FOREIGN WORKERS IN RESIDENTIAL AREAS

FOREIGN WORKERS IN RESIDENTIAL AREAS: 1.

Ms Denise Phua Lay Peng asked the Minister for National Development (a) what will be the impact if all Singaporeans do not want to have the presence of foreign workers in their residential areas; and (b) what specific strategies will the Government adopt to allay the concerns of residents whose neighbourhood is affected by the over-congestion of foreign workers.

The Minister for National Development (Mr Mah Bow Tan): Mr Speaker, Sir, allow me to answer part (a) of Ms Denise Phua's Question first. In land scarce Singapore, it is not possible to totally segregate foreign workers from the local community. If Singaporeans do not want to see foreign workers near their residential areas or using common facilities, this will set a physical limit on the number of foreign workers we can accommodate, which will, in turn, limit our economic growth, raise our business costs as well as the cost of living generally.

If Singaporeans do not want foreign workers in their residential areas, then there may be more illegal housing, that is, many foreign workers will continue to overcrowd in improper housing premises within or near residential areas. This may create even greater health and safety risks, not just to the workers, but also to the surrounding community.

Due to the exceptional increase in foreign worker numbers in the past years, there is a current shortage in foreign worker housing. Hence, MND is exploring temporary measures, such as housing them in vacant state properties or temporary dormitories built on state land, that may be nearer to residential areas. The temporary dormitories are needed as many of these workers are already here and living in overcrowded conditions. Nevertheless, going forward, we will monitor the economic situation closely and adjust our longer-term dormitory supply according to the changing demand for housing.

The Acting Minister for Manpower will be addressing part (b) of the Member's Question in his reply to the next question.

Ms Irene Ng Phek Hoong (Tampines): Sir, much has been said about the problems that foreign workers pose, in terms of accommodation. Can I ask the Minister whether he agrees that as a decent society, it is our duty to provide the foreign workers in our midst decent and humane housing, so that they can come here and earn an honest wage and not feel like modern-day slave in Singapore? Can I also ask the Minister whether he agrees that if MND were to build trees in housing the foreign workers in the estates, the trees should be built to give them a better environment and not to block them from the sight of Singaporeans?

Mr Mah Bow Tan: I think there is a responsibility for us to make sure that the foreign workers, and indeed all workers, just like all Singaporeans, are housed in decent conditions. That is the reason why we have utilised several ways in order to provide proper housing for the workers. First of all, they can rent private residential premises. But we have a limit on these premises. We do not want overcrowding in these premises. And that is the reason why we have to look at other alternatives. So construction workers are housed on-site as far as possible. There is, again, a limit to the number of workers that we can house on-site. And this is why we need to have another option, which is allowing foreign workers to live in some of our industrial estates. We have allowed factory owners to convert some of their industrial premises into dormitories. Last but not least, we provide purpose-built permanent dormitories for these workers and, in these dormitories, amenities are put in place which will provide the workers with a very decent standard of living. There are minimum living space conditions, living space requirements as well as provisions of all the basic amenities and indeed more than that. Some of the modern foreign worker dormitories, in fact, have fully equipped gymnasiums, cinemas, games area, and so on. So they are actually very adequately provided for.

It is precisely because we want to provide proper housing for these workers that we are now seeking to convert some of the vacant state properties into temporary premises. There is currently overcrowding in some of the private residential estates, including HDB, and that is a fact that we have to deal with. So we are now trying to quickly bring up to speed some of these temporary accommodation. The Serangoon Garden Technical School was one such facility. It was ready for occupation in a short time. The facilities are there. There is sufficient space for us to put in all the amenities that I talked about earlier. So, yes, I think it is important for us to provide proper housing for all our workers, not just from the point of view of humanity, as Ms Ng put it, but also because there are basic standards of fire safety and basic standards of health and sanitation that we need to take into account.

But, at the same time, I think we want to make sure that as we roll out these dormitories, the disamenities to the surrounding areas are minimised. That is a balance we have to strike. Hence all the additional features and facilities that we put in, like the road which, by the way, is not just going to serve the dormitory. In future when the site is used for other purposes, once the dormitory moves out, that road will still be relevant and useful. So it is something that will be useful even beyond the lifespan of the dormitory.

