HEAD W - MINISTRY OF TRANSPORT

Head W – Ministry of Transport

The Chairman: Head W – Ministry of Transport. Mr Cedric Foo.

Land Transport – Traffic Management

Mr Cedric Foo Chee Keng (West Coast): Sir, I beg to move,

That the total sum to be allocated for Head W of the Estimates be reduced by $100.

Sir, my first cut relates to land transport which concerns many in Singapore – commuters and motorists alike. I will raise various topics to follow up on the land transport masterplan that was unveiled by the Transport Minister last year.

Firstly, LTA's role as master planner and contestability in the bus sector. During last year's COS debate, the Minister had informed the House that over the next year or so, LTA will work closely with consultants to build up its capabilities for bus route planning and the tendering out of bus route parcels, so as to create contestability. This is an important undertaking by LTA which would have a significant impact on bus

Column: 3010

commuters both from the quality of service as well as bus fare level standpoints. Could the Minister update the House on how LTA is preparing for its new role as the master route planner, and when will commuters begin to see the benefits of contestability in the bus sector?

Sir, my next point is about transfer penalties. Designing a transport system, comprising mostly of direct journeys from origins to destinations, is an extremely costly proposition, and this is not practical for Singapore as the Transport Minister has pointed out. Therefore, a hub-and-spoke system is the inevitable outcome. However, currently, commuters who make a transfer in the hub-and-spoke system face a transfer penalty. The current transfer rebate of 40 cents does not fully offset the boarding charge of 60 cents for the subsequent leg of a journey involving a transfer.

As I highlighted previously, these commuters who need to make transfers are already inconvenienced. They take a longer time because they wait at the transfer points, and yet they are being penalised for making a transfer. Steps should be taken to address this problem if we are to attract more Singaporeans to take public transport. Such commuters should be enjoying a full rebate of the boarding charge for any subsequent leg of their journey. Therefore, I would urge the Ministry to quickly remove the remaining 20 cents' transfer penalty.

According to the Ministry, a distance-based through-fare system is to be introduced in 2009 to address this particular transfer penalty problem. Sir, I would like to ask the Minister if Ministry of Transport has any plans to remove it totally this year and, if so, how and when it will be addressed.

Sir, my next point is about the adequacy of bus and train services. I

Column: 3011

would like to touch on the adequacy of the capacity of these two very important public transport modes. In the difficult times that we are anticipating currently, we can expect more people to choose to use the public transport instead of taxis or cars. The next couple of years actually presents a great opportunity for the Ministry of Transport to realise its stated aim of increasing the share of commuters on public transport. The Ministry of Transport will succeed only if we can offer buses and trains that are comfortable, that are not overly crowded, that will meet the service expectations of those who make the switch from private to public transport. So I would like to ask the Minister if he has a view on the extent of ridership increase he expects on the trains as well as the buses over this year and next, and whether there are specific plans to make sure that we seize this opportunity, give commuters who have switched from private to public transport an experience which they like to maintain, so that we can increase the share of public transport commuters.

Sir, my next point is on the progress of MRT lines' construction. I am very glad the Government decided to push forward with the construction of MRT lines despite the economic slowdown. It has announced two new lines to be built – Thomson Line from CBD to Woodlands, and the Eastern Region Line which will serve the estates running from Tanjong Rhu to Changi. These lines were initially scheduled to be completed by 2018 and 2020 respectively. It was also announced that extensions to the North-South Line to serve Marina Bay and East-West Line into Tuas would be completed by 2015. And these planned lines and extensions are over and above the Government's investments in the Boon Lay Extension. On behalf of my residents, I would like to thank the Ministry for constructing the Pioneer Station, the Circle Line as well as

Column: 3012

the Downtown Line. Sir, I would like to ask the Minister for an update on the progress of the work for these new lines and extensions.

My next topic is on the COE system. The vehicle quota system was implemented on 1st May 1990 to manage and control long-term vehicle population growth at 3% net rate per year, which means net of scrapping and exports. Under this system, LTA determines the number of new vehicles allowed for registration while the market determines the price of COE through bidding. In determining the number of COEs to issue in a forthcoming year, LTA makes a forecast on the number of vehicles expected to be deregistered, either due to scrapping or exporting. Such forecasts have inherent inaccuracies and the net vehicle growth rate may turn out to be higher or lower than the targeted 3%. Can the Minister comment on the actual net vehicular growth rate last year versus the target growth rate of 3% per year? Also, does the Ministry intend to have more frequent forecasting on the number of deregistered vehicles, say, on a quarterly basis?

The Ministry also announced that it intended to halve the allowable annual vehicle growth rate in 2009 from 3% to 1.5% for three years. Has this changed? Could the cut be deeper since the road kilometre growth rate is only 0.5% per annum compared to 1.5% target growth rate over the next 15 years? And given that COE prices are expected to remain low, could a deeper cut be considered?

Sir, my next point concerns off-peak cars. If the various schemes introduced by the Government under the Land Transport Masterplan are successful, then some motorists will switch to public transport during the peak hours. And these motorists may still wish to retain their cars for off-peak use. I have asked the Minister in last year's COS if his

Column: 3013

Ministry would allow for more liberal conversion of cars, bearing the normal licence plates, to off-peak cars. And the reply then was that there is presently a carefully calibrated balance of tax concessions which must go hand-in-hand with the usage restrictions of Off-peak Cars (OPCs).

2.15 pm

Sir, I believe however, that it would be appropriate for the Government to revisit this balance so that more motorists would convert their vehicles into OPCs. On a separate note, the current OPC day licences are outdated. It requires very large paper coupons and it is very prone to tampering. Also, confrontations are often ugly when the traffic police has to stop people accused of tampering. I have many residents who have come to me. Much hardships have been actually caused by this system which is not robust. It is too prone to tampering, too prone to temptation. Some have gone to jail because of it. I hope the Ministry would look at it and see if technology can be used to improve the system.

Sir, next, traffic information with the use of GPS. In Melbourne, for example, there is real-time information that tells us about rubbernecking, traffic, icy roads, accidents, and so forth. They use a technology called Radio Data System which transmits traffic message channel format, or TMC format. These are then fed into the GPS system in the car so that motorists, on a real-time life basis, can adjust their journeys. I think this has a lot of benefits and I want to ask if LTA intends to explore such technology.

Sir, no transport discussion at COS would be complete without discussing Singapore's favourite past-time, the ERP. Under the Land Transport Master Plan, the LTA refined the method of measuring traffic speeds – they changed the average mean speed to 85th percentile. I just

Column: 3014

would like an update from the Minister to see if he finds the ERP changes effective and what are his views on any new initiatives or adjustments that may come about from this experience.

Also, the ERP rates are revised currently every three months. Can the Minister comment on whether there is a need to change the frequency of such rate changes so that they will better reflect the traffic conditions on the roads?

Public Transport Services

Mr Ong Kian Min (Tampines): Sir, in this year's Budget, our Finance Minister announced the move to expand and accelerate infrastructure spending to make Singapore, and I quote, "an extremely livable global city and the best home for Singaporeans".

Back in 2005, our Prime Minister in his National Day Rally Speech envisaged a new downtown at Marina Bay as, our Prime Minister put it, I quote, "the centerpiece of our redevelopment of our city". This latest jewel to adorn our city, Marina Bay, will indeed require much infrastructure spending to make it an exciting place for people to explore, exchange and entertain. I would like to ask the Minister for Transport: what can we expect of the transport infrastructure for that area? Will we see any new innovative or different ways for people to travel from place to place?

Presently, it will seem that the solution to manage congestion is road widening. Just take a look at Shenton Way, South Bridge Road, Robinson Road and the new Marina Boulevard next to the NTUC Centre, which are all four-five lanes wide. While increasing the number of lanes eases vehicular traffic, we must also explore other means to make crowded areas so pedestrian-friendly that people would want to leave home without their cars.

Column: 3015

Our city would be much more livable if in heavy human traffic areas, vehicles can be segregated from the pedestrians, so that these areas become more pedestrian-friendly. If both vehicles and pedestrians have to be at ground level, segregation can be achieved by constructing ring roads at-grade, going around the area. If they can be at different levels, either the roads can be underground and people on the surface, or vehicles at ground level and people below ground or above ground with elevated sky terraces, hanging gardens and walkways. These different levels are all relative. We can have roads at ground level with people above or underground or, alternatively, have people at ground level with roads at a level below.

Presently, at the site of the future Gardens by the Bay, I see huge excavation activities going on to build a massive network of underground shops and corridors. When this underground complex is completed, the Gardens will be built on top of it. But at the ground level, this future idyllic Gardens will be ringed by roads such as Marina Boulevard which are four, five lanes wide. I wonder, for the same amount of digging, why the roads cannot be underground instead and the space above ground be made more pleasant for walking, dining and other leisure activities.

I would like to ask the various agencies to pay particular attention to the public transport connectivity linking Marina Bay, Raffles Place and Suntec City. Currently, there is no convenient public transport link. If a person who works at Raffles Place wishes to meet another for lunch at Marina Centre, there is no alternative, in the light of time constraint, but to drive or take a taxi there and back. Travel within these three business hubs, which are situated close together, should be made seamlessly

Column: 3016

convenient to the masses. These three business hubs should not be found to be so near and yet so far.

Sir, why not a monorail system linking the various developments in the Marina Bay area? Some may object saying that it will be unsightly. But I think it can add a futuristic appeal to our cityscape. Imagine a monorail not unlike the Sentosa Express which departs from and arrives within Vivo City complex or imagine stepping from the cool comfort of the second floor of your office building directly into a sky train, just like the sky trains which seamlessly link Changi Airport terminals one, two and three. I believe that once zipping in and from any of these centres becomes a breeze, it will greatly increase the synergy of the entire Marina Bay area.

The future of our land transport system should not be just about wider roads, more buses, higher ERP charges and even the MRT. These will not be sufficient to cope with our transport needs in the long term. While the transport system in older business hubs like Orchard Road are already entrenched in concrete and asphalt, the new Marina Bay presents a unique and exciting opportunity to create a first-class modern and integrated people-mover system capable of serving this premier business district well for many decades to come. The Government has invested close to $5.7 billion in the infrastructure in Marina Bay and will continue to pump in another $1 billion over the next 10 to 15 years. I hope we have not missed the opportunity to develop this new downtown as a truly extraordinary iconic business district.

In this regard, I would like to invite our Government officials to take a look at Shiodome in Tokyo. Shiodome is located adjacent to Shimbashi and Ginza in the centre of Tokyo City. Formerly a disused railway terminal, Shiodome has recently been transformed into one of Tokyo's

Column: 3017

most modern areas. I recall that on one evening, standing in the lobby of one of the modern skyscrapers in Shiodome and looking through the ten-storey high glass facade at the elevated monorail station in front of the building, I saw a train gliding smoothly into the station. The monorail track was in the dark, the train carriages were brightly-lit and appeared to be floating on air, moving silently through the air. Scenes from the futuristic Star Wars movies flashed through my mind.

Land Transport Masterplan and Review of Car Growth Rate Policy

Mr Seah Kian Peng (Marine Parade): Sir, I take heart in the Minister’s response to my query last March that they will wait three years to review if there is a need for a further reduction to the vehicle growth rate, which currently stands at 1.5% per annum. He also said that this percentage is not intended to be a long-term fixture.

That conversation, however, had taken place before the global financial meltdown. Today, even the brightest brains in business and Government who gathered at the recently-concluded World Economic Forum are unable to fathom how deep their economies have tanked – the severity and depth of this crisis is still unknown and no one could propose nor suggest a solution to get us all out of this rut.

With progressively weakening economic conditions (as evidenced by falling COE prices for sometime now), the picture being painted now is rather different now from what it was a year ago. Individuals and businesses are looking for ways to reduce costs of living and costs of doing business – and transport cost is certainly one of them. If we now reduce vehicle growth rate from the current 1.5% to, say, 1% per year, it is logical to conclude that fewer cars on the road should lead to less congestion

Column: 3018

and smoother traffic flows. ERP charges, which is a function of the traffic density and flows on the roads, should accordingly remain static. In fact, logically, ERP charges may even come down. This will be welcome news to businesses and individuals alike. For businesses, this would lead to a lower cost of doing business and for individuals, a great relief to lowering their cost of living.

Is anything less than 1.5% too drastic? Is lack of demand for cars overwhelming? Are aspirations of first-time car owners curtailed? I do not think so. Not in this current gloom where the game has changed. No one can portend when the crisis will end, and a majority of us have started to shift to survivor mode.

So, I would like to ask the Minister to reconsider the planning parameters of vehicle growth rate versus growth in population policy in the next two years. This should be reviewed sooner, in fact now. If the economic situation improves, the Ministry can always reinstitute the 1.5% growth rate.

Finally, I would also like to ask the Minister for an update on the Land Transport Masterplan that was launched at the start of last year. Specifically, are the planning parameters used in the formulation of the Land Transport Masterplan valid in the light of the current economic climate? If there is a need to, I hope the Minister will also refine the Land Transport Masterplan accordingly.

Progress on the Quality of Public Transport

Ms Jessica Tan Soon Neo (East Coast): Sir, it is about a year since Minister for Transport shared the outcome of the Land Transport Review. A key question of the review was: what it would take for the majority of Singaporeans to choose the bus or MRT over the car?

Column: 3019

I must commend the Minister for the philosophy of the Land Transport system to put the commuter at the centre, and the Minister also spoke of making public transport a choice mode and about how we will make public transport more seamless for commuters and improve bus services to help achieve this.

It is now about a year out since we started on this journey, I would like to ask the Minister to share the progress on the execution of the plans to improving public transport services, especially bus services. What impact has been achieved to make the journey for commuters more seamless, faster and more comfortable?

I am not sure if public transport is becoming the choice mode for commuters or if it is a reflection of the economic conditions but the trend for ridership for MRT, LRT, bus in FY07/08 has clearly shown a shift and increase in ridership to public transport. Ridership for MRT was up 9%, LRT by 9% and buses by 4%. Taxi ridership perversely dropped year-on-year by 2%. So given this increase of people using public transport, we see there needs to be an improvement in the quality of public transport. This will be even more pressing given the current economic conditions, assuming that more people will take up public transport.

So, what is the progress of the execution of the five major initiatives to enhance the hub and spoke system to make the ride for commuters more comfortable, quicker and more seamless?

Quality of Public Transport

Mdm Cynthia Phua (Aljunied): Mr Chairman, Sir, in the last few years, there has been much improvement made to the public transport system. For this proactive stance, the Minister must take the credit for his leadership.

Column: 3020

But as the ridership rises, so too will the demands on the operators. To begin with, buses are still not keeping to schedules especially during peak hours. During off-peak hours, the infrequency of buses is common. The LTA has provided some assistance by installing Real-Time Bus Arrival Information Panels to help commuters. Will these panels be extended beyond the CBD area?

There is no quality benchmark here for, say, at the midpoint of a journey for buses to keep on schedule. Once there is no quality measure, there will be no improvement. LTA should proceed with mid-journey KPI on the percentage of buses arriving on time. In addition, residents have complained about the infrequency of feeder bus services during weekends. We should liberalise the feeder bus services and allow private operators to operate these. The upside of this would mean that more bus operators for our primary school children who then can start schools later.

We know the Circle Line is being brought forward with the opening of four stations. Can we have an update on the earlier opening of the rest of the lines and stations? Are there further MRT lines being planned? MRT trains still suffer from an overcrowding problem during peak hours. Despite the increases in carriage frequency, commuters still find themselves unable to board. Could this be an infrastructure issue where the old MRT lines are a single track system and not able to allow more carriages on the track? Has LTA reviewed the capacity of existing MRT lines and any possibility to add more tracks on the existing lines which are now overcrowded and has reached its maximum capacity?

The transport operators' explanation that to give our polytechnic students cheaper fare would mean higher charges for public fare is not acceptable. There is no need for this direct relationship. It is an

Column: 3021

expense item, but there are also many forms of revenue as well. URA and LTA over last few years have allowed more and more retail space in the MRT stations, and this space provides added revenue. Can MOT and the Transport Council be more persuasive and effective on this matter?

2.30 pm

Direct relationship between fare and fuel prices – there was some confusion about what the Minister has said earlier on that there is no direct relationship between fuel and fare prices. The formula shows a direct relationship as the inflation index incorporates the fuel prices. Are we going to have good news of a lower fare for the general public and our polytechnic students, since fuel prices have fallen for many months?

Masterplan on public transport – next, I would like to ask the Minister for an update of our Land Transport Masterplan in relation to our public transport system which was unveiled only a year ago, so that the public knows what is going to be done and being done.

Increase Frequency of Bus Services on Sundays

Mr Chiam See Tong (Potong Pasir): Sir, I have only one question for the Minister. In view of the great influx of foreign construction workers in Singapore, will he consider asking the various bus companies to increase the frequency of buses that ply along Geylang and Serangoon Roads? Workers tend to hang out in these places, especially on Sundays and public holidays. Increased frequency of buses will ensure that the local general public is not affected by longer waiting hours, wasting time and packed buses.

Buses

Ms Eunice Elizabeth Olsen: Sir, in other first-world cities, there are clear bus

Column: 3022

timetables, so commuters know when to expect their buses to arrive.

