe and the Middle East have contributed to rising food, energy and transport prices globally. The Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS) acted quickly to tighten monetary policy five times. The stronger the Singapore dollar meant that inflation did not reach the highs seen in other countries. Inflation has now fallen significantly from its peak. Hawker food inflation, fallen, compared to the earlier part of this year. Overall, core inflation in 2024 is expected to continue to decrease and to drop further in 2025. MAS' monetary policy will continue to ensure the medium-term price stability.
Second, we have introduced a comprehensive package of measures to cushion the impact on households and enhanced it several times. Even as inflation has moderated, we know that Singaporeans still feel the impact of higher prices. Hence, we have enhanced the Assurance Package several times since it was first introduced in 2022, to help Singaporeans cope with rising costs of living. And today, we have enhanced the Assurance Package to more than $10 billion, comprising cash payouts, MediSave top-ups, CDC Vouchers as well as additional U-Save and S&CC rebates.
In particular, the Government has been giving out CDC Vouchers to Singaporean households every year since the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020. The number of participating hawkers has grown over time. Half of the CDC Vouchers can be spent at hawkers and heartland merchants. This means that CDC Vouchers not only help Singaporean households with their cost of living, but also support our hawkers. There is more support on the way. In January 2025, every Singaporean household will receive another $300 in CDC Vouchers.
In the coming months, all adult Singaporeans will also receive between $200 and $600 in cash payouts. The Assurance Package is on top of the permanent GST Voucher, or GSTV, scheme that already supports lower- and middle-income Singaporeans and households with daily living expenses, including food. We introduced this scheme in 2012 and have enhanced it over the years.
Most recently, we have increased the GSTV cash amount in 2023 so that eligible Singaporeans can receive up to $850 in cash each year. We also implemented a personal income tax rebate of 50% tax payable for the year of assessment 2024, capped at $200, so that the benefits go mostly to middle-income workers.
Ms Hazel Poa has proposed more help for vulnerable groups, such as food discounts and more CDC Vouchers for the lower-income. In fact, this is what the Government has been doing. When you add up all these measures, for example, a middle-income household with two young children will get about $4,400 in rebates, payouts and support this year.
A lower-income household with two young children will get about $6,500 and a retired elderly couple with no income will get about $12,400. Over the years, we have continued to enhance our measures that provide more targeted support to those who are more in need.
For example, in Budget 2024, the Government announced an increase in the quarterly Silver Support payments and an income threshold to qualify for support to provide more help to low-income seniors. On top of the national schemes, the CDCs and grassroots organisations also have their own schemes. We have heard what hon Members Edward Chia, Liang Eng Hwa and Mariam Jaafar have highlighted and what they have done for their community.
Third, the Government stands ready to do more to support Singaporeans, should it be necessary. The Government will continue to monitor global conditions closely. For example, an increase in geopolitical and trade tensions may lead to higher commodity prices and reverse the decline in imported costs.
The broad-based support that we have provided over the past few years will help every family, but we recognise that there may be still gaps for some households. For these households, we will continue to review and update our social support schemes. We are also heartened that many in society have come together to help with cost of living, especially for the more vulnerable groups. Importantly, we will continue to sustain real income growth for Singaporeans.
We do this by creating good jobs for Singaporeans, we help them upgrade their skills and earn a higher pay. It is a more sustainable way to manage price pressures by ensuring that our incomes grow faster than inflation. Let me reiterate the Government's approach.
We cannot control external factors like wars or disruptions, but a stronger Singapore dollar has helped to keep inflation rates in Singapore lower than elsewhere. We have rolled out significant and broad-based support measures over the past few years to help Singaporeans with higher cost of living.
We stand ready to do more to help Singaporeans if needed in a sustainable, fair and effective way, with more help to lower- and middle-income Singaporeans. We will continue to listen to Singaporeans' concerns and take necessary measures to address these concerns. We will continue to help Singaporeans sustain real income growth through higher productivity and enhanced skills.
Senior Minister of State Sim Ann.
Mr Speaker, thank you for allowing me to speak. The main subject of our discussion today is hawker centres and my colleague Senior Minister of State Koh Poh Koon will be setting out the Government's approach to hawker centres. However, some speakers, including Mr Leong Mun Wai, made reference to the "Budget Meal" schemes in HDB coffee shops. Also, we know that HDB coffee shops are often mentioned together with hawker centres, although they are regulated differently. So, I would like to take this opportunity to make a few points.
Sir, like hawker centres, coffee shops in our HDB heartlands are integral to Singaporeans' daily lives. They are important social nodes in the community and provide a variety of cooked food options at similar price points to hawker centres. HDB plans for the provision of coffee shops and other commercial amenities in new HDB developments carefully to ensure that HDB residents have convenient access to cooked food options and other daily needs. Most residents have access to commercial facilities, such as shops, food courts or coffee shops, within 400 metres of their homes, or an approximately five- to 10-minute walk.