Mdm Ho Geok Choo (West Coast): Sir, I would like to ask the Minister to what extent are the local residents, where the dormitories are to be erected, involved in the whole planning process, in terms of amenities to be built or even roads to be constructed to specially cater to this group of foreigners. The reason I ask this question is that, if the local residents were involved to a certain extent, I think it will help to build that ownership of these foreigners coming in to live amongst them.

Mr Mah Bow Tan: Let me explain the process by which we select these premises and also the process of consultation which is relevant to Mdm Ho's question. First of all, when we scan through the list of sites that are available in Singapore, we take into account, not just the availability, but what are the competing uses because there are many other competing uses for these temporary state properties. Having decided that that particular site is suitable for a dormitory, we then go through the process of evaluating the technical feasibility of it. What this means is that we consult the different agencies, like LTA for traffic amenities, NEA to check whether their health or safety buffers are already in place, which means that we would not be able to make use of it, or other facilities or amenities like sewerage, power, and so on. Having gone through the technical consultation and if we find the sites suitable and feasible, we then consult the advisors and also the grassroots leaders. This is the stage where the grassroots leaders are brought into play and this is where any concerns are brought up, and we look at ways of minimising those concerns.

I agree that it is important for us to take that step, to take into account as far as possible the concerns and also put in the mitigating measures. I do have to highlight however that not all the proposals are doable, either because they are too expensive or physically it is just not possible. For example, in the Serangoon Garden case, there was a suggestion to divert the road to another area. We studied it, LTA looked at it, and came to a conclusion that from the traffic safety and traffic hazard point of view, it was not a good idea to redirect that road. There was another suggestion to try to block the disamenities, arising from building the road, ie, to try to block some of the noise, the dust or fumes from the road to the residents. This, we have accepted. So NParks will be planting some trees. So where the concerns are valid and where the mitigating measures are doable, we will certainly take them into account.

But I must come back to the fundamental point which is really that over the last couple of years, we have seen this very sharp rise in the numbers. These numbers are here and we have to accommodate them, and to accommodate them we need to look at not just permanent sites but also temporary sites, and where the temporary sites are chosen and where they cause some inconvenience and disamenities, then let us look at how we can minimise those inconveniences. But it will not go away totally. I think this is something that we all have to accept.

Mr Zaqy Mohamad (Hong Kah): I understand that we are a land scarce city and have little choice in locating our foreign worker dormitories. But have we considered putting some of them in the outer islands, for example, Jurong Island, where it could have better spacing and we do not have this kind of problem with regard to space in the residential areas? In terms of logistics, moving up and down, I think we have done that before in Pulau Tekong with our NSmen, by ferrying them up and down through ferries. The second question is this. We seem to be rushing to build a lot more temporary dormitories, and I understand that there could be demand today. But looking at the current economic situation where there is slow down in the manufacturing, construction and services sectors, do we still need so many dormitories in the residential areas?

Mr Mah Bow Tan: We do try to house the foreign workers as close as possible to their worksites. That is the reason why I said earlier that for construction workers, the first choice is really to provide on-site housing for them. But, again, you must realise that if the construction site is actually quite close to a residential area, there is a limiting constraint there. In the case of Jurong Island, you will be pleased to know that we actually do have dormitories on Jurong Island. In fact, there are two dormitories on Jurong Island and they cater to about 10,000 bed spaces. These are mainly for the process workers, the workers involved in building the petrochemical industries on Jurong Island itself. That is obviously the most sensible thing to do and where it is feasible, we will do it.

Just to give Members another example. A huge number of foreign workers are working on the Marina Bay and also on the Sentosa IRs, and so we try to find dormitory space at or near the sites. In fact, some of them are staying on-site, and some of them are staying just slightly away from it. So this is our first choice. But having exhausted this first choice, we now need to go on to the other choices. When we talk about looking for temporary dormitory spaces, we are actually looking at the third or even the fourth alternative.

On his second question: do we need such a number of bed spaces if the economy slows down? The demand that has been generated now is due to the exceptional surge in the numbers over the last two years. That is the reason why we need these temporary dormitory spaces. Going forward, of course, we would have to monitor the situation very closely and, if necessary, we would be adjusting the number of bed spaces to deal with it. But I can say that as at this moment, and, in fact, for next year, because the demand, especially for construction workers, is still going to be there because projects are still ongoing, I do not foresee that there will be a drastic drop in the demand for foreign workers.