In Singapore, basic bus operators get away with inconsistent arrival times. Moreover, the operators display bus service frequencies that can range from more than 10 to 20 minutes during afternoon off-peak periods, for example, or six to 15 minutes during morning peak periods. This makes public transport unsatisfactory. The range, in terms of frequency and time period, is too wide and too broad. Even then, buses can take longer to arrive. A friend of mine said this has been his experience with Service No. 97, which has become less frequent in recent years. He started taking taxis. And this is precisely what we should avoid.

With more bus lanes being introduced and vehicles having to give way to buses exiting bus bays, for example, can we expect higher standards from the operators so that services are more regular as well as more frequent? With better headways during peak periods from August this year, I hope MOT can start by looking at off-peak periods, where less traffic should make it easier to have more regular arrival times. Basically, a commuter should not go to a bus stop and find that the bus arrives, for example, at 8.05 pm on the first day, 8.10 pm on the second day, 8.15 pm on the third day, and so on.

Why does PTC require timetables to be provided only for bus services with headways of 20 minutes or more? In any case, the PTC's website does not say if PTC even measures whether the timetable is adhered to.

The Ministry has set about to raise bus service standards. This should include timetables, and ensuring that operators adhere to them. One way to start is to require operators to provide timetables for more services, or to require operators to

Column: 3023

ensure that buses leave the interchange at a fixed schedule, and not just a scheduled headway. Of course, if the occasional need arises for operators to provide more bus trips than scheduled, all the better. The point is, let us start somewhere.

Central Bus Planning

Dr Lam Pin Min (Ang Mo Kio): Mr Chairman, Sir, MOT's announcement of LTA's future role as a centralised bus planner is a welcomed move. There is no doubt that Singapore's land transport system is probably one of the best in the world. However, there is still room for improvement and, I believe, MOT will continue to strive for excellence and to make public transportation in Singapore a choice mode of travel.

One of the problems faced by my residents is the lack of connectivity of the bus network. Although there is currently a LRT network serving the Senkang/Punggol area, residents staying far away from the LRT stations do not enjoy the convenience brought about by the system. In fact, the presence of the LRT has taken away previously existed bus services or even denied them the option of having additional bus services plying those so-called areas served by the LRT. Can I ask the Minister for an update on centralised bus planning? When will LTA take over this role? What is LTA's mandate and how Singaporeans will benefit from this initiative?

Update on Central Bus Planning

Mr Lim Biow Chuan (Marine Parade): Sir, last year, the Minister for Transport announced that LTA will take over centralised bus planning. It was also announced that the public will be involved in the land transport system. May I seek an update from the Minister on the plans for the centralised bus planning? Would

Column: 3024

the grassroots organisations be consulted on the bus routes which would be running through the estate?

I recall two years ago when SMRT decided to terminate Service CSS 608, I made several appeals on behalf of the residents to keep the service and to run the service with a longer headway. However, the appeal was rejected and my residents were left without a service which had served them for many years. This has caused great inconvenience and much unhappiness amongst the residents.

The question often posed to me was that bus service should be a public amenity and it should not be left to the bus operators to determine whether to operate a route based solely on the reason whether the bus route is profitable. After all, the bus transport operators are already very profitable.

Hence, may I urge the Minister to consider the following suggestions when carrying out the centralised bus planning system? First, consult the grassroots organisations before finalising the route, as they have a better idea as to where the demand is. Next, where the bus service is not profitable, consider running the service at a longer but more regular headway, for example, if it is not profitable to run a service every 10 or 15 minutes, the transport operators may instead apply to run the service at headways of 30 minutes or one hour but make sure the buses operate on time so that the residents know exactly what time to reach the bus stop and how long they must wait. Next, please balance the interest of the commuters when deciding on a bus service. It does not mean that when a bus service is not profitable, that bus service must be terminated. LTA should also consider the convenience to the commuting public which should be paramount unless there is very low demand for the service. Lastly, implement distance-based transport fare quickly.

Column: 3025

Commuters should not be penalised for having to change buses or MRT because the transport service is not available to them.

MRT

Mr Ang Mong Seng: ( In Mandarin ): [For vernacular speech, please refer to Appendix A.] Mr Chairman, presently, there are on the average some 1.8 million passenger trips per day on the MRT, up 5% from last year, and the ridership will continue to grow because:

(1) rising population in Singapore;

(2) LTA and the public transport operators are actively promoting the use of public transport; and

(3) the economic downturn has caused the public to turn to public transport.

At the moment, the operators have been increasing the number of trips in order to solve the problem of over-congestion. However, just by increasing the trips will not solve this problem. They should consider a more long-term and effective solution.

Therefore, I suggest that they increase the number of carriages from six to eight. In Japan, I have seen some trains with 12 carriages in Tokyo. And in China, the Shanghai Metro has decided to increase the number of carriages from six to eight on their Metro Line 1. This would also increase their takings from ticketing and, in fact, they are expecting an annual increase of 15% from $82 million to $94 million in ticket sales.

In Singapore, an average carriage can carry about 50 passengers. With two carriages, it would carry about 100 passengers. So at three minutes a trip and 20 trips in an hour, in one hour's time, it

Column: 3026

will increase the passengers loading capacity by 1,200. This will also give the operators more income and reduce the long-term operating costs. Of course, if platforms need to be lengthened, this will call for platform construction works, thereby stimulating the building industry.

I was told that the operators will have to spend about $50 million to $60 million to purchase new carriages this year. But I believe that these estimates were calculated last year when the economy was doing better. This year, with the present economic situation, they should be able to get it at lower prices. At the same time, they should also step up the maintenance work on the carriages so as to extend the lives of the trains. These savings would be passed down to the passengers and that would lighten the burden of our commuters. I think transport operators should not only think of increasing the fares. They should also think of how to operate more efficiently for the benefit of the passengers.

*Cols. 3135-3136.

Public Transport

Mr Alvin Yeo (Hong Kah): Sir, our public transport system is the envy of others. Modern, efficient and relatively inexpensive, it has been lauded as one of the key advantages Singapore has in terms of infrastructure. Even other countries come to study our innovations like the Area Licensing Scheme before and, now, our Electronic Road Pricing. But, lately, some cracks are appearing and more complaints are being raised by how crowded our MRT trains are, how slowly our buses move on congested roads, how new or sparsely populated areas are poorly covered. I am sure my colleagues in the House would have had their share of feedback from their residents.

Singapore's way has been to reject the idea of a nationalised public transport operator and to rely on market forces to

Column: 3027

drive the efficiency and economies of our bus and rail providers, as private companies. I agree with this approach. One need only look at the disastrous experiences of other countries with the nationalised transport system to see how that breeds inefficiency and waste and, ultimately, serves the public the poorer. But I do question the viability of having two private companies as transport operators in a small market like Singapore. After all, it is not as if they are competing head-to-head in every place for the users from the same area. Rather the MRT lines and bus routes are allocated between them, and instead of one larger monopoly, we have two smaller ones. Of course, we want competition. But having two separate operators, each with a monopoly over different segments of the transport network, is not, in my view, effective competition. And the smaller size of each operator means they do not even enjoy the benefits of scale that a single monopoly would have. So, how is the consumer better off?

We have seen in a different context how a well-meaning attempt at competition can turn out badly. I am referring to the media industry where SPH was allowed for a time to offer its own TV channels, while MediaCorp set up its own newspaper. In the limited domestic market, both companies suffered such substantial losses that the experiment was called off after a few years. I do hope our Transport Ministry will review the long-term viability of our present setup and consider whether, given the limitations of the domestic market, Singapore's interest would be better served by having a single public transport operator. Such a company would still operate as a private entity and be required to account to its shareholders for its performance. But it would enjoy greater economies of scale and being a single entity would have every incentive to

Column: 3028

enhance the interfacing of bus and rail services, which is another bugbear of our consumers.

But even market forces have to be tempered where public service is required. So, for instance, in areas which are newly developed or not so heavily populated, there does need to be some regulatory intervention to ensure that the profit motive does not mean that those residents are under-served. It should be a condition of the licence to offer transport services that all areas should receive acceptable levels of service, even if it means some routes are less profitable for the operators or even money-losing. That is why I was happy when one of the conclusions of the review of our transport system released last year was that LTA would take over the centralised planning of bus routes, rather than to simply leave it to the bus operators.

Transport is the lifeblood of our society and country. Improving an already efficient system can only help Singaporeans to work, play and live better.

Land Transport and Traffic Management

Mr Ong Kian Min: Sir, although many companies are faced with difficulties in this recession, I believe that our public transport operators are actually better off as ridership creeps up and oil prices slide. As more people switch to taking public transport to save cost, ridership will increase further leading to additional takings which would bolster the bottomlines of the operators. For example, if a bus carries an additional 10 passengers, the operator will earn 10 more fares with essentially no increase in operating cost. Further, with a drastic drop in oil prices, the transport operators' fuel costs are now lower.

However, for the man in the street, as wages and income decrease due to the

Column: 3029

downturn, lower earnings mean that transport costs would form a higher percentage of household income. He would be more appreciative if his transport expenses can be lowered. Although fares are reviewed and based on a stipulated formula, under the current extraordinary circumstances, I would like to urge the Public Transport Council (PTC) and the operators to find more avenues to lower transport costs in addition to passing on the savings from Budget 2009.

2.45 pm

If there is a good time to encourage car-owners to make the switch to public transport as the only or main mode of transport, it must be now. Certainly, giving up your car for public transport will trim off a sizeable chunk in your monthly expenses. I would like to ask the Minister whether his Ministry will be taking other measures to persuade even more car-owners to make the switch to public transport.

Sir, in many cities, residents are very clear about where and when they do not drive their cars because of severe congestion, the lack of parking facilities or exorbitant parking charges. They would rather take public transport or a taxi. But here in Singapore, many people would think nothing of driving to a shopping mall like Takashimaya in the heart of Orchard Road and parking their cars there.

The LTA is doing an excellent job to ensure that we have a delightful driving experience in every area of the city. Most times of the day, it is a breeze to travel along our roads. Driving a car is still the fastest, most convenient and pleasant mode of transport to reach our destination. It is little wonder that almost everyone aspires to own and drive a car.

However, there are certain times when it just so happens that it seems almost

Column: 3030

everyone takes their cars out onto the road at the same time, thus creating unexpected, unbearable and excruciating traffic congestion. I would say that Friday evenings, especially when it rains, are the worst as office workers are returning home while others are driving out from their homes or workplaces to dinner and entertainment.

Since only certain areas of Singapore are congested at only certain times of the day and week, we cannot and should not restrict the use of vehicles everywhere, in the whole of Singapore at all times of the day. However, I would suggest that we start with a couple of specific areas such as the Orchard Road tourist belt, the Raffles Place/Marina Bay business district and our rejuvenated HDB regional centres. In these areas, we should target to systematically enhance the commuter and pedestrian experience by making it conducive for drivers to park their cars further away and enter the areas by public transport or even by way of comfortable air-conditioned walkways. The transition from car parking to taking public transport or walking to these areas should be made easy and time-efficient. Within the areas, there should be convenient and seamless links for the masses so that people can move around effortlessly.

Sir, to accommodate large numbers of pedestrians without feeling overcrowded, footpaths should be widened, buildings should be connected with pedestrian walkways at three levels – underground, street level and above ground. As Singapore is prone to heat, humidity and sudden downpours, it will be a boon to pedestrians to be able to enjoy weatherproof access between buildings. I am certain that if we take care of the walking experience, we will also take care of the road experience.

Since the introduction of tougher penalties for fare evaders in July 2008, it has been reported that there has been a

Column: 3031

large drop in the number of fare evaders caught between July and October 2008. An average of 15 people a day was caught, down from 400 a day. However, during the economic downturn, I fear that more people may be tempted to evade fares. Honest commuters who pay their fares are effectively subsidising the fare-evaders' rides. This is not right. The more enforcement action is taken, the higher the number of fare evaders will be caught. I would like to ask: how many man hours does TransitLink devote to catching fare evaders? Are the enforcement officers effectively deployed? What additional steps may operators take to ensure that all commuters duly pay their fares so that the burden of operations is fairly shared?

Progress in the Road Sector

Mr Wee Siew Kim (Ang Mo Kio): Sir, the Land Transport Master Plan (LTMP) was launched last year. One key goal of the Plan is to shift preference to public transport. Commuters would only be persuaded to do so, if they are satisfied with an aggregate of several factors. As such, the LTMP would need to tackle the factors of convenience, connectivity, speed, service levels, comfort, cost and safety. Can the Ministry update us on the progress made on these factors and what measures are being taken to further enhance our public transportation?

My next point on transportation is the facilitation of cycling. I certainly believe that pedestrians, bicyclists and motor vehicles can coexist. In Singapore, where cycling as a serious mode of transport is gaining strength, should there be more education and rules on the proper cycling etiquette?

Many of my residents have raised concerns of errant bicyclists. Many

Column: 3032

bicyclists use walkways, void decks and garden pathways at will. As our estates become more barrier-free and accessible, this problem could worsen. With many young children and elderly in the estates, residents' concerns will only increase.

Before any major tragic incident happen, could the Ministry work with other agencies to strike a good balance between the convenience for cyclists and the safety of pedestrians?

ERP Matters and Provision of Traffic Information

Dr Lam Pin Min: Mr Chairman, Sir, the vehicle population growth rate previously stood at 3% and this has been revised downwards to 1.5% from 2009 for the next three years. If the roads in Singapore also grow at the same pace, there will be no problem of severe traffic congestion. Unfortunately, in the last 10 years, our road system grew only at 1% per year, and it is expected to grow at half this pace in the next 10 to 15 years.

This mis-match has contributed to the traffic congestion we see each day. Given that only 12% of Singapore's compact land is being used for the construction of roads, the possibility of building more roads to help ease the traffic congestion is not possible. Can I ask the Minister what is the long-term strategy in the management of road traffic congestion in Singapore, and whether other viable measures are being considered other than erecting more ERP gantries and raising ERP rates?

Mr Lim Biow Chuan: Sir, last year I spoke up during the Budget debate in favour of ERP as a means of managing road congestion. It is a fair way to manage the use of our roads as the motorist pays for using the road during peak hours, and for adding to the congestion. However, I notice that LTA

Column: 3033

has implemented ERP on roads which are not congested – an example would be the Nicoll Highway on Saturday afternoons; another example would be the ERP gantries at Upper Boon Keng Road and Geylang Bahru Road. Could LTA provide an explanation as to why is there such a need for ERP gantries when these roads are not congested? Would this not run against LTA's principle that LTA manages road congestion by charging motorists for adding to the congestion? In this case, since these roads are not congested in the first place, what is the rationale for having such ERP gantries?

Next, I wish to ask the Minister whether he is able to introduce a dedicated radio station to broadcast traffic news during peak hours. Timely information about traffic conditions allows the motorists to plan properly for their travel routes and, hence, they will not add to traffic congestion, especially where there is an accident or road works. I understand that currently there is LTA traffic broadcast providing information about traffic on the radio. However, the information is only conveyed every 15 minutes or so. Singapore is a small country. By the time the Traffic Watch is broadcast, the motorist is already caught in the traffic jam. Surely, it makes more sense for traffic information to be given and repeated with regular updates throughout the peak periods so that the motorist can be made aware of the traffic congestion along his route.

A common complaint which I have received is that a motorist drives into a congested expressway such as the CTE and then he is stuck in the traffic for an hour or so, and still has to pay ERP charges. With prompt news available on the radio, the motorist can plan his route better and choose to avoid the congestion.

The Chairman: Order. I propose we take a break now.

Column: 3034

Thereupon Mr Speaker left the Chair of the Committee and took the Chair of the House.

Mr Speaker: Order. I suspend the Sitting and will take the Chair at 3.20 pm.

Sitting accordingly suspended

at 2.54 pm until 3.20 pm.

Sitting resumed at 3.20 pm

[Mr Speaker in the Chair]:

[Mr Speaker in the Chair]: Debate in Committee of Supply resumed.

[Mr Speaker in the Chair]

**__ ** Head W (cont.) –

The Minister for Transport (Mr Raymond Lim Siang Keat): .Mr Chairman, Sir, I thank Members for their comments and suggestions.

Early last year, we completed an extensive review of our land transport system and launched the Land Transport Masterplan (LTMP). The LTMP guides the overall development of our land transport system over the next 10-15 years. To pursue the overarching goal of "ensuring a liveable city", the LTMP sets out three strategic thrusts. First, to make public transport a choice mode. Second, to manage road usage. Third, to meet the diverse needs of our people.

Mr Cedric Foo and other Members have asked for an update on the implementation of the LTMP. Let me highlight the key measures – first, in public transport and then managing road use. My colleagues, Senior Minister of State Mrs Lim Hwee Hua and Senior Parliamentary Secretary Mr Teo Ser Luck will cover other topics later on.

The LTMP calls for very significant changes to the public transport landscape. In 2008, the Land Transport Authority

Column: 3035

(LTA) focused on the improvements that we can make quickly, whilst laying the groundwork and making progress in those areas which require more time.

Ms Jessica Tan asked about our progress in improving public transport. Members including Ms Tan, Mdm Cynthia Phua and Ms Eunice Olsen have asked for higher-quality public transport with better connectivity, especially for bus services. I agree. Buses are a key part of our hub-and-spoke public transport network. The measures we have taken to improve our bus services are: (1) increase bus frequencies; (2) increase travel speed and reliability; (3) offer more choices; and (4) provide better public transport information.