By planning for a good supply of coffee shops and other F&B options in every HDB town and estate, we ensure that residents have options to choose from. The competition will also help to moderate cooked food prices overall. Having said that, over the years, as wages rise, more consumers can afford and are prepared to pay for higher-end meal options and operators have, therefore, responded to these trends.
We have seen coffee shop menu items change, expand and increase in price points over time. The Government continuously pays attention to ground concerns about cost of living and recognise the need for our heartland coffee shops to maintain some lower-priced meals and drinks to cater to those who may not be able to spend as much on cooked food. This includes lower-wage workers and retirees.
This would have been hard to achieve if we had continued to leave things entirely to market forces. The Government, therefore, needed to intervene, but in a measured way that takes business sustainability into account. To strike this balance, the Ministry of National Development and HDB proactively put in place the "Budget Meal" initiative in 2018.
Budget meals are full meals that are priced affordably, as compared to the average price of meals sold at nearby eating places. Typically, they are priced at $3.50 and below. Since 2018, all new HDB rental coffee shops that are tendered out to operators must provide budget meals. This is done under the Price Quality Method tender framework, also known as the PQM tender framework. Under this framework, operators were required to provide six budget meals as well as a budget drink.
I want to take this opportunity to thank Mr Louis Chua for affirming the PQM method. I wish to clarify that HDB does not, as Mr Leong Mun Wai had suggested, require coffee shops to offer budget meals below market prices. The prices should be affordable, compared to surrounding options, but we do not require them to be lower.
Having gained some experience with implementing budget meals at new HDB rental coffee shops, in April 2023, HDB extended the budget meal requirement to rental coffee shops that are up for tenancy renewal. This move coincided with a period of rising food and energy prices and sustained inflation caused by disruptions following the war in Ukraine and extreme weather.
We know that consumers view coffee shop prices as an everyday expenditure and are sensitive to across-the-board price increases. Hence, budget meals became relevant not just to lower-income groups but to everyone who cared about cost of living. We are glad that the initiative has helped more families to stretch their household budget.
At the same time, we are mindful of the need to strike a balance between residents' needs for affordable food options and the operators' and stallholders' business sustainability. Unlike what Mr Leong Mun Wai has asserted, we do not require every stall in an HDB-owned coffee shop to offer budget meals. Generally, an operator of an HDB rental coffee shop is required to provide four to six budget meals.
This requirement can be met by different stalls in the coffee shop and it is also possible for there to be stalls within an HDB-owned coffee shop that do not participate in offering budget meals. Operators and stallholders have the flexibility to propose the budget meals that they wish to offer during the tender or tenancy renewal process and are at liberty to determine the prices of all other meals that they offer.
We are constantly engaging the industry and monitoring feedback from consumers as well as feedback from operators and stallholders and we are prepared to make adjustments to the scheme where necessary. Last year, HDB and GovTech worked together to launch the BudgetMealGoWhere website to help residents locate HDB coffee shops offering budget meals more easily and conveniently.
This website now includes listings of recommendations from the public, submitted through the Great Budget Meal Hunt, a related initiative which we launched earlier this year to crowdsource recommendations of budget meals in HDB coffee shops. In the past six months, 126 privately-owned HDB coffee shops have also started offering budget meals and drinks. We call these community budget meals.
Stalls in privately-owned HDB coffee shops that have voluntarily committed to provide budget meals will display the community budget meal decal in red and blue. More than 440 rental and privately-owned coffee shops are providing more than 1,100 budget meals island wide. This means that, on average, you can find budget meal options at one in two HDB coffee shops.
We are on track to have all 374 rental HDB coffee shops offer budget meals by 2026 and will continue to engage other operators of privately-owned coffee shops to come on board.
HDB supports budget meal providers in several ways.
First, for existing HDB rental coffee shop operators, we provide a 5% rent rebate for the first year of tenancy renewal to help them adjust to the new requirements of providing four budget food dishes and two budget drinks. The rebate starts as soon as the new requirements are in place and operators are required to pass on the rental discount to participating stall operators. We will intervene if stallholders tell us this did not happen.
Also, at the same time, HDB has kept stable the rent it has been collecting from its coffee shops. Over the last five years, HDB did not increase the rent for 97% of HDB-owned coffee shops at renewal.
We also stepped up efforts to raise publicity for these coffee shop operators and stalls. Not only do we want to raise awareness of the budget meals, but we also want to give recognition and generate interest so that more may visit these coffee shops and bring business to all stallholders.
In closing, Sir, although HDB coffee shops are regulated differently from hawker centres, we share the same commitment as MSE and NEA to maintain policies that deliver affordable food while being mindful of sustainable businesses and livelihoods. Sir, I support the proposed amendments to the Motion.
PAPERCUTS