Mr Speaker: Mdm Cynthia Phua, last question.

Mdm Cynthia Phua (Aljunied): Mr Speaker, Sir, I have two supplementary questions. In Singapore, we have the Masterplan which is reviewed every 10 years, and then the DGP plan every five years. In this case, there is an ad hoc request for land use. I want to ask what is the process for approval of ad hoc use because compatibility of use is important in land use planning. Can the Minister explain the process of this land use per se in the midst of a residential estate? The second question is, how does this acute shortage come about because any employment of foreign workers needs the approval of MOM? Does it mean that there is no communication at all between MOM and MND?

Mr Mah Bow Tan: As Mdm Cynthia Phua said, we do have a long-term land use plan, ie, the Masterplan, which is reviewed every five years. What the Masterplan does is to stipulate the land use plan for various sites in Singapore. But, at the same time, even with the Masterplan, because land is so scarce in Singapore, we do consider short-term uses for state land. Why do we do this? Because (a) it provides flexibility in land use; and (b) more importantly, it allows us to make better use of the land. If you leave the land empty and do not use it at all because there is no urgency for the longer-term use of the land, then obviously that land is going to waste. So there is a wastage or under-utilisation of land on the one hand, and there is a demand on the other hand. If we match the two together, this is where we try to get the compatibility that Mdm Cynthia Phua talked about. I will give Members several examples. There was a shortage in office space a few years ago. We realised that we were not able to generate the additional office space in such a short period of time due to a huge surge in demand for office space in the last two years. So the solution was to tender out sites for temporary office space, for use as transitional office space and, hence, make use of vacant state properties.

These are the short-term uses that I am talking about. So while the Masterplan reflects the longer term planning intention of the site, it does not preclude us from making better use of the land, if it is still vacant, for short term use. This is precisely the situation for the Serangoon Garden site. The Serangoon Garden site's long-term land use planning intention is for it to be a residential site, but there is no need to tender out the site for residential use. There is no urgency for it. So what do we do? Do we leave it vacant or do we look for alternative use?

There are several alternative uses. We find which is the one that is the most compatible. That is the reason why we decided to – after looking at all the feasibility studies – allocate it for foreign worker dormitory. That is the reason why we go for temporary uses even though we have a more permanent planning intention in mind.

The Member also asked whether there was miscommunication between MDA and MOM. We do have a long-term planning framework in place which takes into account demand for foreign worker bed spaces and housing, which in turn, is related to economic growth in the various sectors. So this planning framework allows us to plan in advance – which is all very fine if the planning parameters or assumptions are as indicated. But in this particular case, the economic growth in the last few years was more robust than anticipated. Just to give Members some figures, construction demand in 2006, when we just came out of the recession, was $17 billion. This year, we expect construction demand to be something like $30 billion, in the space of two years. The number of foreign workers in 2006 went up by 55,000. In 2007, it went up by 102,000, in the space of just one year. And this is not just construction, this is across all sectors – manufacturing, processes, services.

We could have said, "Let us not allow the foreign workers to come in, because this is not what we have planned for. We do not have the space for them to come in. Let us say no to foreign workers." What would that mean? If we did not have the number of foreign workers that came in, that would have impacted our growth. That would have impacted the cost of doing business. That would, in fact, have impacted the cost of living because when they come in, there is a reduction in the cost of doing business and, hence, the cost of living. It also meant higher construction cost and delays. So when MPs and residents ask us for upgrading projects, "When is it coming? When is the lift upgrading coming? Where are the flats? Why are we not building enough flats?", all this ultimately boils down to whether we have the resources to build and to upgrade. And what are the resources? It is the foreign workers.

So, to say no would have created other problems for our economy and our general cost of living. So, we decided to say yes. We decided to go for growth, and then to find ways and means to solve the down-stream problem of looking for housing for them. It is not an easy issue to tackle. It is a challenge. It requires residents to bear with some inconvenience and to make some adjustments. It requires advisers to work the ground to try to convince their residents that overall, on balance, there is a benefit to the economy, to the country and to them ultimately.

Sir, I submit that this is still the best policy for us, that we go for growth, grab the opportunities when we get them, and where there is a resource constrain, we find ways and means to try to work through the problems.