Firstly, increase bus frequencies. Last year, the Public Transport Council (PTC) introduced new standards for feeder bus services, so that at least 85%, or more than four out of five, feeder services during peak hours must run at headways of 10 minutes or less from August 2008. This will be further tightened to 90%, or nine in 10 services from August 2009. LTA also worked with SBST and SMRT to improve headways of trunk buses on ERP affected corridors, to make sure that all of them have headways of less than 12 minutes. This will be further tightened to 10 minutes for all buses from August 2009 instead of 15 minutes previously.

As a result, SBST and SMRT have together added more than 100 additional bus trips during the morning and evening peak periods to improve services. The services that have been improved are running more frequently, with headways shorter by 17%. This means that commuters do not have to wait as long at the bus stop, because the bus arrives sooner. It also means more capacity and, hence, it is easier to get onto a bus during the peak periods.

Column: 3036

All this is possible because SMRT and SBST have been buying more buses and hiring more drivers, and they will have to continue to do so to provide a higher quality of service. This year, they are putting another 470 new Euro V buses on the road, and stepping up their recruitment drives.

Mr Chiam See Tong asked whether we can increase the frequency of bus services on Sundays, when there are more foreigners using public transport. The PTC’s regulations already require 85%, or more than four in five public buses, to run at headways of not more than 20 minutes during off-peak hours, including Sundays. The operators in fact often do better than this. For bus services in the Geylang and Serangoon areas, the weekend and public holidays' load is now about 60% to 80%, so it is still below capacity. In other words, the issue is whether there is sufficient demand to warrant higher frequencies. But, nonetheless, PTC will look into this.

Secondly, we have worked on improving bus travel time and reliability. To achieve this, LTA has extended the network of normal bus lanes from 120 km to 155 km, and tripled full-day bus lanes from 7 km to 23 km. Bus speeds have increased by up to 8% for normal bus lanes and 13% for full-day bus lanes. Traffic speeds in the other lanes have remained above the optimal speed threshold.

Commuters have benefited from these new bus lanes. Mr Ho Kok Khun wrote to the Straits Times Forum on 4th December. He said that with the bus lanes implemented in Yishun and Ang Mo Kio, bus commuters now enjoy a smoother, faster ride, saving 10 to 15 minutes when they travel to town.

Ms Eunice Olsen would like buses to be better at arriving on time. I share her

Column: 3037

desire. The PTC’s regulations ensure that buses usually start their journeys on time. But whether the bus arrives at individual bus stops as scheduled depends on the traffic. Our buses share the roads with other vehicles, and as every motorist knows, traffic conditions can be unpredictable. Hence, it is difficult to guarantee bus arrival times. But we can improve their accuracy and reliability. The extension of our bus lanes has helped to make the bus journey more reliable, by allowing buses to travel unimpeded by other traffic. The two public transport operators have also invested in operational control systems to guide buses in real-time, to minimise bunching and help keep bus arrivals regular. These efforts have not gone unnoticed. A bus commuter, Mr Mark Ivan Lee, wrote to the Straits Times online Forum last month with his observations of the efforts bus captains and service leaders have put in to keep to their schedule and to please their customers.

Thirdly, we have also offered commuters more bus choices since the liberalisation of the Premium Bus Service (PBS) scheme two years ago – from 10 to over 70 today. Commuter feedback has been positive. More importantly, commuters have voted with their feet – total ridership on PBS has increased by almost 60% in the period from November 2007 to the end of last year.

Fourthly, to make it more convenient to take a bus, we have sought to let commuters know when their bus is arriving, so they can adjust their travel plans. If you are an SBST commuter, you can already use the IRIS system with your mobile phone. Before you leave the house for the bus stop, just SMS IRIS to find out when the next bus will arrive. My children are a big fan of this. As they always seem pressed for time, this helps them decide whether they can walk to the bus stop or sprint for it. LTA is now building upon this system, conducting a six-month trial to

Column: 3038

put in an integrated SMS system that can include all public buses and not just SBST’s.

There are now more of such tools to help commuters make better decisions and choose the best ways to get to their destinations. In July last year, TransitLink introduced a public transport journey planner that is integrated across modes and operators. The planner works out a few route options for you to get to your destinations. It tells you which bus or train to take, where to transfer, how long is the journey and how much it will cost. In October, LTA set up a Public Transport portal that provides all public transport information from a single website.

Underlying all these initiatives is our vision that our public transport system should be a seamless and unified system.

3.30 pm

Mr Cedric Foo and Mdm Cynthia Phua asked about the crowding situation in our trains. Last year, public transport ridership grew by 7.4%, the fastest rate in many years. However, if we look closer at the numbers, we see that since the onset of the financial crisis in September 2008, ridership growth has been decelerating. It was 9.4% year-on-year in September; in October, it went down to 6.4%; in December, it was 4.9%. Preliminary estimate in January 2009 was that public transport ridership had dipped by 3.1% year-on-year. The reason could be because of the lunar new year holidays falling in January this year. Last year, it was in February. But it could also be that the economic slowdown has led to cutbacks on discretionary trips. Whether these trends persist will depend on the contrary factor of people switching from cars to public transport if the economy weakens. However, what is critical for us for the long term, from the strategic point of view, is to ensure that there is adequate public transport capacity going ahead. This is critical if we want to

Column: 3039

persuade Singaporeans to shift from cars to public transport.

An immediate step that we have taken is to increase the frequency of train trips during the rush hours. There are now 12% more train trips during the morning and evening peak period. Since the beginning of 2008, SMRT and SBS Transit have added some 900 additional train trips a week. The trains are now running at intervals of about two to four minutes during rush hours. So even if a commuter cannot immediately board the first train that arrives, he knows that it will only be a few more minutes before another train comes along which he can board.

There have been other initiatives to improve train services. The train operators have introduced service ambassadors to encourage passengers to move to the centre of train cabins, and to the ends of station platforms. All 66 first-generation trains on the North South/East West (NSEW) Lines have been refurbished. There is now more space in each train.

As for comfort, LTA’s Operating Performance Standards (OPS) is 1,600 passengers per train, or five passengers per square metre. This is the level that operators are not allowed to breach, based on the actual response of commuters in the local context.

Our trains have not yet hit this level. Even at the most crowded stretches in the morning peak of peak, say at Toa Payoh southbound, the trains are carrying an average of 1,300 to 1,450 passengers. This is about four passengers per square metre, comparable with Hong Kong, and better than London’s five, Tokyo’s seven and Shanghai’s eight. Looking ahead, more can and will be done.

Column: 3040

Our current train frequencies are about the best that the system can do under current constraints. To improve, we need to do two things. First, we need to upgrade the MRT infrastructure. If we try to improve headways without doing so, the trains will start bunching up at certain chokepoints, one of which is the Jurong East MRT station. Besides being an interchange station, it is also the terminating station for the trains from Bukit Batok to turn around. However, Jurong East station currently has only one track for the trains coming from Bukit Batok to turn around. They cannot do so quickly enough. This slows down the entire line.

Second, we will also need to buy more trains. Over the years, we have gradually added more trains to the NSEW Lines. We started with 66, now there are more than 100. But we need to add even more if we are to increase train frequencies further.

That is why LTA announced in July last year that it will carry out the Jurong East Modification Project (JEMP). The JEMP will relieve the current infrastructural bottleneck by creating an additional train track and platform at Jurong East station to turn trains around faster. This will allow trains to run more frequently. To take advantage of this improvement, we are purchasing an additional 22 trains concurrently for the NSEW Lines. This answers Mdm Phua’s question on whether there are any other infrastructural improvements.

We will also accelerate the JEMP by one year, and will now aim to complete it by 2011 instead of 2012. With the JEMP, the headway during peak periods can drop to about two minutes along the busiest stretches of the NSEW Lines. This represents an increase in capacity of about 15%. So commuters will be able to enjoy more frequent train arrivals and a more comfortable ride. This improvement will cost us about $800 million, and

Column: 3041

enable the NSEW Lines to meet projected demand all the way till 2020.

Beyond 2020, LTA will study whether to embark on other projects to further increase the capacity of our existing lines. For example, we can upgrade the signalling system, buy more trains and expand our depots. The cost can be massive and implementation likely to take a long time – about eight to 10 years. So I have asked LTA to examine this very carefully, together with other agencies, such as the Ministry of Finance, to decide how best to proceed.

Mr Ang Mong Seng suggested that we add more cars to each train, to bring the current six cars per train to eight. We have indeed looked into this, but decided that it would not be feasible. Our train depots, track turnarounds, and MRT station platforms are all sized for six-car trains. To accommodate a longer train, we would have to lengthen all these, which would be very costly and disruptive, taking several years to complete.

A point worth emphasising here is that besides raising the capacity of our present rail lines, a major thrust of the LTMP is to build new rail lines – the Circle Line, Downtown Line, Thomson Line, Eastern Region Line as well as various extensions to the current lines. This new infrastructure will double the size of our MRT system by 2020.

Mr Foo asked for an update on our new rail lines. We will try to bring forward the completion schedule as much as possible, where technical constraints allow and where it is cost-effective to do so. LTA has worked with its contractors to review the timelines, and I am pleased to announce that the completion of the North-South Line Extension (NSLe) will be brought forward from 2015 to 2014. This extension will provide better connectivity and accessibility to future developments in the Marina South area.

Column: 3042

Even if we keep to the announced schedule, we will open new extensions or stages of new lines every other year from now until 2020. In two weeks, on 28th February 2009, the Boon Lay Extension (BLE) on the western edge of our MRT network will start running. And I am pleased to announce that on the 30th May 2009, Circle Line Stage 3 (CCL3), from Bartley to Marymount, will be opened for passenger service.

CCL3, together with the rest of the Circle Line which will open from 2010 onwards, will add more capacity to our MRT system. The Circle Line will help commuters save travel time, by reducing the need to make detours into the city centre in order to transfer across MRT lines. LTA expects that about 10 to 15% of commuter trips that are currently made on some of the most heavily-loaded sections of the existing MRT lines will move over to the full Circle Line once it is opened, reducing the crowding levels that we experience today.

Beyond this, Stage 1 of the Downtown Line will open from 2013, giving commuters in the city the direct rail link between Raffles Place, Marina Bay and Suntec City, that Mr Ong Kian Min asked for.

URA and LTA have worked closely on the planning for Marina Bay. These plans will include some of the things Mr Ong asked for – seamless connectivity by public transport and better pedestrian facilities. By 2018, the Marina Bay area will be served by four MRT lines – the existing North-South Line, the Circle Line, the Downtown Line and the Thomson Line. Most commuters will have access to an MRT station within a walking distance of no more than 400 metres on average.

As part of the plans for the Marina Bay area, we are working on having our MRT stations seamlessly integrated with an extensive pedestrian network, includ-

Column: 3043

ing underground, street-level and upper-level walkways. Where feasible, we would also have air-conditioned underground pedestrian cum shopping malls, similar to City Link Mall, to connect developments and transport nodes. In future, the public will be able to walk underground and in air-conditioned comfort all the way from Raffles Place MRT station to the Marina Bay Sands Integrated Resort, via the Marina Bay Financial Centre.

However, these plans are always being improved. Our city is constantly being renewed. So let me reassure Mr Ong that LTA will continue to work with other agencies, such as URA, to review the plans for our city and study the suggestions Mr Ong has raised.

Going forward, LTA will be carrying out the more complex initiatives in the LTMP. The key initiative for public transport will be centralised bus network planning. Currently, even though bus routes are approved by the PTC, the bus network is planned by the bus operators. LTA will take over the role of the central bus network planner from this year onwards.

Dr Lam Pin Min asked how this would benefit commuters. When LTA takes over bus network planning, a single agency would be able to plan the entire transport network – bus, rail and roads – holistically as one integrated system, from the commuter’s point of view. Centralised planning will allow us to make the entire public transport journey, from the start to the end, as integrated and as seamless as possible, so that travel is faster and more convenient. For example, feeder bus routes will be reviewed to provide more direct and faster connections to the bus interchanges and MRT stations.

Mr Cedric Foo, Dr Lam Pin Min and Mr Lim Biow Chuan have asked for an update

Column: 3044

on central bus network planning. LTA is now drafting a blueprint for the future network, with the objectives of improving journey quality, increasing integration across public transport modes and services, streamlining the hub-and-spoke design of our network, while ensuring the overall financial viability of the bus network.

Financial viability is an important discipline that bears highlighting. Public transport is the most efficient means of carrying people, but this presumes that there are enough passengers on the bus. If the system is not financially sustainable, the impact may not be felt immediately. But over time, it will pull down the quality of the whole system, as the network will not be able to generate enough revenue for the operator to invest and upkeep the quality of bus services.

Mr Lim asked LTA not to automatically shut down bus routes that are not profitable on their own and to try other ways such as reducing bus frequencies. We will consider his suggestions. In fact, let me reassure him that LTA’s approach will be to consider the overall viability of the bus network, rather than insist that every bus route on its own must make a profit. But this does not mean that we can add economically unviable services to the network in an indiscriminate manner. Otherwise, sooner or later, the whole network would suffer.

On the issue Dr Lam has raised of whether we can allow bus services to duplicate routes that are also served by the rail system, LTA will have to decide on such instances judiciously, based on the best way to use the available resources. On stretches of rail corridors that are already congested, bus services are allowed today to run in parallel with trains, but there are also many other instances where such duplication will not make sense.

Column: 3045

3.45 pm

<

This is an example of the balance between competing requirements that will need to be struck. LTA will look for the best way to benefit as many people as possible while maintaining the overall viability of the bus network. LTA will consult industry experts, transport operators and grassroots representatives on the planning principles and strategies to adopt.

One of our guiding principles is to avoid making any radical, 'Big Bang'-type changes to bus services. Commuters make more than three million trips on buses every day, and we are conscious that any change must be gradual. Otherwise, there will be mass confusion. Our approach instead is to identify any gaps in connectivity, try to plug them, and see where bus services can be streamlined to improve efficiency of the network.

Another point that I should highlight is that even after LTA has taken over route planning, painful trade-offs will still be necessary. Take, for example, a feeder bus service which has quite a circuitous route. I am sure Members are familiar with complaints from some residents that their feeder service makes "one big round" before it reaches the MRT station. One option for LTA is to 'straighten out' the feeder route, so that it is faster. But this means that some residents who used to go, say, to the market that is along that "one big round" would now lose their direct service and may need to take a transfer.

To help identify and resolve these sorts of trade-offs, and to answer Mr Lim, LTA will hold a series of dialogues in each Group Representation Constituency (GRC) and Single Member Constituency (SMC), to consult local grassroots leaders whose residents are affected by the changes. The consultations will start in the second

Column: 3046

half of 2009. LTA will present the design of the existing bus network in the constituency, explain the proposed changes and invite comments. We will also take suggestions, highlight the trade-offs involved and the choices that the community can help to make. Members of the public will be able to channel their feedback through their local grassroots leaders and constituency representatives.

Once the new bus network has been implemented, LTA will then look at how best to package the bus routes for competitive tendering. Mr Alvin Yeo raised the issue of industry competition. We are not looking at competition 'in' the market where operators compete head-to-head for market share. Experience elsewhere has shown that in the public transport sector, this type of competition will destroy integration and lead to wasteful duplication. Instead, we are looking at competition 'for' the market where the operators compete to provide a package of bus services or run a rail line. By introducing greater contestability to the public transport sector, commuters will benefit as the operators would be incentivised to improve efficiency, service quality and innovation. Thus the public interest is best served not by simply having a single public transport operator, as Mr Yeo suggested, but by ensuring there is the threat of competition to keep these dominant market players on their toes.

Mdm Cynthia Phua and some Members in last week's Budget Debate have asked that polytechnic students’ concession fares be lowered. The operators decide on concessions. However, I would encourage them to see how best they can help in these difficult times. As for the Government, our approach has always been to provide targeted help to those most in need. Polytechnic students are a large and diverse group – there are students from wealthy families and students from less well-off families. We

Column: 3047

should not ask taxpayers to subsidise the fares of polytechnic students who can well afford it. For less well-off households, there are various Government measures to help them such as the Workfare Income Supplement, GST Credits and if more help is needed through the CCC ComCare Fund.

We are now in tough economic times. Mdm Cynthia Phua asked about the fare formula. The fare adjustment formula is not a cost-plus formula. It pegs fare increases to macro-economic factors such as the Consumer Price Index (CPI) and the Wage Index, rather than the operators’ specific costs. This ensures that the operators have to be efficient if they want to be profitable, as they cannot pass their costs on directly to commuters. So as Mdm Phua pointed out, the formula is not directly linked to fuel prices but has an indirect link through the CPI. However, based on the fare formula, the maximum fare adjustment this year would have been close to five per cent. This is why I am pleased that the PTOs have announced that they would work with the PTC to reduce fares this year.

Like Mr Ong, I hope the PTC and the PTOs will find ways to lower transport costs in addition to passing on the savings from the Budget.

Mr Foo and Mr Lim asked that distance-based through-fares be effected as soon as possible. I agree that this is an important initiative to enhance the attractiveness of our public transport system. However, the PTC will have to decide whether, in the current bad economic conditions, it is better to go ahead and implement it this year, or is it better to phase it in so as to minimise the burden of adjustment on both commuters and the PTOs. The PTC will make its decision together with the fare revision by the end of this month.

Column: 3048

Let me now cover the second key thrust in the LTMP – managing road usage. Dr Lam asked about the long-term strategies for managing road usage. To keep traffic flowing smoothly on our roads, we have to adopt a holistic package of measures as no single measure can achieve this.

First, we have to continue to increase and optimise our road capacity where we can. We will continue to build roads, and leverage on technology to maximise their capacity. To answer Mr Foo, we are studying how best to use GPS technology to further optimise road capacity. However, there is a limit to how many more roads we can build or widen.

Secondly, we have to control the demand for our roads. Congestion is a function of both vehicle usage and vehicle population. Hence, we will need to continue to control our vehicle population as well as their usage.

Third, we need to put in place viable and more efficient alternatives to the car in order to ensure we have a sustainable transport system. That is why we continue to invest heavily to improve our public transport system.

While our strategies to keep congestion in check will revolve broadly around these three strategies, circumstances and behaviour will change over time. We will thus need to continually review the balance between them to ensure that the right balance continues to be struck. We will also need to fine-tune existing measures and explore new ways of achieving these three objectives.

When we launched the LTMP in early 2008, we announced that we would enhance the efficacy of the ERP system by using a new set of criteria to determine ERP rates. We took a phased approach by first implementing the changes in the city area in July 2008, before extending it

Column: 3049

outwards progressively. We were hopeful that by introducing the changes to the ERP system in such a phased approach, we can allow improvements from early phases to flow through the whole road network so that we end up having to do less later.

I am glad to say that this is indeed what happened and by November last year, traffic conditions had improved significantly. Of the six new gantries planned for November, we did not have to install four of them. We also deferred the gantry at Serangoon Road, and in the end, only had to implement the gantry on the PIE near Eunos. The changes to the existing gantries were also not as extensive as we had earlier thought necessary. This answers Mr Foo’s question on how effective has the ERP changes been.

I have said that ERP is to manage congestion and not a revenue measure, and that the Government will be happy to collect less if drivers drove less. So if economic conditions lead to changes in travel patterns and less road usage as Mr Seah said, LTA will take them into account and will adjust the ERP rates accordingly. This was what happened in the latest quarterly rate review in February 2009, when LTA lowered ERP rates at 15 gantries. In fact, based on what we have seen so far, if demand for driving continues to fall, the additional ERP revenue collected per year will be about $50 million, and not the $70 million we had earlier estimated. But rest assured that we will not reduce the $110 million in road tax reductions and $200 million in ARF reductions that we have already announced.

Mr Foo asked if ERP rates should be reviewed more frequently so that it is more responsive to changes in traffic conditions. Let me explain why LTA reviews ERP rates on a quarterly basis.

Column: 3050

LTA has found empirically that traffic conditions take some time to stabilise each time ERP rates are adjusted. Drivers may change their behaviour several times after a rate change before they settle into a steady pattern. The change in traffic impact is not just at gantries that have had their rates changed but also on adjacent gantries and time slots. So if we review the rates more frequently, we will be making decisions prematurely. Overall, this would reduce the effectiveness of the ERP system.

As to why ERP is levied on some roads even when there appears to be no congestion, the reasons vary. Mr Lim has cited Nicoll Highway and Upper Boon Keng Road as examples. The rates for ERP gantries around the cordons in the city are determined based on the speeds of different baskets of key roads. Cordon ERP is meant to deal with congestion in a specific area comprising a network of roads rather than to deal with congestion on a specific road. Nicoll Highway is one in a basket of roads in a cordon. Within the basket, some roads are more free-flowing than others, and if we can fine-tune the system to take this into account, we will. For instance, the whole city used to be one large cordon. But LTA has now divided it up into three separate cordons: the Orchard Cordon, the Bugis-Marina Centre Cordon and the Shenton Way-Chinatown Cordon. Breaking this up has allowed us to better fine-tune the ERP rates. For example, the Orchard Cordon does not start operation until 12 noon on weekdays, while there is no ERP for the Shenton Way-Chinatown Cordon on Saturdays. However, if we were to lower the ERP rate for just one road in a cordon compared to adjacent roads, say the ERP gantry at Nicoll Highway, motorists will simply decant over to Nicoll Highway and jam it up. This is why gantries in the same cordon have the same ERP rate, and it is determined by a basket of roads within the cordon. While I am all for further reducing ERP rates, it has to be

Column: 3051

predicated on traffic conditions not worsening as a result.

As for Upper Boon Keng Road, we implemented ERP there in April 2008 because speeds along that stretch of road had fallen below 20 kph. Today, traffic is flowing smoothly within the range for optimal flow. I think the important point to make here is that we have to use an objective way to determine when ERP rates should go up and down, which is what LTA has done. So when the traffic speeds along Upper Boon Keng Road go above the optimum speed range, which so far has not happened, LTA will certainly reduce the ERP rates.

Giving motorists more traffic information will also help them make better choices on the routes to take and help LTA to manage traffic congestion better. For those who listen in on the radio in the morning and evening peak hours, you may have heard regular capsules called "LTA Traffic News". LTA has, since October 2008, procured airtime on four MediaCorp radio stations to disseminate traffic news. Mr Lim would be pleased to know that the stations broadcast traffic updates up to five times more frequently during the morning and evening peak hours than in the past. The updates can be heard at about once every eight minutes during the peak periods. Feedback from listeners have been positive.

LTA did a poll last month. More than 80% of the respondents have found the service useful in helping them to plan their routes. Mr Lim asked if LTA would consider a dedicated radio station to disseminate traffic news. LTA is currently studying the feasibility of such an idea.

4.00 pm

Mr Chairman, Sir, congestion is a function of both vehicle usage and vehicle population. Since the introduction of the

Column: 3052

Certificate of Entitlement (COE) system in 1990, we have kept the vehicle population growth rate at 3% per annum. Last year, we announced in the LTMP that we would lower it to 1.5% from Quota Year 2009 (QY09) onwards. At 1.5%, it is still higher than our road growth going ahead, which is about 0.5% per annum.

Dr Lam Pin Min asked if it is sustainable for vehicle growth to surpass road growth. Mr Cedric Foo and Mr Seah Kian Peng asked if LTA would consider a lower growth rate of 1% from QY09 as the economy has worsened and COE prices have fallen. Mr Seah asked me the same thing last year. I think the point I made last year remains valid. In the longer term, I agree that we may have to reduce the vehicle growth rate further. However, it is also important, when making changes, to do so gradually so that people have sufficient time to adjust. We have implemented quite significant changes to improve our public transport system and to manage road use, and we are not finished yet. It will take time for the impact of these changes to take effect and for people to adjust. As we have already taken the step to halve the vehicle population growth rate to 1.5% for the next three years, we should only do a review after some time to see if a further reduction is required. On Mr Seah’s suggestion that the severity of the economic downturn is another reason to review the growth rate now, my view is that the vehicle population growth rate should not be dependent on prevailing economic conditions which are volatile and unconnected to long-term factors like the pace of road construction, public transport improvements and progress in road management technology. These fundamental factors are critical in determining the sustainable vehicle population growth rate. Nevertheless, when we do the next review, we will consider all the suggestions from Members.

Column: 3053

Hence, for the QY09 which begins in May 2009, LTA will be issuing a total COE quota of 83,789. This is about 24% less than in QY08.

Part of this quota is to allow the vehicle population to grow by 1.5%. The bulk is to replace vehicles that LTA anticipates will be deregistered this year. Some have pointed out that our vehicle growth rate in the last few years has exceeded the 3% annual growth rate. The reason why this has happened is because the number of vehicles deregistered actually turned out quite differently from the numbers projected when we worked out the COE quotas for the respective years.

This is not to say that the COE system does not work. It does, because any errors in projection are always corrected in the current or subsequent years. Since the COE system was introduced in 1990, our vehicle population has grown at a Compound Annual Growth Rate (CAGR) of about 3% as intended. The COE system has therefore been effective in keeping the growth of the vehicle population within the prescribed growth rate on a long-term basis.

However, I think that there is scope to review how we project COEs to replace vehicles that are deregistered, as suggested by Mr Foo, to see if the methodology can be improved to more closely match the COE quotas released for the year with the actual number of vehicle de-registrations. It will improve the responsiveness of the system, but there will, however, be trade-offs, such as more uncertainty over the quota released. Hence, LTA will consult the motor vehicle industry as part of its review.

Mr Foo asked if the Government will consider making Off-Peak-Cars (OPCs) more attractive to motorists. I think he also made the same point to me last year. He has since spoken to me and he is a

Column: 3054

persuasive man. So this year, I shall not disappoint him.

OPCs have been with us since 1994. In fact, we started off with the Weekend Car Scheme in 1991. In the last few years, the OPC scheme has been gaining popularity. At the end of 2005, there were only about 5,000 OPCs. Today, we have about 42,000 OPCs, an eight-fold increase over a three-year period. They currently make up about 7.7% of the car population.

The OPC scheme is something we should encourage. It provides an alternative and a lower-cost means for people to own cars, and as its name suggests, helps to alleviate peak hour congestion on our roads. Those who own OPCs will tell you that they do not use their cars on a daily basis to commute to work during the restricted hours. They either make use of public transport or they plan their schedule to avoid the restricted hours. This fits into our overall objectives to better manage traffic congestion on our roads, particularly during the peak periods, and help to moderate ERP charges.

Hence, we will study how we can make the OPC scheme more attractive and convenient to motorists, to encourage more car owners to opt into the scheme. We have received numerous feedback from OPC owners, such as the limited outlets where the OPC day licences can be purchased; the cost and risk of holding a large stack of OPC day licences, the problem of paper licences running out; allowing OPCs to be used freely on Saturdays; and the feedback from normal car owners that it is not attractive to convert their cars to OPCs because one has to wait until the car is deregistered before the full OPC benefits can be realised.

So, for a start, we have identified three areas to look into. First, LTA will

Column: 3055

review how to make it more convenient for motorists to purchase the OPC day licences. LTA is studying how to implement an electronic licence scheme to replace the current paper licences. LTA will be holding focus group discussions with OPC owners to seek their views on this. Second, we will study the feasibility of giving cash rebates for those who convert their existing cars to OPCs, which will be more attractive than the conversion scheme today where the cash is only paid out when the car is deregistered. Lastly, we will relook into the restricted hours for OPCs, in particular, the Saturday restrictions, with some corresponding adjustments to the tax concessions of the OPC scheme.

Mr Chairman Sir, let me conclude by saying that this is a time of significant change in our land transport system. We aim to keep our city "liveable", by improving public transport and managing excessive road usage. I have touched on the many initiatives we have implemented or will carry out to achieve this overarching goal. But whether we succeed or fail is not determined by Government policies alone. It is ultimately determined by the decision of each and every Singaporean, every time he or she steps out of the house. Every day, millions of Singaporeans ask the same question when making a particular trip: "Should I hop onto a bus or train, or should I drive the car?" If out of every five car trips, one is taken on public transport, then indeed we are on the way to success.

I am encouraged by letters such as this one, written by Mdm Doris Chan. Mdm Chan lives in the Shunfu area, and used to commute by car to her office in Beach Road. But since the middle of last year, she has switched to public transport. She wrote to LTA recently,

Column: 3056

noting the improvements to public transport which is faster now and, with the higher transfer rebate, more attractive. She also says, "I don’t have to worry about traffic jams, steering the car or avoiding other vehicles which is stressful. I don’t need to worry about how to 'escape' ERP gantries, or what amount to pay. On the bus, I can just relax, look out the window and enjoy the scenery. I now get to see things in my neighbourhood that I used to miss before – new buildings, friends walking along the road. And best of all, walking to the bus stop and MRT station is good exercise, and reduces my weight!"

I hope that there will be more people like Mdm Chan.

Taxi Service

Mr Low Thia Khiang (Hougang): ( In Mandarin ): _[For vernacular speech, please refer to Appendix A.]_Mr Chairman, the figures released by LTA in January this year showed that in the first 11 months last year, taxi drivers received as many as 1,800 summonses with demerit points; three times more than the 407 cases in the year before. Among these summonses, 70% were for violation of taxi-stop rules in the CBD.

In my MPS, there are quite a number of taxi drivers living in the Hougang area who came and sought my help after receiving such summonses. They told me that on some occasions, they were booked under circumstances beyond their control, for example, passengers alighting on their whims and fancies but the taxi drivers were fined. Although the passengers are aware of the regulations imposed by LTA on alighting within CBD, they often insist on alighting wherever they want. As the taxi-stand could be too far away from their destination, some even just drop the taxi fare, open the door and get down at the traffic light. The Police then summoned the taxi driver.

Column: 3057

Under such circumstances, it is really beyond their control.

Another problem is that there are not enough waiting lots for taxis at popular taxi stands. When the lots are taken up, the taxi drivers have only two choices: first, is to risk being summoned by the Police; or secondly, to ply their empty taxis in the CBD looking for another taxi stand. This adds on to their burden and it is not environmentally-friendly.

Some of these busy taxi stands allow only taxis to let the passengers alight and not to wait for passengers. In this present market downturn, it will make life more difficult for the taxi drivers.

I hope that LTA will provide more waiting lots along the curb near the popular taxi stands, so that it will benefit all taxi drivers, and the passengers will also be able to catch the taxi within a shorter waiting time. This is a win-win situation for both.

*Cols. 3137-3138.

Mr Chiam See Tong: Sir, can you carry on whilst I search for my speech?

The Chairman: Okay. I will go to the next one, Er Lee Bee Wah. You will take your turn first.

Improve Service of MOT

Er Lee Bee Wah (Ang Mo Kio): Sir, I have brought this issue up in this House during the last Budget debate and I am, once again, appealing to the Minister for his patience and support in providing lifts at all overhead bridges at MRT stations throughout Singapore.

Residents of all ages use overhead bridges at MRT stations. Pregnant women, elderly or wheelchair-bound train commuters need better access to ascend and descend overhead bridges. Barrier-free accessibility in the residential areas should also be extended to its other supporting facilities such as overhead

Column: 3058

bridges. Stairs are not conducive for accessibility, certainly not the 67 steps at Khatib MRT overhead bridge, which is more like a vertical marathon. Senior Minister of State, Mrs Lim Hwee Hua, visited Khatib soon after the last Budget debate and one year has passed, I hope to hear good news for the residents in Nee Soon South.

LTA should also re-examine the building of covered linkways for the ease of public transport commuters throughout Singapore. Is our policy so rigid that some of our residents are deprived of having covered linkways on their way to MRT stations? We know these days the weather is often in the extremes – when it rains, it pours; when it shines, it burns.

4.15 pm

I am glad to know that LTA will take over the planning of the bus network. We are looking forward to more seamless public transport in Singapore.Some public commuters have to walk a long distance from one bus stop to another in order to change bus. One such example is in Zone B of Nee Soon South. There is no direct bus that take residents to the Community Centre as well as Khatib Centre where they shop for their groceries. They have to take Bus 812, alight just before the bus turns back to the interchange and then walk 270 metres to the next bus stop across Yishun Avenue to take Bus 811. You and I will certainly have no problems in walking, but for the elderly and the pregnant women to walk 270 metres to change bus is more like another marathon.

bAn improvement on the bus routes is imperative. I have had several meetings with the bus operator, SMRT, but the problem remains. I am glad to hear from the Minister that he is going to look into the issue of fare concessions for Polytechnic students. But I would like to urge the Minister to extend this concession to all Polytechnic students just

Column: 3059

like what we have done for the Junior College students.

Ample Warning of Road Work Signs

Mr Chiam See Tong: Sir, our road construction contractors must be the least road-safety conscience people in Singapore. As a driver of a motorcar on Singapore roads, I note that the workers working on the roads are exposed to grave danger everyday. As MPs, we can certainly do something for these workers. If we should read in the morning papers that some workers have been run down by a motorcar and die, I think that would be too late for us to do anything. I would then feel certainly sad or even guilty since I have not tried my best to do something for them. Those workers killed on the road would only appear as a statistic but I have to remind Members that they are also human beings. They are fathers of children and husbands of wives. And I wonder if the Minister could consider instructing the road construction contractors on the road to attain high safety standards, and persuade these contractors to take steps to warn motorists of the presence of their workers on the road.

The Senior Minister of State for Transport (Mrs Lim Hwee Hua): Mr Chairman, Sir, Mr Low Thia Khiang has commented on the surge in summons received by the taxi drivers on account of offences committed at taxi stops and taxi stands, whereas Mr Chiam See Tong has requested for more prominent road signs further upstream to alert motorists to ongoing road works. Er Lee Bee Wah has raised several requests to improve the connectivity and accessibility to public transport facilities in her constituency, as well as concessions for polytechnic students. As Minister Raymond Lim has spoken on her last two points, in terms of bus services and polytechnic students, I

Column: 3060

will not cover these, but will take the rest of the questions in turn.

Sir, on the rule to disallow taxis from waiting for passengers at taxi stops or waiting beyond the allocated number of lots at taxi stands, this is really to ensure the safety of all road users. Taxi stands are intended to allow taxis to wait for passengers within the number of taxi lots allocated at each stand without impeding the flow of traffic. This allows both passengers and taxis to queue up in an orderly manner, without blocking the traffic lane. However, where traffic is heavy and due to space constraints, there are no lay-bys and no space for taxis to wait or queue without obstructing traffic, taxi stops would be assigned instead. Taxi stops are, therefore, intended only for the picking up and dropping off of passengers. Thereafter, taxis must move off from the taxi stop immediately. If there are no passengers wishing to board immediately, taxis should not wait at the taxi stop. Taxi drivers who are booked for waiting at taxi stops or queuing beyond the allocated number of lots at the taxi stands will be given a composition fine of $50. There are no demerit points for the offences and repeat offenders will be issued with the same amount of fine.

As regards the increase in the number of taxis drivers caught, I would like to inform the House that arising from the greater awareness, the number of taxi drivers caught stopping indiscriminately along the main roads in the CBD area has actually declined by more than 80% since March 2008, from the high of 566 at the point of implementation to about 76 as at January 2009.

Let me just recap for the House again why we have this CBD taxi rule. In the CBD where demand for taxis and traffic volume is high, some measure of control is necessary to prevent disruption of traffic, which may be caused by taxis stopping suddenly or changing lanes along

Column: 3061

public roads in the CBD to pick up or to alight passengers. This is largely a safety issue.

There is, however, a trend which could have contributed to the supply and demand issue and which has exacerbated the situation. The increase in the number of offences can also be attributed to the drop in taxi ridership in 2008, due to the revision of taxi fares that took effect from December 2007, as well as difficult economic conditions in the later part of 2008. So with the supply of taxis exceeding demand, especially during the off-peak periods, there were longer queues of taxis at taxi stands, particularly in the CBD area. And this is despite LTA increasing the number of taxi waiting lots in the CBD by about two times, from 101 to 296.

Sir, LTA has to balance the convenience of taxi commuters and taxi drivers against the safety and needs of other road users. Taxis that wait for passengers at taxi stops obstruct the flow of traffic and cause danger to other road users, just like taxis that queue beyond the allocated lots at taxi stands. This is why they are not allowed to do so. Nevertheless, if there are taxi stands where Mr Low feels more taxi lots are needed, I welcome Mr Low to let LTA know where these are, and LTA will be happy to look into his suggestions.

Sir, let me now turn to Mr Chiam’s comments on better warning for road works. To ensure that contractors carrying out road works make necessary provisions for traffic warnings, LTA requires them to comply with a Code of Practice for Traffic Control at Work Zones (COP).

Under the Code, contractors must provide sufficient and early warning to motorists approaching the work zone. The minimum sizes and distances for warning signs vary with the speed limit of the road. For example, a road with a 40

Column: 3062

kph speed limit would require warning signs with a minimum size of 90 cm by 90 cm. The first warning sign is typically placed 120 metres upstream from where the lane begins to taper off. The signs for an expressway have to be at least 120 cm by 120 cm, and placed 480 metres away. Additional warning signs should also be placed closer to the work zone provided that there are not too many close to each other such that they end up confusing drivers.

Contractors have to apply these guidelines according to the ground situation. The priority is to ensure that the signs are visible and motorists have sufficient time to digest the information and react accordingly. These guidelines were developed after extensive reviews of the standards and practices of other developed countries. Giving information too far ahead of a work site will unwittingly cause traffic to slow down too early and increase the inconvenience to drivers. In order to minimise the disruption, it is necessary to place the warning signs at an optimum distance from the work site. For expressways and other roads with speed limits of 70 kph and above, we would also require the deployment of truck-mounted attenuators to help absorb the impact in the event that vehicles miss all the advance notices and crash into the work site.

Notwithstanding the comprehensiveness of the Code of Practice, there could still be instances where contractors do not follow LTA’s requirements strictly. Motorists can call LTA’s hotline if they spot any unsafe practices at road works and LTA will look into them.

Let me now turn to the issues that Er Lee Bee Wah has raised. Let me first of all commend her for her persistence in raising these issues to serve her residents’ needs. I would like to assure her that we listen to feedback and suggestions, even if at times we are unable to accede to

Column: 3063

them immediately. One of the realities that my Ministry faces is that we have limited resources. We, therefore, have to prioritise as there are trade-offs involved in how we allocate funds and resources.

Sir, we recognise that our population is ageing and we want to build a more inclusive society. Members would recall that one of the three strategic thrusts of the LTMP launched last year is meeting people’s diverse needs. This is why my Ministry has been spending more so as to ensure that our public transport system is accessible to the less mobile, not just in the Member’s constituency but for all Singaporeans islandwide.

All existing MRT stations already have at least one station entrance fitted with a lift and a barrier-free route. LTA is currently installing additional lifts to 16 existing stations. LTA is also building ramps so that 70% of existing stations have at least two barrier-free routes by 2011. By 2010, 40% of our public buses will be wheelchair accessible, and we intend that by 2020, the entire fleet will be so.

We will also be spending $60 million to ensure that road facilities islandwide are accessible for all pedestrians, including the less mobile by 2010.

Sir, this is our priority at this time, to make sure that our less mobile residents can reach the station first, before seeing how we can shorten the walk. But we have taken onboard her feedback. LTA will study the viability of installing and maintaining lifts at pedestrian overhead bridges near MRT stations where there is sufficient usage to justify it.

The same goes for providing covered linkways. This is again a popular request with Members. The principle here is to target our limited resources at places

Column: 3064

where it will make the most difference to residents. LTA’s main focus is on connectivity from transport nodes and transport facilities (ie, bus stops or taxi stands) to amenities like schools and polyclinics. But LTA will always consult the advisors when deciding where to erect such covered linkways, and there have been several occasions where LTA has adjusted their plans to take in the feedback. Beyond this, Town Councils can make use of their CIPC funds to further improve the connectivity within their estates if they choose to.

4.30 pm

Cycling

Ms Irene Ng Phek Hoong: Sir, we have come a long way from the days when cycling was not even recognised as a mode of transport in Singapore, but only as a form of recreation. After years of debates in and out of this House, I welcome the Transport Ministry’s clear statement, made just in August last year, of its policy shift on this matter, and I would like to commend the Minister for this. Given its clear position now, I would like to ask MOT for its plans to integrate cycling into the transport system on a nation-wide basis.

Ms Irene Ng Phek Hoong: There is an increasing number of cyclists on the road; also a rising number of accidents involving cyclists. Most alarming are the collisions between a bus and a bicycle. In such accidents, the cyclist has almost no chance of survival. The problem is especially acute on bus lanes, where the bus driver believes he is king of the road. He does not feel a need to look out for bicycles. I know that, already, cyclists are allowed to share bus lanes. But going by the behaviour of some bus drivers and motorists, I am not sure if they are aware of it.

Column: 3065

It is not uncommon for a bus to tightly sandwich a cyclist between itself and the kerb, leaving little room for the cyclist to move, or to try to intimidate the cyclist off the road by bearing down close to the cyclist. There were reports of road rage, with the bus driver shouting and gesticulating at the cyclist on bus lanes. But it is even more dangerous for the cyclist to move to the middle lane, and be squeezed between the bus and the car. This would leave the cyclist with nowhere to go except to the hospital bed or the mortuary.

Sir, we have to think of ways to make the roads, especially our bus lanes, safer for our cyclists. One way is to turn bus lanes into shared bike-bus lanes and clearly designate this on signs and on the road with painted legends on both bus and bicycle. Instead of calling it a bus lane, call it a bike-bus lane. Bike-bus lanes are actually quite widely used and common in French and German cities. The German Federal Ministry of Transportation reported that cyclists are safer using bus lanes, and bus operations are not negatively affected by this arrangement. For safe sharing of bike-bus lanes, bus drivers must be professionally trained to coexist with cyclists and cyclists be given guidelines on sharing the bus-lanes.

An increasing number of city planners recognise the merit of such lanes. Early last year, Chicago Mayor Richard Daley announced that the city would provide training to all bus drivers prior to rolling out bus-bike lanes. Other cities employing shared bike-bus lanes include Toronto, Vancouver and Philadelphia. London Telegraph reported recently that on lanes where bicycles share bus lanes, bicycle crashes were reduced 44%.

I would urge LTA to work with Traffic Police to educate both motorists and cyclists on safe sharing of roads, especially when sharing bus lanes and on

Column: 3066

observing traffic regulations. Having such designated shared lanes will also help change the mindset of motorists towards the place of the bicycle on our roads.

Cycling in HDB Estates

Mdm Cynthia Phua (Aljunied): Cycling is now a form of healthy exercise although what I am appealing to the authorities may appear that I am against cycling. But the contrary is true. I love cycling, especially to feel the "rush" to my face.

Today we see bicycles of all forms being used on the roads including motorised bicycles. With the introduction of the trial at Tampines, cycling on pedestrian pavement is common in all HDB estates now. There are three issues I want to highlight.

The facility for cycling in the estates: we need cycling lanes especially when cycling becomes an essential mode of transport. Many foreign workers are cycling to their nearby workplaces and when they go to look for food around the HDB estates. I have also noticed that parents are sending their children to schools on bicycles.

To emphasise the importance of having proper cycling lanes, let me share a report written for the European Commission Directorate-General for Energy and Transport which pointed out that, and I quote, "City regions that have large cycle lane networks in proportion to the size of the urban road network were also found to display the highest levels of cycling modal share." It added, "People are more likely to cycle responsibly where they are provided with the facilities that enable them to cycle safely and quickly." The co-use of the pedestrian pavement for cycling is heading for a collision course. I sincerely wish that similar tragedy of cyclists and motocyclists on the roads would not happen to our pedestrians on our pedestrian pavements.

Column: 3067

For responsible cycling, the onus lies on the cyclists. If public education fails, then enforcement on the cyclists has to be done. There are many issues here. Are there acts that govern the responsibility of cycling on pedestrian pavement? LTA should clarify if pedestrian walkways are governed by the Road Traffic Act as they are not public roads. Who is the authority that oversees the behaviour of cyclists on pavement? Without any identification for cyclists, how do we enforce responsible cycling? I have been informed by our grassroots leaders that they tried to stop and advise irresponsible cyclists. However, the cyclists do not stop and zoom past. Even if the cyclists are to stop, the enforcement is rather confrontational.

One way is to define the responsibility of cyclists under the relevant law and put the onus on cyclists when there is an accident. This means that the cyclists are deemed responsible for the accident on the pedestrian walkway when the accident happens. The other additional responsibility is that cyclists are to wear bright clothes, luminous stripes at the back, ensuring that there are basic front and back lights, and loud ringer installed on the bicycles.

I ask that we act now to protect the interests of all parties, especially our pedestrians, and that the Ministry takes preventive steps and not wait until an accident happens before reviewing the Road Traffic Act.

Cyclists

Mr Ang Mong Seng: ( In Mandarin ): [For vernacular speech, please refer to Appendix A.] Mr Chairman, school children cycle to school and workers cycle to work. Cycling not only helps to alleviate traffic congestion, it is also an excellent form of exercise. More and more residents are cycling in the HDB estates,

Column: 3068

particularly the foreign workers. Cycling is the main mode of transport for them.

But some residents complain to me that there are frequent incidents of collision on the track shared by cyclists and pedestrians. The residents said that some cyclists simply pushed and shoved their way through; knocked over pedestrians and just rode away. Even the Police could do nothing about it. The reason being that the bicycles are not licensed, and thus cannot be identified.

Therefore, for the safety of both the cyclists and the pedestrians, I would suggest, firstly, that we should broaden the tracks that are shared between the cyclists and the pedestrians to at least 3.5 metres in width, and this is the width of the track in Gombak that is built by National Parks Board. So far nobody has any complaints with this type of wide track.

Secondly, there should be licence plates on the bicycles. In the old days, the bicycles had number plates, as reported in the newspapers. But now the new bicycles are not registered and there are no number plates. I think LTA should allow all the cyclists to have a licence plate number. These numbers could be personalised numbers like AMS888, for Ang Mong Seng, or OAH889 for Ong Ah Heng. This will also prevent people stealing your bicycle.

And thirdly, for safety's sake, they should have lights in front and at the back and there should also be a bicycle bell. These would be safety features for the bicycles – safety not only for the cyclists but also for the pedestrians.

Finally, I would suggest that LTA provide more bicycle parking lots near the MRT stations. We can see that there are so many bicycles that are parked near the MRT and even on the pedestrian walkway. It is very unsightly. So I hope

Column: 3069

that we would provide more parking lots for the bicycles. This is not only for the convenience of the cyclists but it would also create a better image in the public area.

*Cols. 3139-3140.

The Senior Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Transport (Mr Teo Ser Luck): Sir, I did not bring my bicycle. Maybe I should have borrowed it from Mr Ang and I should bring a helmet.

Sir, there are more bicycles on the roads today and you also see more bicycle shops. As an avid cyclist, I cycle almost every other day on the road. And I can see cyclists coming out on the road in big groups from 5.00 am in the morning. These are the cyclists undergoing training. There are also recreational cyclists in the morning, running errands or buying groceries. So, we see that many of our citizens have already accepted cycling as a form of transport. I am glad to say that MOT has also made a policy shift to accept cycling as a mode of transport and also as part of an inter-modal connection to the transport nodes of our rail and bus system.

Sir, I thank Ms Irene Ng, Mdm Cynthia Phua, Mr Ang Mong Seng and Mr Wee Siew Kim for their support and suggestions on cycling. At last year’s Committee of Supply debate, before I joined MOT, I advocated a lot on cycling, as I am an avid cyclist. Now I am on the other side of the fence trying to answer all the questions on cycling.

In the Land Transport Masterplan (LTMP) that was released last year, we said that cycling was a transport option that can link commuters to major transport nodes such as MRT stations and bus interchanges. It also described how LTA intended to facilitate cycling.

The key dilemma in facilitating cycling is about space – how do we share space amongst competing users in such a way

Column: 3070

that will make better use of our very limited land, as well as ensuring the safety of pedestrians, cyclists and motorists? The challenge is developing acceptance and consideration between the different groups. This is going to take time. As I mentioned, from my own personal experience, I can see that there is now better awareness among the drivers but I think there are still some gaps to close. So, we have taken a very careful and deliberate approach to finding that balance between the various stakeholders. Even before the LTMP was released, there were already several grassroots cycling initiatives in a number of towns where there was support from the residents. There were also groups promoting safe cycling. The programmes that LTA is rolling out to facilitate cycling as a mode of transport are to build on the foundations laid by these early adopters.

The grassroots organisations in Tampines, working with LTA and the Traffic Police (TP), are running a trial to assess if cyclists and pedestrians can safely share a common footpath. To support the trial, LTA has widened 1.2 km of footpaths as well as key pedestrian crossings and they have put up 'cyclist dismount' signs at major junctions. So when you reach the sign, dismount, you have to take a walk and push the bicycle.

Separately, LTA launched a pilot project in October last year to provide cyclists in Pasir Ris, Tampines and Yishun with more and better-designed bicycle parking facilities near MRT stations. The additional bicycle racks will facilitate cyclists who want to ride to the MRT station, park their bicycles and then hop onto a train. This is the inter-modal transport process that we are promoting. And this pilot will also allow LTA to gather feedback on the design and placement of the racks in order to better understand the users' needs, before we actually extend these facilities to other MRT stations and bus interchanges.

Column: 3071

At the national front, LTA has also worked with two public bus operators to complete a six-month trial to allow foldable bicycles on board buses and trains during less crowded off-peak hours.

Cyclists in the pilot towns have generally welcomed these new facilities while others in some other estates have also asked for similar type of facilities. But we have also received some divergent feedback from other groups. Some bus passengers worry about foldable bicycles taking up scarce space on board. Similarly, some pedestrians also did not like sharing footpaths with cyclists, for fear that they could be knocked over with little warning, as Mr Wee Siew Kim has pointed out. That is why I said this really takes time but we can see that there is progress. Even though there are diverse views, we can see that at least there are groups ready to support cycling as part of the whole transport system.

Mdm Cynthia Phua and Mr Wee Siew Kim have also asked about public education and enforcement. The Traffic Police will continue with their ongoing public education efforts. This is extremely important because this creates awareness and allows people, especially non-cyclists, to better understand about cyclists, about sharing paths and being accommodating. It also creates awareness amongst cyclists to understand their own responsibility to ensure their own safety as well as the people around them, ie, the pedestrians, and even how to keep themselves safe from errant drivers.

4.45 pm

Sir, the Traffic Police will continue with this ongoing public education effort. In fact, in 2008, a total of 273 Road Safety talks were conducted at Road Safety Community Park. Another 25 road safety exhibitions providing safety tips for

Column: 3072

cyclists were also held at HDB neighbourhoods, primary and secondary schools, and workplaces.

The Police will also continue to take enforcement action. It is the responsibility of the Police to take enforcement action against cyclists who ride in a disorderly manner or endanger the safety of others. But these are punitive measures. Acceptance and consideration between cyclists and pedestrians is still the best way to protect our residents. However, it will take time to develop this. So, we have to continue to move forward at a measured pace that the public and the local communities would be comfortable with, and all the while actively consulting and engaging the various groups to see the acceptance level before pushing it even further.

For instance, since last year’s trial to allow foldable bicycles on board buses and trains, LTA has sought feedback from cyclists, bus captains, service leaders, train officers, public transport commuters and other relevant stakeholders. The general consensus is that such a scheme can work. So, we have decided to continue with the scheme from 15th March onwards. But there will be some slight adjustments to the scheme as we have to take into account the range of stakeholder feedback that LTA has already received. Foldable bicycles will still be allowed on board only during weekend and off-peak hours, but further details will be announced later by LTA.

Ms Irene Ng suggests allowing cyclists to use our bus lanes. She has mentioned that we are already doing so. And I am doing so. I have been cycling on bus lanes all the time. SBST’s bus captains and SMRT’s service leaders have been trained to keep a lookout for and to maintain a safety distance from cyclists. However, I think cyclists do have a part to play. They have to be responsible and should obey traffic rules and traffic lights, and also

Column: 3073

know how to avoid an oncoming bus. As a cyclist, I would say that if you go in a group, ride in a single file and keep to the extreme left of the lane. I understand that some cyclists ride in the middle of the lane and try to overtake other vehicles. I do not think you can be a hero in this sense – you have to keep yourself safe. It is also important to make it easier for the bus to overtake the cyclist. So, it is both the responsibility of the bus driver and also the cyclist.

As to whether we should clearly indicate that cyclists can cycle in bus lanes on signs and on the road with painted legends, I think the issue is that today, you would see that there are already many lines on our roads as well as signs. We already have safety cycling signs on lamp-posts – that was a joint project between LTA and the Safe Cycling Task Force. I think we have to try to avoid putting up too many signs, as it would become very confusing. But it is important that we should continue to publicise this fact, which Ms Ng has brought up, continue with public education that cyclists are allowed to cycle in bus lanes, and also educate the bus drivers as well as cyclists about safety. I believe that we can achieve this same objective.

Mr Ang Mong Seng urged us to build wider paths with clear dividing lines between cyclists and pedestrians. I am pleased to say that we will do so. LTA, in partnership with community stakeholders, will roll out a $43 million programme to design and construct dedicated cycling tracks next to pedestrian footpaths in HDB estates. The programme will complement existing efforts in the respective towns to develop cycling infrastructure. Where there is enough space, these tracks will be physically separate from the footpaths, allowing cyclists to have a truly dedicated path. In more restricted areas, the tracks will be joined to the existing pedestrian footpath,

Column: 3074

but they will have painted markings, clearly defining and identifying them for cyclists, like what you see in our Park Connectors.

The first phase of the programme will cover five towns. We will start with Tampines, to build on the work that has already been done to facilitate cycling there. LTA will start building 6.9 km of cycling tracks from the second half of this year onwards. It costs an estimated $4.7 million. These dedicated cycling tracks will be up to two metres wide where there is enough space, and will bring cyclists to the MRT station and bus interchange. In doing so, these tracks will also run near to all local amenities. So, for recreational cyclists who want to run errands, do their grocery shopping, or go to different shops, they can have a safer and shorter cycling trip. Cycling can become a mode of transport for residents to do what they need to do.

The next town will be Yishun, where LTA will work with HDB to extend its existing cycle tracks. 7.5 km of cycling tracks will be constructed from 2010 onwards. This is at a cost of $6.3 million. The Town Councils of Sembawang, Pasir Ris and Taman Jurong are also in the process of working with LTA to design similar cycling tracks. In the case of Sembawang and Pasir Ris, we will be building on and complementing the existing cycling tracks that they already have.

We selected these five towns for the first phase of the programme, to develop this infrastructure so that they can become cycling towns. All have favourable local characteristics – their residents must support cycling, and the pedestrians and cyclists there must be able to accommodate one another.

We hope to add more towns in the future, but as we have learnt from the

Column: 3075

Tampines trial, grassroots support is important. They had several dialogues and engagement sessions with the residents and grassroots, to refine plans to promote cycling as a mode of transport. There were many concerns raised and diverse views expressed by the grassroots leaders, residents as well as cyclists. We have to also address the concern raised by Mr Wee on errant cyclists and proper cycling etiquette. We hope to be able to move into the next phase in about three to five years’ time by engaging the Town Councils for such programmes then.

Both Mdm Cynthia Phua and Mr Ang Mong Seng asked whether LTA can make registration of bicycles compulsory. They hope that it will help enforce against reckless cycling behaviour. I agree with the concerns over reckless cycling – it endangers not only the pedestrians but also the cyclist himself. However, we need to ask whether this proposal is practical or feasible. If you are to register bicycles, the task of compelling every existing bicycle owner to step forward and register all his bicycles is quite burdensome. Personally, I have four bicycles at home. So, I would have to register all my bicycles – maybe TSL 1111 to 4444. If everybody has several different bicycles, it can be burdensome and maybe extremely difficult to enforce. When you register, you also need to consider deregistering them. So, you have to deregister the bicycle, to transfer the ownership if you sell or give away the bicycle. It is therefore not surprising that even some of the cities that we study – "bicycle-friendly" cities like Paris, Amsterdam and Copenhagen – do not have compulsory registration schemes.

Maybe what we should do is to focus on improving cyclist and pedestrian behaviour. This is the crux of the matter. This is why we can only move at a pace

Column: 3076

that people are reasonably comfortable with. All the while, we have to continue to engage and consult them before we take the next step. I know that the people and volunteer sectors, like the Singapore Amateur Cycling Association (SACA), where I believe Ms Ng is the advisor, are working with the Traffic Police on public education and outreach efforts. These efforts will have to continue. We cannot give up hope so quickly. Let us make sure that public education can work and it is effective.

Other safety measures that Mr Ang Mong Seng suggested are already in place. For example, the current Road Traffic Rules require that bicycles on our roads, when ridden after dark, be equipped with a white light in front and a red light at the back. I think, most importantly, it is not the white or red colour of the lights, but lights that are prominent and bright enough to be spotted at night. Any violation of the rule carries with it a composition fine of $20. This is a matter of personal responsibility. So, if you put on all these lights and the bell, they are for your personal safety. In fact, one of my bicycles has a " garang guni " horn. Although the Traffic Police does not have any plans to make the installation of, say, bells compulsory, I would urge all cyclists to do so, and to use them appropriately. It is important to have a bell because when you are near or at the back of a pedestrian, it is important to signal instead of just shouting out, which is not very polite. It is also very important to have helmets, as brought up by Mr Low. Helmets are very important when you are on your bicycle, whether during the day or night.

Mr Chairman, Sir, last year, I said that I looked forward to the day when our citizens could consider cycling as a mode of transport. I see this is beginning to happen. I agree with Members that we still have some way to go, but I am happy to say that we are progressing and we are

Column: 3077

getting there. We need to support all stakeholders to make Singapore not just as a cycling town but also a cycling city.

Corporatisation of Civil Aviation Authority of Singapore

Mr Cedric Foo Chee Keng: Mr Chairman, Sir, I would like to discuss air transport in this cut.

In the second half of 2008, Changi Airport handled a higher volume of passenger traffic of about 37.7 million passenger movements, up 2.7% from the same period in 2007. But, at the same time, the airport has continued to win numerous awards, including the Best Airport in the World by Business Traveller (UK) for the 21st consecutive time.

However, we should note that there was a drop in passenger traffic in September, November and December 2008. On the air freight side, for 2008, the total movement was 1.86 million tonnes, a drop of 2% year-on-year; and for the month of December 2008 alone, a drop of up to 21.4%. All these are, of course, attributable to the global difficulties facing the aviation industry.

I would like to ask the Minister if he would share with us his views on the expected passenger and cargo performances for Changi Airport this year, and what measures the Ministry is contemplating to ameliorate the expected fall.

Sir, in August 2007, the Minister announced plans to corporatise Civil Aviation Authority of Singapore (CAAS), with its regulatory functions being vested in a new regulatory body, and its commercial functions corporatised. This plan was to enable Changi Airport to compete more effectively and to enhance Changi Airport's position as a premier air hub. Consultants were to have been

Column: 3078

appointed to advise the Government on this corporatisation plan. I would like to ask the Minister to update us on how the corporatisation would impact airlines, ground services companies, tenants like duty-free shops and staff of CAAS? Also, would this lead to landing charges and rentals for DFS shops going up?

Sir, there are concerns that the proposed CAS, which is the commercial part of the present CAAS, will be narrowly focused on just short-term profits. If this were the case and if it were not regulated properly, the risk is that the externalities, that of an efficient and cost-effective airport operation will bring to Singapore as a whole, will be lost. Could the Minister assure us and explain how the regulations for CAS would be promulgated?

There are also discussions on what the next steps would be following the corporatisation of CAAS. Does it mean that privatisation would be a logical next step? Would CAAS or any of its assets such as Changi or Seletar airports be privatised? And if so, when are such steps expected and what considerations will MOT have to take into account before making such a big move, as clearly there are many risks associated with a complete privatisation of CAAS.

5.00 pm

Mr Ong Kian Min: Sir, with a modest increase of 1.6% in international passenger traffic in 2008 compared to 2007, as reported by the International Air Transport Association (IATA), Changi Airport did well in handling 2.7% more passengers during the year. However, the increase came in the first nine months of last year. The bad news is that passenger volume decline in the last three months of 2008 against the same period in 2007, giving an indicator of the decline in passenger volume that we can expect this year.

Column: 3079

Cargo traffic handled by Changi Airport has also tumbled. For the rest of this year, the picture is set to become bleaker.

The IATA forecast a 3% decline in international passenger volume and a steep 5% drop in international cargo traffic. The extension of our Air Hub Development Fund by $130 million to support the airlines at Changi Airport and the aviation industry players in Singapore will help the airlines and airport partners ride out the downturn.

I would like to ask the Minister to elaborate on the measures being taken to cope with the decline in air passenger and cargo traffic at Changi Airport. What efforts are being made to strengthen our position as a major regional air hub?

Mr Wee Siew Kim: Sir, from the recent performance data, it is clear that Changi Airport is not immune to the global downturn and the falling demand in air traffic. Will the economic recession dampen the aspirations of competing airports in the region to supplant Changi Airport's premier position? I do not believe so.

As such, beyond the new T3, upgrades to T1 and T2, and expansion to the Budget Terminal, what other steps and initiatives are being planned to further entrench Changi Airport's lead?

Changi Airport has led not only with world-class infrastructure but also with the customer experience. Changi Airport's ultra efficiency and warm service are often cited as its memorable traits. But these may not be sufficient to stave off the challenges in the aviation sector today. What more is being done to ensure Changi Airport's cost competitiveness? In these challenging times, this cost factor is even more critical for users of the Airport

Column: 3080

to determine if they stay or move to lower-cost airports.

The 12th January announcement by Swissport to pull out of Changi Airport's ground handling market after only three years comes somewhat as a shock. Has this third provider's presence resulted in improved competitiveness of the Airport's ground handling sector? If yes, is this a setback in Changi Airport's drive to nurture competition at the airport? I guess incumbents at the Airport and business slowdown would have made the operating environment very difficult for Swissport. But other than these reasons, has any act of commission or omission on the part of the authorities also exacerbated the cost structure? Could there have been changes to the way Changi Airport manages and extracts value from service providers at the Airport that also worsened the issues? Are there learning lessons from this departure?

Perhaps it is timely to have an objective review of the entire situation at the Airport. I think it could possibly result in learning lessons and benefit all stakeholders, airlines, MRO providers, warehouse, retailers, the authorities and, of course, the passengers.

As Changi Airport has a big impact on Singapore's economy, it is vital to ensure the continued attraction of Changi Airport as an aviation hub of choice. That must be the ultimate goal.

Dr Lam Pin Min: Mr Chairman, Sir, air passenger traffic has seen a decline over the past few months. The economic downturn has put a spin on the number of people making air travel. The aviation industry is expected to remain challenging in the months ahead.

The International Air Transport Association (IATA) has projected a 3% drop in global passenger traffic while cargo traffic is expected to drop 5%.

Column: 3081

The global financial crisis has also hit the cargo business especially hard. SIA Cargo had mothballed one freighter in the desert in the United States. And according to IATA, cargo traffic plummeted 22.6% in December 2008 and it is expected to get worse in the coming months and years.

The dogfight for premier air hub status is a bruising one and the stakes are high. Changi Airport has had a good 27 years but it is up against some serious competitors such as China, India and the Middle Eastern countries. I would like to ask the Minister how long can Changi Airport retain its lead as a leading air hub in the region in the face of falling air passenger and cargo volume. What measures are in place to help Changi Airport maintain its status as an air hub?

Civil Aviation Authority of Singapore which manages Changi Airport employs 1,700 public servants. By August 2009, CAAS will retain its regulatory functions, but the running of Changi Airport will go to a separate corporate entity. This entity will adopt private sector practices like setting competitive salaries to stay competitive and viable. Many successful airports around the world have gone corporate and in some cases are run by public-listed companies. The objectives of corporatising Changi Airport are to give it flexibility to respond to challenges, ability to attract and retain talents and pursue overseas ventures.

Can I ask the Minister for a progress update on the corporatisation process? And whether there would be significant retrenchment as a result of the reorganisation? And if so, what measures are in place to help those affected?

Mrs Lim Hwee Hua: Mr Chairman, Sir, I thank Mr Cedric Foo, Mr Ong Kian Min, Mr Wee Siew Kim, and Dr Lam Pin Min, who have asked about the impact of the

Column: 3082

economic crisis on the aviation industry as well as the corporatisation of Changi Airport.

Members have asked about the strategies and measures that are put in place to maintain Changi’s competitiveness in the face of the economic crisis. 2008 has been a tough year for the global aviation industry. First, the airlines were hit by a sharp increase in oil prices, which reached a peak of US$146 per barrel in July 2008. Then, the global financial crisis broke in September, triggering a severe global recession that the industry has not seen in quite a while.

Sir, we are already witnessing the impact on Changi Airport. Passenger traffic dipped from a growth of 1.8% in October to a 3.2% decline in November 2008 and a decline of 0.6% in December 2008. Air cargo fared even worse. The 8% decline in October deteriorated further to a 14.2% drop in November and 21.4% drop in December.

As Mr Ong has observed, as Changi did well in the first three quarters of the year, it managed to end the year 2.7% up for passenger traffic, serving some 37.7 million passengers while suffering a drop of 2% in air cargo, moving 1.85 million tonnes of cargo.

Again, as Members have noted, the full impact of the global downturn can be expected to be felt in 2009. We expect Changi to welcome 8.5% fewer passengers or some 34.7 million for 2009. And consistent with the weaker trade flows and economic conditions, Changi is expected to move only 1.77 million tonnes of cargo or a drop of 5.1%.

Sir, in the face of this slackening demand, how do we protect the competitiveness and dynamism of our air hub? To do so, we will need to do three things:

Column: 3083

– First, to help the aviation industry to reduce and contain costs;

– Second, to push for greater liberalisation in the regional air travel market; and

– Third, to continue with infrastructure upgrading and expansion.

First, with airlines cutting back flight services to rationalise their networks, it is our aim to keep Changi Airport as high up the list of destinations airlines must retain as possible. To do so, Changi must continue to offer the best value for money even though it cannot be the lowest-cost airport.

Towards achieving this objective, we have set aside for 2009 a further $130 million under the Air Hub Development Fund to finance programmes such as an increase of landing fee rebates from 15% to 25%, a Growth Incentive Scheme and a Route Development Incentive Scheme to help airlines grow their traffic out of Singapore. These measures are targeted at helping airlines in hard times, and to entrench them in Singapore.

With the drop in passenger traffic numbers, the shops at Changi Airport are also feeling the pinch. CAAS has set aside more than $60 million in the form of a rental relief package for retail, food & beverage, and services concessionaires. This will lower the concessionaires’ rental cost and help them remain viable through this period of lower sales.

Let me now move on to our continuing efforts to liberalise the air travel market which goes beyond addressing the short-term dip in travel pattern. With airlines' bottomlines severely affected by the current downturn, there is a possibility of national governments becoming more

Column: 3084

protectionist so to shield their struggling national carriers.

Singapore has and will continue to work towards air rights liberalisation on a bilateral basis with other countries. The pursuit of liberalisation is critical to Changi as a hub because the starting point to an air hub’s connectivity is the rights for the airlines to operate. The benefits of liberalisation can be seen in the opening up of the Singapore-Kuala Lumpur sector in 2008. Rights for two additional daily flights were added in February, and full liberalisation implemented on 1st December. The results speak for themselves. In 2008, passenger movements for the sector grew by 11% to 1.89 million passengers.

This impressive growth demonstrates that there is potential in the Southeast Asia market yet to be tapped, due to the limits imposed on the market. That is why we will continue to push for liberalisation within ASEAN under the Roadmap for Integration of Air Travel Sector (RIATS) and beyond. This will benefit not only our economy, but also that of our ASEAN partners as well.

Looking outside the region, ASEAN is working towards air services liberalisation based on the RIATS, with key Dialogue Partners such as China and India. It would set the stage for new vistas of air traffic expansion in and beyond the region, enabling ASEAN to participate in the robust economic growth of Asia's foremost economic powerhouses.

Finally, let me touch on the upgrading and expansion of our airport infrastructure. Two key projects are currently underway – the upgrading of Terminal 1 and the expansion of the Budget Terminal. These will not only help the economy, but also position Changi for more growth and widen its lead when the economic crisis is over.

Column: 3085

Sir, the work on Terminal 1 started in May 2008 and will be completed by end 2011. At a total estimated cost of $500 million, the upgrading will improve operational efficiency and provide users with a more integrated and appealing environment for travel, shopping, dining and entertainment. When the work is finished, the upgraded Terminal 1 would virtually be a new terminal.

The expansion of Budget Terminal is scheduled for completion in April this year. This will increase its passenger handling capacity from 2.7 million to seven million passengers per annum. This expansion is necessary to facilitate the growth of the Low-Cost Carriers (LCCs) sector. In 2008, almost all (93%) of Changi’s growth came from the LCCs, compared to around half in 2007.

Sir, let me now address Mr Wee Siew Kim’s question on the pullout of the third ground handler, Swissport, from Changi Airport.

After operating for four years, Swissport made the decision to exit Changi in January 2009 as it was unable to gain sufficient market share to ensure commercial viability. Let me assure this House that Swissport’s pull-out does not lessen our commitment to uphold competition in the ground handling market at Changi.

When we decided to award a licence to a third ground handler back in 2005, our objective was to allow for greater competition into what was then a duopolistic market structure. Following Swissport’s entry, there was a general lowering of ground handling rates to the airlines by around 15%. Further, the increased competition led to new products and initiatives being introduced by the incumbents, such as the new CIAS lounge in Terminal 1 and a new business model to cater to LCCs by SATS.

Column: 3086

The Government should not intervene in the market just to ensure the survival of a third player or a certain number of players. Once the industry structure is in place, it is up to the companies to compete with each other for market share, grow the business and remain viable.

In the immediate term following Swissport’s exit, ground handling costs are unlikely to rise as the ground handlers are still bound by existing contracts. Sir, going forward, we are committed to maintaining contestability in the ground handling market, and are prepared to issue another ground handling licence should a suitable bid be made.

Mr Chairman, Sir, Mr Foo and Dr Lam asked for an update on the progress of the corporatisation of CAAS for reassurances on the management of the airport’s staff during the transition, and also on whether the current crisis would have any impact on the exercise.

5.15 pm

Last year, we informed this House that the government will restructure the existing Civil Aviation Authority of Singapore (CAAS) into two entities, namely a new company to run Changi Airport and a new Civil Aviation Authority for the regulatory and strategic functions.

CAAS currently manages Changi Airport, provides air traffic services, plans and implements future airport expansion, regulates aviation matters and advances Singapore’s strategic interests in the international aviation arena. Corporatisation will separate its regulator and business functions so that each entity can focus on its respective roles.

Corporatisation will give Changi Airport the flexibility to respond to changes in the aviation industry and the global business environment, and to stay ahead of the competition. As a corporate entity,

Column: 3087

it will be better able to attract and retain global talents. It will also be able to pursue overseas business ventures and investment opportunities more aggressively. This will ensure that Changi will continue to offer the best value-for-money to its customers and thus ensure Singapore’s position as a global aviation hub.

The economic downturn has not diminished the rationale for corporatisation. As part of the corporatisation exercise, the Ministry of Transport and CAAS have made study visits to important and busy airports around the world. These include Australia’s Sydney Airport, Holland’s Schipol Airport, Germany’s Frankfurt Airport, and the United States’ JFK Airport.

Important lessons, especially on regulation and competitiveness, were learnt which have been incorporated into the corporatisation design for Changi Airport. Sir, we are mindful that Changi Airport brings positive externalities, not all of which accrue to the airport operating company. Hence, we set out to design a regulatory regime that will balance Singapore’s interest in strengthening Changi as an air hub, vis-à-vis the need for the airport to deliver sustainable economic value and be innovative in its services. The regulatory system will have sufficient levers on the company to ensure competitive prices, service excellence, and timely investments in airport infrastructure. Let me add that there are currently no plans to privatise the corporatised entity, which is in itself a separate and distinct decision that has not been taken at this time.

The design of the two entities and the regulatory framework has been completed and the implementation is now in full swing. To ensure a smooth transition, CAAS has held a series of engagement

Column: 3088

sessions with staff to update them on the corporatisation exercise, to seek their views, and to address any concerns.

It is understandable that some of the CAAS staff might be apprehensive about the exercise. Let me assure them, and Members, that this corporatisation is not a cost-cutting exercise, i.e. saving money by cutting jobs. In fact, because we have to create a new regulatory interface and split corporate functions like human resource, finance and legal between the two new entities, more jobs will be created. No retrenchment of staff is thus expected in this exercise.

In addition, as Changi Airport is a critical infrastructure, the legislative model of corporatisation will be adopted to ensure the least disruption to Changi’s operations. My Ministry will hence be introducing a Bill in this House soon, to effect the corporatisation.

The key consideration in the assignment of staff will be the roles that they are assigned to the new entities. For example, airport management staff will likely be transferred to the new airport company. Others who are involved in strategic or regulatory roles will most likely be designated to the new Civil Aviation Authority.

For those performing corporate functions common to both organisations, such as the ones I mentioned – human resource, finance and corporate services – postings will be based on organisational needs, and ensuring an equitable talent spread and critical mass in the two entities. This arrangement will ensure that officers are deployed to where they can best contribute to the organisation, based on their experience and expertise.

Finally, all staff will join the new company and the new Civil Aviation Authority on 'no worse-off' terms at the point of transfer. They will be able to

Column: 3089

carry out their pre-corporatisation salaries and benefits – such as leave and medical benefits – to the new entities.

Going forward, on 1st April this year, CAAS will be separated operationally into the two new entities. This will allow staff in the entities time to get used to the new environment, to test out the operating systems and to iron out any teething problems. The legal separation is scheduled to take place formally on 1st July.

Mr Chairman, Sir, allow me to conclude by noting that while the economic crisis we are facing now is unprecedented, the strength of our aviation industry, in particular of Changi Airport, has put us in a good position to weather the storm. Not only will we survive the current downturn, but also will we emerge from it stronger. It is this kind of unexpected and sudden crisis that necessitates the greater flexibility that corporatisation will give to Changi Airport. With the corporatisation of Changi Airport, we will be better prepared not just for the recovery but also for the long-haul.

Maritime Hub

Mr Cedric Foo Chee Keng: Sir, my final cut is on sea transport. Let me first declare my interest. I work for a shipping company.

Mr Chairman, Sir, the maritime sector has served Singapore well for many, many years and shipping will continue to be a principal mode of cargo transport for many more years to come. Yes, the financial turmoil, sharp drop in consumer demand have affected trade flows and therefore shipping, ports and related businesses are all undergoing a very difficult period.

It is difficult to predict how long and how deep the recession will be but the storms however perfect must subside at

Column: 3090

some point. It is therefore of great importance that Singapore is able to see beyond the economic fog and continues to invest in its maritime cluster. This sector comprising ship financing banks, shipping lines, marine insurers, classification societies, shipbrokers, bunkering operators, ship agents, shipping lawyers, arbitrators and so forth, can potentially contribute much to our economy. To this end, it is encouraging to note that there has been some success brought about by MOT's initiatives. For example, I was told that four international group Protection and Indemnity clubs, P&I clubs for short, are now represented in Singapore and the market talk is that two more clubs will be setting up office here this year and some of the European banks have also set up dedicated shipping desks in their Singapore office.

Could the Minister update the House on what steps are being taken to enhance Singapore's position as a maritime hub? For example, what is the progress of plans to construct more container berths at Pasir Panjang? Would we let up because of the current slowdown? Would we press on? How are we promoting more P&I clubs to set up offices here and better still to have their corporate headquarters relocated to Singapore? These are difficult times for the clubs and they are looking to fundamentally reduce their cost of operations. Singapore, with its low tax base made one percentage point lower through the Budget this year, and its excellent infrastructure, can be a very attractive option for these P&I clubs.

Sir, in order to achieve the aim of enhancing Singapore's position as a maritime hub, we will also have to take steps to continue to develop a pool of skilled personnel to support these activities such as marine insurance, marine arbitration and so forth. I would like to ask the Minister also to update the House on whether there are specific manpower development initiatives to help

Column: 3091

enhance Singapore's position in this very aspect?

Mr Chairman, with the current economic slowdown, it is inevitable that the stakeholders in this industry will also feel the brunt of it. One recent example is that of an international mutual club, this is an insurance club, which has recently transferred its entire underwriting and claims servicing activities for Southeast Asia region from Singapore to its Hong Kong office. Another more recent example is the collapse of Armada Shipping which was granted approved international shipping (AIS) in 2006 in Singapore but it is now seeking protection from the Singapore court under a scheme of arrangement.

I note that the Government intends to grant a 20% concession in port dues for all harbour craft engaged in commercial activities and about 2,000 such craft will benefit from it. I fully support this move but at the same time I wonder if it is sufficient to help the stakeholders who are undergoing a very difficult period. I would like to ask the Minister to update the House on whether there are other initiatives and if the difficulties in the sector deepens, is the Ministry preparing more initiatives to help this particular sector.

Sea Transport

Mr Ong Kian Min: Sir, we have been hearing news indicating that the seas are rough and the going is tough in the maritime sector. Ever so often we hear news of shipbuilding classifications and deferments. Perhaps as a sign of things to come, our total cargo volume in December 2008 dived by more than 20% compared to the same period last year. So, like Mr Foo, I would like to ask the Minister to enlighten us on what measures

Column: 3092

would be taken so that the marine industry may survive this global economic downturn and how we may further strengthen our position as the preferred transhipment hub?

Competition among Seaports

Mr Wee Siew Kim: Sir, today, in the face of economic downturn, it is worrying to see idle cranes at the port and drop-off in car transhipment volume. It naturally raises concerns on the competitiveness of our port.

While it would be easy to attribute the current situation to a demand drop-off, we cannot just wait for demand to return. Other seaport competitors of ours, facing the same economic circumstances, would not be sitting still. They would be re-engineering their operations and cost structure to ensure that they are more productive and competitive when demand returns.

Can the Ministry provide an update on measures to be taken to enhance the competitiveness of our port? How do we stack up against what we know our competitors are doing? And how much more do we need to do?

While a competitive cost structure is key, are there additional upstream and downstream services, infrastructure and activities that we should be mobilizing or engaged in to ensure that shippers, ship owners and the other players of the maritime industry continue to place Singapore ahead of our competitors?

Mr Teo Ser Luck: Sir, I thank the Members who have raised the questions on the maritime industry.

Let me first provide an update of the performance of the maritime sector. For 2008 as a whole, the maritime sector has done well. Singapore remained the world’s busiest port, and the tonnage of

Column: 3093

vessel arrivals grew by 11.1% to reach 1.6 billion gross tons. We also continued to be the busiest container port, with throughput growing by 7.1% to 29.9 million TEUs.

Our efforts to become an international centre of maritime business also made good progress, with more shipping companies and maritime service providers expanding and setting up operations in Singapore. The number of companies under our Approved International Shipping Enterprise (AIS) Scheme grew to around 110, from below 100 the previous year. Assets managed by companies under our Maritime Finance Incentive Scheme have also grown to almost $2 billion, and it is up from $1.2 billion in 2007.

While full-year figures are positive, it is clear that the maritime sector has been adversely affected by the current global downturn, in tandem with other industries and that is not surprising because the sector is at the forefront of cargo movements and trade has dipped. So international freight rates had also been affected. Ship charter rates, port throughput volumes have all fallen sharply in the last few months. In the first half of last year, our container throughput grew 12% year-on-year. But the growth slowed to 9% in the third quarter of 2008, and then it turned negative, to minus 3%, by the fourth quarter. The drop in December was very steep. It was at minus 13%.

The impact is similar in other ports as well across the world. For example, Hong Kong’s container throughput fell by 12% in the fourth quarter of 2008, and in December it fell by 24%.

Though both Port Klang and Port Tanjung Pelapas have not released official figures, we understand that they also suffered negative growth for the fourth quarter, and with double digit declines in December.

Column: 3094

5.30 pm

In other words, though we continue to be competitive, the entire market is down, and we are affected. But we continue to be attractive as a maritime centre, and there will be some opportunities to tap in this downturn. For example, as maritime businesses consolidate their offices internationally, we can work with them to consolidate their operations in Singapore. There are also opportunities in maritime arbitration, as the level of activity has picked up with the downturn. I agree with Mr Foo that there should be no let up in our efforts to promote maritime ancillary services in Singapore, and we should continue to seek out such opportunities. While we hope for the best, we must be prepared for a challenging year ahead.

Sir, the Resilience Package announced by the Minister for Finance has measures such as the Jobs Credit Scheme, Special Risk-sharing Initiative, and corporate tax cut that will benefit the maritime sector. Mr Foo and Mr Ong can be assured that a key priority for the Ministry in 2009 is to help the industry ride through this current downturn.

One area where we will focus on will be to lower the business cost. We have already introduced several relief measures over the last couple of months. For example, we have extended the waiver of withholding tax on overseas interest payments to finance the purchase of Singapore flag vessels under the Block Transfer Scheme (BTS). We have also expanded this scheme so that more shipowners can benefit. These measures can help reduce the costs of financing at this time when credit is tight.

We have also announced two new measures in this year's Budget. First, we will be injecting an additional $45 million into the Maritime Cluster Fund (MCF) to support new business developments. This is a new component of the MCF.

Column: 3095

New maritime businesses planning to set up in Singapore, or existing maritime businesses planning to expand into new lines of businesses, can tap into this fund to defray their start-up costs. For example, a ship broker expanding into offshore broking activities may apply for co-funding under the new component.

The second is a 20% port dues concession for harbour craft engaged in commercial activities. This concession lowers the business cost of our port service providers such as bunker suppliers, ship chandlers, tug boat operators, and domestic ferry operators. Many small and medium sized businesses will also benefit from this concession. This will come into effect on 1st April 2009 for one year.

Besides harbour craft which ply within our port limits, we will also extend concessions to ocean-going vessels such as containerships, tankers and bulk carriers. I am happy to announce today that the Maritime and Port Authority of Singapore (MPA) will also grant an additional 10% concession in port dues to ocean-going vessels with a port stay of not more than 10 days. This concession will be given over and above existing port dues concession already enjoyed by the industry, such as the 20% port dues concession for container ships. The concession will also come into effect on 1st April 2009 for a period of one year.

Besides reducing business costs, protecting jobs will be another key priority. The Ministry is encouraging maritime companies to hold back on retrenchments, and to take advantage of this downturn to send their workers for training instead. We are working with the Workforce Development Agency (WDA) through their Skills Programme for Upgrading and Resilience (SPUR). Already, the Singapore Shipping Association (SSA) has maritime

Column: 3096

courses under SPUR. We will continue to work with WDA to expand the breadth of maritime courses, such as the maritime courses offered by the tertiary institutions.

The MCF also has a manpower development component which complements SPUR. Training programmes that do not come under SPUR can be funded by the MCF. It can be used to co-fund the development of maritime training programmes, course fees, scholarship and internship programmes, among others. In 2007, the MPA topped up the manpower development component of the MCF by $21 million, bringing it to a total of $50 million. Since then, companies and training organisations have tapped on the fund to the tune of $7 million. I strongly encourage more maritime companies to leverage on SPUR and MCF to upgrade the skills of employees.

We have to invest for the future. Mr Foo asked about enhancing Singapore's position as a maritime hub. It is indeed important that, even as we focus on alleviating short-term difficulties, we should not overlook positioning ourselves for the future so that we are ready for the growth that comes up. Singapore remains a compelling location for maritime business because we are strategically located as a port. We have a comprehensive and vibrant maritime cluster comprising the full range of activities and services. We are still the maritime centre of Asia, and I am confident we will continue to grow in the longer term.

We must continue to invest in the future. One key area is scalability for the port infrastructure. Our port continues to compete well. Over the last 10 years, our container throughput has doubled. Over the last five years, it has expanded at a little over 10% per annum, slightly higher than both Port Tanjung Pelepas and Port Klang, despite our port's higher base.

Column: 3097

Mr Foo asked if our plans to develop the port will be affected by the current downturn. The Government remains committed to making timely investment in our port infrastructure. The development of Pasir Panjang Terminal Phases 3 and 4 is well underway and will proceed without delay. This is because we will still need additional capacity when the first berths come into operation in 2012. To prepare for the even busier port of the future, plans are also afoot to develop a new Port Operations Control Centre at Changi by 2010 and to dredge and deepen the main approaches to our port. Our port operators are also making their own investments to ensure that we continue to be well-placed to compete as a hub port going forward. For example, PSA is also taking advantage of the slowdown to refit their port equipment to raise fuel efficiency and to cross-train their port workers to raise operational flexibility and nimbleness.

Besides hard infrastructure, investment in our people must also continue. There were many excellent jobs in the maritime industry over the last few years. Last year, each of the 57 students in the pioneer batch of the Bachelor of Science in Maritime Studies at NTU found jobs in the maritime sector upon graduation. When growth in the sector resumes, we must be ready with the pipeline of talent to fill these vacancies. The MPA will continue to work with industry and our tertiary institutions to develop more maritime training programmes and to attract Singaporeans into maritime careers.

Sir, through good times and bad times, the maritime industry is an important bedrock of the Singapore economy. We are committed to working in partnership with the industry to steer through this downturn. Even as we trim our sails and batten down our hatches, we must remember to continue charting our future course. Singapore's fundamental strengths in the maritime industry remain strong. I am

Column: 3098

confident that the industry will grow again when this downturn is over.

The Chairman: There is some time left for clarification. Mr Cedric Foo.

Mr Cedric Foo Chee Keng: Sir, first, I would like to thank the Minister for making me very pleased and not disappointed about the off-peak car scheme. For my colleagues, it is good for them to note that if you press on, sometimes you get what you ask for.

But there are many other colleagues that have asked for one particular point and have made this particular appeal, and that is, the polytechnic student concession fares. So he will please many of them to avoid disappointing many of them. In the last count, up to 10 MPs have spoken on this subject. The Minister's response was that there are, amongst the polytechnic students, some who come from wealthy families and some from less wealthy families, and so we should not allow them to enjoy this same concessionary rate as other JC students. But I think that argument fails to recognise that even among the JC students, some of them are from wealthy families and some from poorer families. Even among the senior citizens, some are very wealthy and some are less wealthy. I think the cut-off point is: are they full-time students? Indeed, JC students are full-time students; ITE students are full-time students, and so are polytechnic students. I recognise that any concession we give to a particular group means a cross subsidy from all the rest of them who are not enjoying the concession. But I think we have come to a point where the public supports it. That is my belief, and I hope the Minister will state his stand. Although it is beyond him to make those adjustments – it is up to the Public Transport Operators (PTOs) – I think, with his statement, it will help a long way when the PTOs are reviewing this subject.

Column: 3099

The Chairman: Can I ask Members not to make new speeches but just clarifications? Mr Raymond Lim.

Mr Raymond Lim Siang Keat: I really do not know whether what I say would go a long way with the PTOs. I just want to manage Members' expectations. Let me clarify what I said which I thought I had made quite clear. There are actually two parts to this polytechnic student concession issue. One is that, as the Member correctly said, this is a decision for the public transport operators; they decide on concessions. He is again right that there is a cross-subsidy element between those who are paying full fares and those who are on concessions, and the public transport operators would have to weigh this. But in this current difficult economic climate, I would encourage them to see how best they can help to lower transport costs for polytechnic students.

But, on the part of the Government, the approach that we have taken is to provide targeted help for families who need it the most. For the Government to come in and provide the subsidy for polytechnic students, it would be an across-the-board subsidy and not a targeted approach. Therefore, it would benefit polytechnic students from wealthy households and those from poor households. But this is not our approach. We prefer to use a targeted approach and we have various schemes to help them – the Workfare Income Supplement and GST Credits. And if they need more help, there is the CCC ComCare Fund.

Mr Low Thia Khiang: Sir, in my speech, I requested LTA to look into the feasibility of modifying the roadside kerb near the taxi stand to form a taxi bay or holding area if there is site constraint at the taxi stand for more taxi parking lots. The Senior Minister of State, in her reply, asked me for suggestions on a particular taxi stand. But, Sir, I am not a taxi-driver although I know one or two taxi stands. I

Column: 3100

would suggest that LTA do a survey with taxi-drivers or work with taxi-drivers or the Taxi Drivers' Association to look into particular taxi stands where there is a high demand to provide such facilities.

The second clarification: I wonder whether LTA, in the name of road safety, has conveniently ignored the plight of taxi-drivers. Has the LTA considered the impact on the taxi-drivers when implementing new measures regulating where the taxis that can stop in town and changing some of the taxi stands to taxi-stops, while some taxi-drivers obviously may not be informed of that. I wonder whether, in Mandarin, it is " na de shi si ji lai kai dao ".

The Senior Parliamentary Secretary, Mr Teo Ser Luck, wants to promote Singapore as a cycling nation. I wonder whether he is aware that there may be obstacles to this objective, eg, bicycle thefts. I think the Police generally may not be interested in bicycle thefts. I would like to ask him whether LTA would consider providing anti-theft bicycle rack at MRT stations.

The Chairman: There are at least six Members who want to raise clarifications. Can I ask that clarifications be kept short? Mrs Lim.

Mrs Lim Hwee Hua: Sir, I would like to assure the Member that LTA in deciding on the locations of the different taxi-stops and stands, has been working very closely with the taxi-drivers as well as the Associations. But as the situation is fluid and travel patterns change, LTA will continue to monitor the situation and decide if certain locations should be changed. I would like to assure the Member that LTA is not going through an experimental process in terms of trying to have the taxi-drivers test the different propositions. In his cut earlier, he did mention that some taxi-drivers are at the mercy of passengers who asked to alight

Column: 3101

at the places that are prohibited. I would like to assure him that in enforcing the rules, compassion is exercised and the benefit of doubt will be given to taxi-drivers where such situations arise.

Mr Teo Ser Luck: First, I thank Mr Low for bringing up this valid point. If we want to develop Singapore into a cycling nation, there will be many bicycles and parking facilities around. I know that LTA is already studying better ways to secure those parked bicycles.

I think we have still a long way to go in becoming a cycling nation but we will work towards that and this is one of the considerations we have to think about, and probably learn from other cities like Paris, Amsterdam, and see what we can implement in Singapore.

5.45 pm

Mr Seah Kian Peng: Sir, I refer to the Minister's response to my suggestion to review the car growth policy and specifically my suggestion to reduce it from the current 1.5% to 1%. Amongst other reasons, he stated we need to give the public sufficient time to adjust to this new policy. To that, I would say I think that existing motorists and aspiring motorists have already spoken in terms of bidding for COEs. So I want to clarify what the Minister means by "sufficient time to adjust to this new policy".

Secondly, I think he also said that it is already halved from 3% to 1.5%. I think the question to ask is really, is 1.5% too much in this current climate. 1.5% to review it after three years is adding 36,000 cars on the road. My suggestion of putting it to 1%, if it's done now, over three years would mean 12,000 fewer cars in these three years. So I do think that circumstances have changed and I would like to ask the Minister to give this some consideration.

Mr Raymond Lim Siang Keat: When you make policies, you try your best not to

Column: 3102

inject uncertainty into it unless there are compelling reasons for you to change. If you create regulatory uncertainty in policy-making, people who depend on it will lose confidence. So unless there are compelling reasons, you do not change.

So when we work out what is sustainable for the vehicle population growth rate, we look at the long-term fundamental factors – what is the road growth going ahead, what sort of public transport improvements we are putting in, what sort of road management technologies will come on stream, and then we make the decision. As I mentioned last year, when we make this decision, we do not lock it in permanently. We said, "Let's do it for three years." We have not even started. So if we change this decision even before we start, it will create uncertainty.

The economic conditions change rapidly so if we were to do what Mr Seah suggests, to just peg it to prevailing economic conditions, we are going to end up with what people call "up and down economics". If you look back to August 2008, how many people predicted the Lehman collapse in September? Also ask yourself, how often have we revised our GDP growth forecast? It is really changing rapidly. So we are going to implement a vehicle population growth rate in terms of what should our sustainable rate be into the future. If the long-term factors change, then we would adjust the vehicle population growth rate.

Ms Irene Ng Phek Hoong: Sir, I thank the Senior Parliamentary Secretary for making clear that bicycles can go on bus lanes. But my speech is more on making the bus lanes as bike-bus lanes, to designate it as such with clear legends and the Senior Parliamentary Secretary said that doing so might confuse people with too many legends. I wanted to flash a picture but I was advised that it is not that easy so I will do an "Ang Mong

Column: 3103

Seng" and show a picture of a bike-bus lane in Paris which I took when I was there and I do not think it will confuse anybody to have a bike-bus lane. In fact it makes it clearer that the bicycle can share the lane and then the drivers will be trained to look out for bicycles because I think it will be quite clear that the bicycles have a right to be on the lanes.

And the second point is, I just want to clarify a point by hon. Member Cynthia Phua, my good friend. I share her concern that pedestrians and cyclists must share footway safety and the education and enforcement must be a part of it. But I just want to clarify that in the Tampines trial, the reason we started it was because cyclists were already using pedestrian walkways. Cyclists and pedestrians were already having conflicts on the walkways. It is not that because we started it in Tampines and therefore cyclists are starting to use the pedestrian walkways in other parts of Singapore. All along, cyclists have been using the footways and our trial has been to try and see how we can make it safe for both sides and we have done a lot of work on the ground. The grassroots leaders have worked very closely with LTA. I want to thank LTA for the cooperation given, especially in producing education brochures that give cyclists clear indications of the etiquette – how to ring the bell and how to give the right of way to pedestrians at all times.

And my final point is that the trial has just ended and I just want to say to Members in the House that this is a trial just by Tampines so no need to be too worried about it.

Mr Teo Ser Luck: I want to thank the Member for sharing. I think it is something to consider. Thank you very much.

Er Lee Bee Wah: In reference to the response from the Senior Minister of State

Column: 3104

just now on my request for the provision of a lift at the overhead bridge near MRT station, I just want to clarify that I am appealing to the Ministry to provide lifts at overhead bridges near MRT stations throughout the whole of Singapore, not just Nee Soon South. And on this particular issue, I would like to ask the Senior Minister of State whether she is still looking into the feasibility of implementing this or is she saying, "no" to this project.

Mrs Lim Hwee Hua: Mr Chairman, Sir, I think I have stated quite clearly that our priorities are really to grant access first, before we talk about shortening the walk in whatever manner or form. But I should add that for the Khatib station in point, it is actually going to be included in the 70% of the population of existing stations that we will be equipping an additional barrier-free access. In other words, two more entrances to the station would be given additional ramps and this will be done by the third quarter of this year as opposed to the middle of next year. I certainly hope the Member is happy with that.

Mdm Cynthia Phua: I want to ask the Parliamentary Secretary when he talked about introducing this cycling lane in the HDB estates, what law governs this? Is it the Road Traffic Act? Because it is not a road, it is not a public road per se , so who would govern this and who would be responsible for the management and the enforcement? Does the Police have the say over cyclists on this cycling lane in the estates? I think I agree with the Minister when he said when you create a policy, it must be very clear. I think when you create these cycling lanes, you are not very clear on the legal aspect of it.

Mr Teo Ser Luck: The Police has the authority and the Police is the one responsible for the enforcement. I have to check for you the specific Act but the Police is responsible.

Column: 3105

Ms Eunice Elizabeth Olsen: Sir, I want to thank the Minister for all the good news he has about our public transport system. I just want to ask him whether he thinks it is better for the commuter wanting to plan his trip to know when the buses are expected to arrive on a regular basis and if it is more cost-economical for the LTA and the operators to use timetables instead of the electronic real-time system which in any case does not address the problem of consistency and if the traffic is unpredictable, whether or not we can start off with the afternoon off-peak period. The Minister mentioned the SMS service, but perhaps low-income commuters might not be able to pay every time they want to know actually what time the bus is arriving.

Mr Raymond Lim Siang Keat: First, in answer to Mdm Phua, it is under the Road Traffic Rules.

And if I could beg your indulgence, Sir, I think Mr Seah asked something else. There are two parts to it. If I could also answer the first part, he says well, people have already adjusted so what else, what other adjustment is necessary. I beg to differ. Because people have adjusted to the 3% vehicle population growth rate and we have announced in this House that we are going with 1.5% going ahead so they would have factored that in. If I say because the economy has slid in the last few months, I shift the growth rate further down to 1% or 0%, I would have undermined the expectations of people. There is an impact on people's lives if we cut the COE quota. What do you think will happen to the COE prices if I tightened and squeezed it? It might actually go up after I have announced that I am going to do a lower vehicle population growth rate. So I beg to differ. I do not think that people have already factored all of this in, that it is going to go down to 1%. They have factored 1.5% in making the adjustment and so we should not just change it.

Column: 3106

Ms Eunice Olsen's question was, is it better to have timetables at the bus stops? My answer is yes, if we can do it, we would. Let me explain where we are now. I think in her speech she mentioned that in first world cities they have timetables. I visited London, I visited Australia and I asked the same question, "Where do you draw the line?" They draw the line in the same way, like us. They draw the line that they will give timetables at the bus stops when the bus arrival is not frequent. So you have to define a cut off – what do you mean by "not frequent". In Singapore we do it at 20 minutes, in London, it is about 12 minutes. Transport for London cuts it at 12 minutes. Anything below 12 minutes, the timetable is the same like ours, they give the frequency range. So if you go to any of our bus stop today – and mind you previously we did not have bus information panels at all our bus stops – now we have 4,500 of them. If you go and have a look at it, there is a frequency range. So it tells you that the first bus is 6.24 am in the morning, for instance and in the morning peak periods, 6.30 to 8.30 am, the frequency would be from 10 to 12 minutes. So that is how they do it. When it is a frequent service, they give a frequency range. No difference from London. Now beyond that, when the headway is longer than 20 minutes, you then can give actual timing because when it is longer, the bus can adjust to be sure that they arrive, say, at 11.20 pm. That you can do. But when it is frequent, you cannot because if there is a traffic jam somewhere, you will miss that. So you tell people how frequent it is. Should we work towards tightening this further from 20 minutes? This is something that we will definitely look at.

Mdm Cynthia Phua: There is another concern on cycling and pedestrian walkway and cycling lanes that are introduced in the estates. This is when there is an accident between a pedestrian

Column: 3107

and a cyclist, where does the responsibility lie? In terms of the insurance coverage, how do you cover them? Does a cyclist who cycle on a cycling lane and a pedestrian walks by, who is at fault? And when a pedestrian is knocked over on a pedestrian lane, again whose responsibility is it? So I would like the Senior Parliamentary Secretary to think through these aspects before introducing cycling lanes within an estate. Because in our common areas, residents expect safety and security and I would love our children to be able to run around instead of introducing two-wheelers, especially a motorised one in our estates.

The Chairman: Mr Teo, do you wish to respond?

Mr Teo Ser Luck: I think that is both a comment and a question and I assure the Member, Mdm Cynthia Phua that we will definitely take into consideration the question of responsibilities.

I always feel that if you want to promote something, cycling or some other activities, we would rather encourage than strictly enforce it. So in terms of the ownership, there is a lot of public education that is needed. We need to accommodate and then we can move forward. That is why at this time, even at the cycling towns, for example Tampines, it is still on trial. We still need to engage all the different stakeholders before we decide how to move forward what kind of infrastructure is needed before they can co-exist. I know it is not easy. I know there are a lot of questions about ownership and enforcement. So I think all these things have to come into place, a more integrated approach before we can say we move forward to develop more cycling lanes or even shared pavements or footpaths for both to co-exist. I think if the residents are not ready, then there is no way we can implement it. So it has to

Column: 3108

be an almost bottom-up initiative and acceptance before we can actually go further on the implementation.

6.00 pm

Rest assured that we will take all these into consideration as we develop all our cycling plans around the different towns and implement them further.

The Chairman: Any more clarifications? Otherwise, I will flash the red light.

Mr Seah Kian Peng: I thank the Minister for his clarification. The key point I want to make is that when we talk about sustainability, it must be sustainable. The fact remains that the car growth of 1.5% is exceeding the road growth of 0.5%. There is going to be a mis-match for this year, next year and the year after. So, we are just adding more cars to the roads and this will certainly mean a lot more inconvenience for all existing motorists.

Mr Raymond Lim Siang Keat: I think Mr Seah is taking the Member's advice to heart – if you are persistent enough, he said, it might work. Road growth is just one of the factors. So, Mr Seah is right – road growth is 0.5%. But as I mentioned earlier, there are other factors, like public transport improvement and IT improvement in road management technology. So there are other factors at play and this is the reason why when we do long-term planning, we do not say that we are now going to fix this rate in perpetuity. We would say, well, we fix it, but we will review it over three years, so that we have a sense of where we are and we do not try to lock it in.

Mr Low Thia Khiang: Sir, I know the Minister has explained the effect of ERP. On the ground, people do not seem to be convinced of the effect of ERP. They will still complain that even you pay for ERP, you will still end up in a jam. Would he like to clarify that?

Column: 3109

Mr Raymond Lim Siang Keat: If you look at, say, the Straits Times Survey conducted in October last year – the percentage of people who said that the changes to the ERP have led to smoother traffic has actually picked up compared to the year before. So, I am not sure what survey the Member is referring to, or what evidence, or it is just hearsay. If it is hearsay, then I say please, have a care because it might not be really reflective or representative of the policy impact.

Ms Irene Ng Phek Hoong: Sir, I want to thank the Minister for the plans to improve our hardware and I think we have come a long way as a first class transport city. I just want to make clear that we can have the best transport system but if the behaviour of the commuters is less than gracious, it can be still a very stressful experience. Can I ask the Minister whether there are plans to introduce any campaigns to improve the behaviour of commuters – especially those rushing to MRT trains, not giving way to the elderly or the pregnant women on trains – and try to make sure that even while we enjoy a first class transport system, we can also behave like first world citizens?

Mr Raymond Lim Siang Keat: I agree that we can be a more gracious society. If we visit our MRT stations at peak hours, you will see that we now have service ambassadors. SMRT has introduced service ambassadors and also more public announcements. We try to educate people on a certain etiquette at the station. This is really an ongoing process. I will give a simple example. When the train pulls up, you should actually allow those inside to come out first. But some commuters are in such a hurry that before those inside the cabin can come out, they are rushing in, causing a huge jam. We have for some time now drawn those yellow lines that you can see at our MRT stations, and we have our service

Column: 3110

ambassadors guiding the people. The other thing that they do is to try to get them to distribute more evenly in the train.

Again, if you go down to the stations at peak periods, you will see that the cars at the ends can actually take people in; so we try to distribute the passengers. And in between, in the intermediate cars, there is a tendency of bunching everybody at the door of the train; so, again, these service ambassadors try to educate people and tell them to move in. I think some of our commuters are concerned that if they were to move in to the middle of the train, they will not be able to get out at their station. But this is not really true. The dwell time is enough and they will be able to get out. So, I agree that we should educate people, so that we will have a more gracious society.

Mr Cedric Foo Chee Keng: Sir, this year's debate on transport in the Committee of Supply is less heated than previous years, I think for three or four reasons. One, COE prices, I believe, are at a record low and contrary to what Mr Low Thia Khiang said, from our interactions, more people are accepting the ERP. Also, the public transport operators have voluntarily said that they will not apply for any fare increase this year. I think this shows that they are with the people. On behalf of the GPC, we applaud this gesture. But I think, more importantly, it is the fact that the Minister has laid down the long-term Masterplan and it is beginning to show early signs of working and creating a Singapore that will be more liveable, and I am confident that that will take place.

I want to thank Minister Lim, the Senior Minister of State and the Senior Parliamentary Secretary for their very comprehensive and convincing replies. Sir, I beg leave to withdraw the amendment.

Column: 3111

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

That the sum of $389,297,400 for Head W ordered to stand part of the Main Estimates.

That the sum of $5,004,798,300 for Head W ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates.