HEAD T - MINISTRY OF NATIONAL DEVELOPMENT

Head T - Ministry of National Development

The Chairman: Head T - Ministry of National Development. Mr Charles Chong.

Concept Plan 2001 Review

Mr Charles Chong (Pasir Ris-Punggol): Sir, I beg to move,

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

Sir, the Minister for National Development recently announced a mid-term review of Singapore's Concept Plan 2001. The revised Concept Plan aims to transform Singapore into a top First World nation and provide capacity and infrastructure to support a population of 6.5 million people, up from 5.5 million that was originally planned in 2001. It envisages a steep increase in demand for industrial land and also a significant increase in the proportion of high density housing to accommodate a larger population as well as to cater for more foreign workers and elderly Singaporeans. There will also be increased transportation demands to satisfy amidst our severe land constraints. Could the Minister elaborate further on how his Ministry intends to achieve these objectives as there are concerns over how we will be dealing with a much larger population comprising old and new citizens and foreign workers, all of whom will be closely packed in high density housing?

Sir, we would also need to overcome some immediate obstacles that others seem quite determined to place before us. Could the Minister clarify the media reports that, in addition to the sand export ban by the Indonesian government, there is now the granite export ban, this time imposed by the Indonesian navy? How would this development affect the construction industry and what measures would the Government be able to take to overcome such impediments to our progress and development?

Sir, I was glad to hear that the Concept Plan, while intending to cater for a significant population and industrial growth, will continue to enhance the quality of life in our city, our housing estates and public places. Could the Minister let us know his Ministry's plans for enhancing our clean and green Garden City image and providing good quality living environment for all present and future Singapore residents? We also need to ensure that our buildings incorporate features that would reduce energy consumption, increase water conservation and promote recycling. Could the Minister tell us what measures are being considered to make our buildings more green and ecologically friendly?

Finally, would the Minister consider requiring all town councils to meet minimum standards to ensure that our public housing estates remain among the best in the world and that none degenerates into a slum due to mismanagement? Singapore is just too small for any constituency to become a slum, as this will undoubtedly have a negative impact on the neighbouring constituencies and, ultimately, the rest of the country.

Concept Plan

Dr Lily Neo (Jalan Besar): Sir, may I ask MND what is the progress in the planning for increase in population growth? How do we cater for the increased demand on housing land space where it supplies education, healthcare, transport, recreation facilities and social services. Should there be inter-ministerial cooperation among the various Ministries for this planning? How much funds must be needed for this plan for the 6.5 million population growth and has MND put aside this funding?

Property Market and Public Housing

The Senior Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for the Environment and Water Resources (Dr Amy Khor Lean Suan): Sir, high-end property prices have risen dramatically over the past 12 months. Nary a day passes without the press reporting a story of how new price records are being broken, how queues formed outside choice show flats, queue numbers swapped for an astronomical sums of money,

blank cheques only are taken at popular launches, and units are flipped at profits of $100,000 or more. These scenes are eerily similar to the heydays of speculation in the mid-1990s.

3.00 pm

The Minister has repeatedly assured Singaporeans that the problem is confined to the luxury segment of the market and that the masses need not worry of being outpriced. The Government has gradually resumed its land sales programme and reintroduced payment of stamp duty upfront, instead of upon completion of sale, presumably to discourage speculation. We have also read about returned units from options left unexercised because the original purchaser is unable to find a buyer to flip the property and wants to cut losses.

Sir, the situation is worth monitoring closely for its potentially debilitating effects on the quality of banks' housing loans portfolio in the event of a price correction. Equally disconcerting is the manner in which sky-rocketing prices dampen aspirations and create middle-class anxiety. I understand the logic that, so long as speculation does not extend to the mass market, the Government has no business to intervene. After all, those who choose to punt on Marina Bay residences or One Shenton are best left to their own devices. If they suffer a loss, it is their problem.

My fear, Sir, is that the mass and luxury segments of the market, seemingly decoupled now, may rejoin once again. In fact, there is already evidence of filtering effects of the high-end boom into the lower to mid-tier segments. I also understand from property professionals that the primary market rather than the secondary market is all the rage now. This is no longer value investing. I urge the Government to monitor the situation carefully and stand ready to introduce measures to curb excessive price increase which, left unchecked, could only end in grief. The stock market correction we have witnessed in recent days is a grim reminder of the market's self-correcting mechanism and how much chaos it can create not just to computer trading systems but to the savings of people as well. The euphoria has also seeped into the public housing segment, evident by recent press reports of public outrage at people who seemed to have prior notice of upcoming walk-in selection exercises.

Sir, looking at it positively, this is but a reflection of the strong demand underpinned by solid economic gains over the past few years. But we should not dismiss the risks of faulty markets creating the conditions for a painful correction. While HDB exercises strong influence because of its ability to set new flat prices, it should not neglect the pressures that may build up in the resale market. After all, the prices of new HDB flats are influenced by resale flat prices. I urge the Government to keep a close watch on affordability so that public housing flats will not be out of reach to ordinary folks who may already feel envious of the millions some people are reported to have made in their property trading.

With regard to housing for a city of up to six million, I would like to ask the Minister what is the mix of low-rise and high-rise dwelling units the planners are considering and what will be the intended housing density for high-rise living. How can we ensure that we still have sufficient public and green spaces for communal interaction and bonding which are even more critical with an increasingly diverse population?

Land Use Planning

Mr Zainudin Nordin: Sir, the development of Marina Bay is an important thrust in making Singapore a vibrant and global city. Could the Minister update this House on the development of Marina Bay, whether it is on track, and what the future plans are after the successful award of some major developments, such as the BFC and the IRs? With the focus of attention on Marina Bay in the next few years, what would next happen to the existing Central Business District (CBD)? What are the plans for the CBD to ensure that it remains attractive? Would the Government also be developing other areas outside of the city? If so, where would that be?

While we develop various areas, it is equally important to inject life and soul to places. We note efforts have been made in this through the attraction of national and international events. These should continue. To further the effort, we should also look into the evening economy. I would like to ask the Minister whether within the downtown areas there are plans to encourage activities to take place at night so that the areas can remain lively. What are the plans to inject night buzz into the downtown areas?

City in a Garden

Mdm Ho Geok Choo (West Coast): Sir, City in a Garden will incorporate the best features of the world's top cities. But it will come with a tropical twist, lots of water and business charm. Indeed, an exciting vision to bring the buzz into the city.

In response to criticisms about the homogeneity of our HDB flat design, we are beginning to see more variations and colours. In planning for a City in a Garden, it is important that we inculcate a sense of ownership. Many worry that the buzz may give way to the importance of evolving a character of the city. Consultation with the public will ensure that we incorporate the input of Singaporeans, including those living overseas, whose exposure may be a rich source of ideas. With involvement of the stakeholders, we can then continue to build on our strength of a sense of unity amidst variety and diversity of our environment.

Sir, one way we can achieve this is to let residents take ownership of the gardens, fruit trees or waterways adjacent to their homes. We have seen PUB's efforts in this direction to get schools and residents to care for their nearby waterways. If Singaporeans can take shared ownership and responsibility of these gardens and waterways, they will also get to enjoy the benefits of the beauty and the cleanliness of these amenities. I believe that by inculcating this sense of shared ownership and responsibility at the community level, we will also develop our national heartware of community bonding and harmony.

I have the following questions:

(1) How would MND go about engaging the community in taking ownership of their living environment?

(2) What steps will MND embark on in sustaining the efforts of the community towards reaching the vision of a City in a Garden?

(3) What is the budget set aside to translate this island into a City in a Garden and how will this budget be financed?

The Minister for National Development has recently said that, indeed, we can create a global city by working together in meeting the future challenges to provide for population growth and capitalising on economic opportunities while maintaining a good quality of life. How will the group of Singaporeans who will not be able to catch up with this higher standard of living be helped along such that they will not become paupers in the midst of plenty?

The Chairman: Order. I propose to take the break now.

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 again at 3.20 pm.

Sitting accordingly suspended

at 3.07 pm until 3.20 pm.

Sitting resumed at 3.20 pm

[

Mr Speaker in the Chair: ]

Debate in Committee of Supply resumed.

Head T - Ministry of National Development - (cont.)

The Chairman: Head T - Ministry of National Development. Mr Mah.

The Minister for National Development (Mr Mah Bow Tan): Mr Chairman, Sir, a number of Members, including Mr Charles Chong, Dr Lily Neo and Dr Amy Khor, have asked about the 6.5 million population figure and how we can cater to the needs of such a population. I would like to begin my response by addressing this very basic question of why we should prepare for a larger population.

The key messages in the Second Minister for Finance's Budget Speech this year were that we should prepare for future growth and embrace globalisation. Put very simply, without growth, we stagnate and there will be no future. We have done well over the last 40 years. We started off with very little resources, but we built up our infrastructure gradually, grew a strong economy, and improved our social services, such as education, healthcare, housing. Our development supported and, in turn, was supported by a growing population. At the time we became independent, our population was about 1.9 million. Today, we are talking about 4.5 million.

Sir, in the next phase of our development, our population is expected to grow further. Two questions Members may ask:

(1) Do we need to grow our population?

(2) If so, by how much?

My answer to the first question is an unequivocal yes. If we aspire to become a global city, we need a variety or a whole host of activities and facilities that cater to different groups of people. So, if you want hawker food, you will have hawker food, but if you want fine dining, you can have fine dining. If you want cinemas, they are there; if you prefer theatres and concert halls, we have to provide those as well. Or flea markets versus high fashion. So we need different things to cater to different needs and tastes. We need different housing types, transport modes, recreational options and employment opportunities. We need a critical mass of people to support this range of activities. Hence, our population must grow.

The second question then is by how much. How many more people should we add and accommodate in Singapore? As I have explained in this House, we do not have a target population per se , but what we do is to seek to enable and encourage population growth as far as possible. How large a population we can accommodate will depend on many factors, eg, our physical constraints, the quality of life that we want, our success at social integration of immigrants, and so on. If we look at major global cities, eg, London, Paris, New York, Hong Kong, etc, we will find that they all have populations ranging from about seven million to 12 million people. These cities are abuzz with life and vibrancy. Even second-tier cities in China and India are growing rapidly, attracting attention from multinationals, attracting talents and investments.

One example is Chengdu, which the Second Minister for Finance cited in his closing speech on Thursday. I visit Chengdu regularly, at least once a year, in my capacity as the Adviser to the Singapore-Sichuan Trade Investment Committee (SSTIC). My first visit was in 1996. At that time, I found Chengdu to be a rather drab and dreary city. The buildings were rather nondescript, with bicycles everywhere, people wandering and crossing the streets everywhere. Today, it is a booming city. Its people are well-dressed, there are cars everywhere. In fact, I am told that Chengdu is the city with the third largest car population in China. If you go to the shopping street, Chun Xi Lu, which is the equivalent of Orchard Road, you will see all the major brands there, whether it is Hugo Boss, Cartier, Starbucks, even our own Breadtalk,

Old Chang Kee. They are all there. So it is a different Chengdu today supported by a population of 11 million people, all very gung-ho , all wanting to do better and better for themselves and all very optimistic about the future. We have opportunities there in Chengdu and indeed, many of our businessmen have already moved in, large and small. Surbana is developing a major township there. For the first phase, 2,000 flats were all sold out within a week. I visited one of those flats. I was quite amazed to see the quality of the interior decoration of this so-called low to middle-income housing. It had teak parquet flooring, and wallpaper, large screen plasma TVs on the walls, built-in stereo systems, high quality bathroom fittings, things that you seldom see in many Singapore homes. And this is supposed to be in Chengdu, a second-tier city.

The point I am trying to make is that, even in this second-tier city, they are moving and moving fast, and they are attracting talent and investments. Intel, Motorola, Nokia and Ericsson are all there. So are our own businessmen. In fact, when the Prime Minister visited Chengdu and he spoke to the businessmen, many of them said, "Quality of life here is not bad, in fact improving, and in some areas, just as good as Singapore." If we just stay still in Singapore, I think we are making a big mistake because everybody else is moving and moving very fast. This is the reason why we have to continue to push for growth. How fast we grow and how much we grow depends on us really, on how ingenious and resourceful we are. There are many trade-offs that we need to make and it is up to us what kind of trade-offs we want to make.

To give ourselves an idea of the kind of trade-offs we need to make, what kind of impact a larger population will have on our infrastructure, we asked our land use planners and transport planners to come together to work with economic and social agencies to do a review of our Concept Plan. We did the last Concept Plan in 2001. This Concept Plan is our long-term land use plan for Singapore. By long-term, I am talking about 30-40 years. We have asked them to base it on a population of 6.5 million, a population projection which we derive from current demographic trends. The findings show that we have enough land - spare land, vacant land - to cater to such a population, as well as land that we can intensify. So if we take certain steps to make better use of the land, we should be able to comfortably house a population of 6.5 million, if we need to. I will elaborate on some of these plans later but I have asked the Clerk to distribute a copy of a pamphlet which sets out some of these ideas that are in the Concept Plan review.

But as Members have rightly pointed out, physical infrastructure alone is not enough. We also need to be mindful of the social impact of a larger population. I know that this is outside the scope of urban planners, but it is a key consideration. Let me reiterate that this is an important consideration if we are able to grow our population. It is not a new challenge. We have always been an open economy. We have always been an immigrant society. Our population over the years has grown, both through indigenous birth as well as through immigration. As I just said, we grew from 1.9 million around the time of independence to something like 4.5 million today. So there is no reason why we cannot grow further and still remain socially cohesive.

But, we have to plan for our physical development ahead of time, and we have to invest in the necessary infrastructure. This is one of the reasons why the Budget this year has taken some very bold steps. We need to put in place some of these measures now to ensure not only that we have sufficient land but that we are also able to maintain a quality environment.

What are some of these considerations. First, housing. In terms of housing density, we should be able to meet needs quite comfortably, provided we plan our land use carefully. Dr Amy Khor asked what kind of densities. All I can say at this point in time is that our densities will increase. We will need to build taller flats in some places, but it does not have to be so everywhere. We will continue to have a mix of different housing types, both landed as well as non-landed. We also need to make sure that quality housing will come with good amenities, proper greenery, clever use of parks and waterbodies for recreation, so that we can mitigate the impact of a denser environment.

Our HDB heartlands in particular will undergo a makeover, a major regeneration. Members have expressed concern about the affordability of public housing with a larger population. I would like to reaffirm the Government's commitment to support home-ownership for eligible Singaporeans.

Dr Amy Khor is also concerned that the speculative activity in the high-end market will spill over into the public housing market and, therefore, affect affordability. There is no evidence at the moment to support this concern, but we are monitoring the situation. At this point in time, overall housing prices for the whole Singapore market have increased by slightly over 10% last year, whereas the HDB resale price index increased by 2%. That is a comfortable rate of increase which maintains a store of value, but at the same time, does not price it out of reach of many Singaporeans. And HDB flats will continue to remain affordable. Last year, those who bought HDB flats used, on the average, around 20% of their monthly household income to service their housing loans. 20% is actually a very comfortable margin because, by international standards, 30-35% as about the limit for expenditure on housing. So it is well within that norm of 30-35% for the debt servicing ratio. If you think about it further, this 20% that they use, most of them would actually be able to make use of their CPF contributions entirely to service this debt. They do not even have to touch their take-home pay. However, this is a dynamic situation, so we will continue to monitor both the private and also the public housing market to ensure that there is sufficient supply in the pipeline to meet demand. And if it is necessary, we can always release more sites for private development through the Government Land Sales programme or we can step up public housing development if needed.

Another area of concern is transportation. More people means greater transportation needs and we need to accommodate these needs within the land constraints. The only way to do this is to promote more efficient transportation which, by definition, must be public transportation. And we will have to do this by providing a well-connected and comfortable public transport system while, at the same time, managing the growth in car population through both car ownership as well as car usage measures. The Ministry of Transport will be considering these issues when they review land transport policies and plans in the coming year.

Mr Charles Chong also asked about the promotion of energy-efficient and environmentally-friendly buildings. I am happy to inform him that the MND and BCA have formulated a comprehensive plan to promote a wider adoption of green building technology. The plan will consist of regulatory requirements for Green Mark standards as well as incentives, intensifying R&D in this area and also raising awareness of efficient building technology.

He has also asked about our plans to create a "City in a Garden" and Mdm Ho Geok Choo also did the same. We will continue to expand our park infrastructure, build new parks, and enhance existing ones, such as the much loved Singapore Botanic Gardens, the well used East Coast Park and also develop a new park. The Horticulture Park is coming up on the West Coast and three world-class gardens at the heart of Marina Bay, collectively known as the Gardens by the Bay, will come up around 2010.

We also intend to increase our park connectors network which is a very efficient way of leveraging on the use of existing parks. We hope to treble the land from the park connectors from 70 km to 200 km by 2012. Our waterways will also be turned into attractive recreational destinations and PUB is working on this together with NParks.

As Mdm Ho Geok Choo rightly pointed out, this effort must also be a private sector effort. It cannot just be a public sector effort alone. So we will take this public-private sector approach in order to green our city. We have launched community gardening programmes, which some Members may know, are very popular in the HDB heartlands. We will mobilise public support and participation in these programme. We will work with the landscape industry to upgrade their capabilities. So all these efforts will help us realise our vision of making Singapore a distinctive "City in a Garden".

Mr Zainudin asked about Marina Bay, I am pleased to inform him that the Marina Bay development is well on track. There are significant developments going ahead apace, buildings being developed and infrastructure put in place. And in the next five years, you are going to see a very different Marina Bay. It will be totally transformed when Marina Bay Sands Integrated Resort is up and the Marina Bay Financial Centre is ready. We have the new double helix bridge, and the waterfront promenade which will link all these attractions together. It is a necklace of attractions. When they are all ready, Marina Bay will be a totally transformed area, a very exciting prospect for Singaporeans.

For the next phase of development at Marina Bay, even as we complete this phase, we will be focusing on three new areas. The first will be the Central sub-zone which is adjacent to Shenton Way. In other words, we will move the developments from Shenton Way south into Marina South. Secondly, we will continue the development along the bay front because there are still some areas which we can develop. And last but not least, we will start to initiate development to frame the Gardens-by-the-Bay, the ones at Marina South.

The existing CBD will also not be left behind. We plan to enhance public spaces within the CBD. We will improve the walkways and the street furniture, introduce landscaping and attractive lighting. Of course, we will facilitate redevelopment of some of the buildings in the CBD area as well.

What about outside the CBD? Obviously, we are not concentrating our efforts on the CBD or Marina Bay alone. Other than the city centre, we will be opening up new areas to bring more jobs and facilities to people living in the suburban estates. The first area of focus would be Jurong. We intend to facilitate development in the Jurong Regional Centre as the next phase and then the Paya Lebar Sub-Regional Centre after that. Further afield, we hope to be able to do the same in areas like Woodlands.

Mr Zainudin Nordin also spoke about the lack of a night-time buzz. I think it is difficult for the Government to be involved in creating this night-time buzz, but we can do something to facilitate it. We want to make Singapore an attractive city not just by day, but also by night, a 24/7 city. In this respect, there are many things that we can do. URA, together with other agencies are working to see whether we can improve the range and quality of evening activities by improving the infrastructure in this area. We will focus on four main areas - Orchard Road, Singapore River, Bras Basah, Bugis and Marina Bay.

For example, in the Marina Bay, we are looking at two projects. One is called a "Light, Water and Sound" show, where you use the Marina Bay's skyline as the backdrop or centrepiece for the show. The second is an "Aqua Shell", which is a floating stage for live theatre and musical performances.

We are also exploring the feasibility of brightening up the Bras Basah-Bugis area, eg, through "Artvertisements" - advertisements that also double up as art pieces. Maybe this should come under MICA. This is something which should facilitate and encourage in order to create that night-time buzz Mr Zainudin is talking about. We want Singapore to be a key destination in Asia for round-the-clock excitement in entertainment, shopping and dining, all within a safe and secure environment.

3.45 pm

Sir, even as we talk about all these long-term plans, as Mr Charles Chong rightly pointed out, we also need to address some immediate concerns. One of the immediate concerns is this issue of the sand export ban and the disruption in granite supply from Indonesia. Let me, first of all, explain that we import raw materials for our construction industry from many sources. In the case of land sand to make concrete, as opposed to sea sand which we use for reclamation, we have been importing land sand mainly from Indonesia until they banned it recently. We have found alternative sources, so that is no longer an issue.

We have also been importing granite from Indonesia, which our construction industry uses to produce concrete. Unlike land sand for concrete, and sea sand for reclamation, which Indonesia had banned in 2003, the export of granite in the form of aggregates as well as granite dust is not banned.

However, in the last few days, the supply of granite from Indonesia has been disrupted. We understand that the Indonesian authorities have stepped up their checks and detained some barges which were carrying the granite materials to Singapore. Our importers told us that these barges carry granite; they are not carrying sand. It is granite in the form of aggregates or dust. They also say that they have the necessary certificates to prove this, because before they can export, they have to get certification from the various government agencies in Indonesia. They say that they have these certificates; yet their barges have been detained. On our end, we have verified that there has been no land sand from Indonesia since the ban took effect in early February. The reason why the barges were detained, according to our importers, was that it is to prevent the smuggling of sand following the recent ban on sand exports. Our verification in Singapore shows that sand has not been coming from Indonesia since the ban. So we are quite puzzled.

We do not know how long these actions will continue. I have informed Minister for Foreign Affairs, George Yeo, and he has raised the matter with his Indonesian counterpart, Minister Hassan Wirajuda, to seek clarifications on these latest actions by the Indonesian authorities. Minister Hassan told George Yeo that there was no export ban on granite from Indonesia and that he would check what was the reason for the actions being taken that has caused this disruption. The Minister for Trade and Industry Lim Hng Kiang has also spoken to his Indonesian counterpart, Minister Mari Pangestu, who confirmed that there is no export ban on granite and that they are now verifying the situation.

Meanwhile, to make up for any immediate shortfall in the supply and to make sure that work goes on at our construction sites, we are releasing granite aggregates from our stockpile. As part of our on-going efforts to diversify our sources of supply of essential construction materials, we are buying granite aggregates from other sources and encouraging the private sector importers to do the same.

If the situation continues, I expect that the price of granite aggregates will go up due to the higher transportation costs, because we are bringing in this material from alternative sources, which are further away.

As in the case of land sand, as Members may have read, the Government has worked out some co-sharing arrangements with the contractors and concrete suppliers to assist them for the existing public sector projects, and we will do the same for this disruption. The BCA has briefed the industry associations on the situation and what the Government is doing, and what the Government is prepared to do to help the industry.

Sir, let me assure Members that the Government is closely monitoring the disruption in the supply of granite, and is taking necessary measures to ensure that our construction activities will not be disrupted during this period of uncertainty. We will work with the industry and we will do whatever is necessary - find alternative sources, supply from stockpiles, look for alternative methods. This is something that is urgent and necessary for us and, going forward, we must adopt more sustainable construction methodologies. We have got to look for alternative materials. We have to reduce our dependence on concrete and therefore the need for granite and sand. This is the best way to ensure that our long-term plans to develop our infrastructure and to rejuvenate our city will not be derailed. I am confident that this can be done.

Sir, to conclude, our population will grow, both as a stimulant to and a result of economic growth. The challenge we face is how to ensure that the quality of our living environment is not compromised. We want a Singapore that is not just a place that provides jobs and opportunities, but also a quality of life that other major cities will increasingly find hard to maintain, and this is something that will become our competitive advantage. We can do this by planning ahead, by investing in our future needs now. Obviously, we have to address not just future needs but also present challenges, ie, the one that we are facing now in the construction industry. But with resolve, determination, creativity, with the long-term planning approach, we can overcome constraints and we can achieve our vision of making Singapore a livable and attractive city, even with a higher population.

Affordable Housing

Mdm Cynthia Phua (Aljunied): Sir, I fully agree with the Minister's explanation that we must plan forward for growth, if not we stay stagnant. However, Singapore is our homeland. We would like to urge the Ministry to carefully take into consideration the concerns of Singaporeans in detailing the planning parameters for our limited urban land. I would also like to urge the Ministry to let our people be involved and have the answers in the drafting of the planning parameters and make the process transparent, eg, to answer some of these questions.

What do we mean when we say we aim to have an "endearing home, a global city"? And what are the global standards we set to ensure that our quality of life is comfortable to our people? Do we have in mind which country or city we hope to emulate for the population parameter of 6.5 million? How much space can we afford to provide for each resident and each family? And what is the green lung space that each citizen could have? Do we build more Sentosa Coves where our precious seafronts are taken up for premium housing instead of for the general public?

I feel that we must keep in mind the fact that the housing needs of our citizens are changing in a more diverse manner. With the improvement of overall education standard and change in socio-economic status, there is an increase in the number of singles, single parents and smaller families. We must also not forget the numbers of foreigners that are streaming in each year. With the diverse categories of people, each with their own different housing needs, the Ministry must draw up a long-term plan to manage the competing demands of the housing needs of residents. What measures do we have in place to ensure that there is enough land for public housing, and ensure that it continues to be affordable for those who need it? Will there be a change in the present policy to provide public housing up to 90% of our population? Will there be a shift in the policy in view of the diverse population having very different needs? Would we move to the private sector to provide the top 50th percentile of our population income level? Or will the Ministry review its policy of affordability to take into account the bottom 20th percentile of the population income level instead of the standard measurement at the 30th percentile income level?

Presently, in view of the economic and property cycle, the housing authority is unable to fine-tune the supply to meet the demands for each sector of the population. For example, presently, there are limited 2- and 3-room flats for residents who wish to downgrade, especially elderly residents and smaller families.

( In Mandarin ): [For vernacular speech, please refer to Appendix A.] Sir, I hope that the HDB will review its policy to also provide subsidised loans to second-time buyers who wish to downgrade to a smaller unit. The flat buyers should be given the flexibility to decide whether to upgrade to a bigger unit or downgrade to a smaller flat.

In view of changing housing needs, HDB should constantly try to revise and improve its policy and processes to ensure that the housing needs of the nation are largely met. Therefore, I urge that the HDB consider exercising greater flexibility in its policy, so as to ensure that HDB is in tune with changing preferences.

( In English ): Another issue concerns the elderly. How can they unlock the value of their property? This will help those who require cash to maintain their health and lifestyle as they grow older. I am going to make a bold suggestion. We have the reverse mortgage of NTUC Income. The take-up rate is low and the understanding is also not there. Can the HDB, besides providing mortgage loan, now provide reverse mortgage loan for our senior citizens who need to cash out?

*Cols. 2627-2628.

Mr Zainudin Nordin: Sir, the last economic crisis that our country experienced had unearthed quite a number of problems related to housing, namely, the cost of owning flats, and the availability of rental flats in Singapore. This could be seen by the rising number of demand for rental flats and more flats being repossessed than before, and more people are in arrears of their instalment payments for their flats.

Sir, the new initiatives of our Government to increase the supply of smaller flats and rental flats are welcomed by Singaporeans. May I ask the Ministry to update the House on the progress of the effort?

With the rapid economic growth, the cost of building new flats and infrastructure is expected to rise. What impact will this have on the cost of new public housing? Will the change to the Land Acquisition Act be translated to higher cost of public housing too?

Sir, we have also seen an increase in demand for studio apartments for senior citizens recently. The two projects that have been launched in Bishan and Tampines have had a very good response. What are the long-term strategies and plans to provide suitable and affordable housing for senior citizens in Singapore? While the number of citizens who have their flats repossessed by banks and HDB is still small, the number is higher than before. What is being done to assist families who are in such a predicament for alternative housing? And may I also know how effective is the HLE?

Public Housing

Dr Loo Choon Yong (Nominated Member): Sir, I intended to speak about the speculative activities spilling over to public housing, but the Minister had anticipated and had given able and adequate reassurance to this House.

Housing for Singles

Ms Irene Ng Phek Hoong: Sir, the opening of new HDB flats to singles above 35 was for two reasons. First, it is always stressed that all Singapore citizens should have access to affordable housing and medical care. Why should we withhold subsidised housing for singles? It is like telling singles that they cannot go to subsidised wards in hospitals but to Class A and private hospitals only.

Second, working singles, like married couples, pay taxes which are used to subsidise HDB flats. If HDB wants to give priority to families for new flats, then can we do this through a differentiated subsidy? For instance, a higher subsidy for families and lower one for singles, rather than completely blocking out singles from buying any subsidised HDB flats.

Third, social inclusion. Singles, especially the knowledge workers, are a very mobile lot and can move to any other country which welcomes them. Socially, we also want to make sure that they have a stake in Singapore and to enhance their efforts, the way we do for families through their new subsidised HDB flats. Sir, it has often been remarked that Singapore men propose marriage to their girlfriends by asking, "Want to buy a HDB flat?" And when they divorce, and we know that an increasing number of couples do as the divorce rate is rising, they say to each other, "Okay, sell our HDB flat, split up."

4.00 pm

Sir, my point is that the HDB's so-called pro-family policy does not necessarily reduce the number of singles. In fact, I wonder whether it has any effect at all beyond forcing singles to live unhappily with their married siblings and parents in cramped HDB flats. In fact, in 1990, 14.1% of those aged 35-44 were singles. Despite HDB's pro-family policy, the figure rose to 19.4% in 2005, and we cannot argue that there will be more if there were no HDB pro-family policy as there is no evidence to that effect. Sir, I do not believe there will be a sudden spike in the percentage of singles if HDB allows them to buy new flats.

There are many reasons why singles are not married - long working hours, high expectations and so on - but not being able to buy a new HDB flat is not one of them.

HDB Bank Loans

Mr Michael Palmer (Pasir Ris-Punggol): Sir, as of 1st January 2003, the HDB home mortgage market was liberalised. The Ministry announced that HDB would no longer offer market rate loans but instead would transfer the service to our financial institutions. HDB flat buyers who are either not eligible for an HDB concessionary loan or who choose to take a private loan may apply for a home loan from any bank or financial institution licensed by the MAS. In addition, those buyers that have existing market rate loans with the HDB could re-finance their mortgages.

In his speech in this House on the Second Reading of the Housing and Development (Amendment) Bill on 31st October 2002, the Minister for National Development said, and I quote:

"Some Members have previously expressed concern that the provision of market loans by banks, instead of HDB, is in effect a withdrawal by Government of its social safety net. They see HDB as generally being more sympathetic towards flat owners in arrears, and will not repossess flats as a last resort. On the other hand, they perceive banks as being less forbearing, as they are profit-driven. Let me reiterate that there is no change in the Government's commitment to the provision of basic housing in the form of subsidised HDB flats. We are not touching our basic housing safety net. Our housing subsidies have enabled the vast majority of Singaporeans to own their own homes. Concessionary loans are a key instrument to promote home ownership. Hence, the Government will continue to provide HDB loans at concessionary rates to eligible buyers. We will continue to maintain our home ownership policy by providing subsidised loans for subsidised flats so that eligible Singaporeans can continue to afford good quality public housing.

However, with bank origination of market rate loans, the Government is indeed pulling back the safety net at the fringes. But this will only apply to those who do not need extra help in the first place. They are either financially better off, or those who already own an HDB flat."

Three to four years on, we are beginning to see the effects of this liberalisation of the HDB home mortgage market. Interest rates are no longer what they used to be and the value of the home has also decreased in some areas. Those that are being affected are not those at the fringe who do not need extra help. They are certainly not financially better off.

In a recent answer to a question posed in this House, the Parliamentary Secretary for the Ministry said that as at end 2006, of the 89,000 HDB flats financed by bank loans, 895 mortgagee sales of flats financed by bank loans had been completed. He went on to say that the rate of repossession was about 60 flats a month but that was on the decline.

It is, therefore, timely that the Minister update us on the following: What steps has the HDB put in place to better prepare existing or potential borrowers from banks of the risk of taking a bank loan and how to manage their debt? What steps has the HDB put in place to reduce the probability of borrowers over-extending themselves with the banks? What measures will the HDB take to assist families who have been displaced by poor judgement taking bank loans and as a result, over-extending themselves? Is the HDB aware of the fact that many banks are not willing to grant loans, a loan of less than $100,000, to buyers and, therefore, some buyers are unable to get loans from the banks unless they borrow more than $100,000? If so, what is HDB's position in this regard? Is this causing buyers to borrow more than they can afford? What will HDB do for buyers who do not qualify for both HDB concessionary loans and bank loans? At the end of the day, we cannot ignore the fact that they will obtain mortgage from the HDB or a bank when a person buys an HDB flat, ie, public housing. He does not expect to subject to same rigours as when he buys public housing.

Mr Mah Bow Tan: Mr Chairman, Sir, before I answer the specific questions posed by the Members on the various HDB policies, let me just go back to the earlier answer that I gave concerning our efforts to reach the top of the premier league of global cities. And, here, I want to say that even as we are striving for that goal, I am proud that as far as our public housing is concerned, I believe that we are up there with the best in the world, with possibly the highest home ownership rate in the world. If you cast your mind back, considering that less than 50 years ago, most Singaporeans were living in overcrowded slums, squatter colonies in the city, I think you will agree with me that it is quite a remarkable achievement.

So when Members raised concerns about whether social stability will be affected by a larger population and more immigration, I can say with quite a high degree of confidence that it will not. One of the reasons for my confidence is our public housing programme. It is a programme that has not only given Singaporeans a roof over their heads but it has also provided Singaporeans with an asset and a physical stake in the nation, and successive generations of Singaporeans are able to own a piece of Singapore and call it home.

Indeed, the common experience of HDB living has played a key role in the development of the collective Singapore identity. Each HDB estate is a mini Singapore. It has residents of different races, languages, and religions living and interacting as neighbours. We learn to understand one another, and we relate to one another through this common experience. And this identity is important for us, especially as we face the challenges of globalisation and even as we welcome more immigrants to Singapore. Unless we do so, some of these immigrants will live with us in our HDB estates. They will be introduced to our local food, the local lingo, and local habits, both good and bad habits unfortunately. Their children will go to our local schools and they will mix with Singaporeans of all races. Over time, some of them will become citizens, do national service and raise Singapore families. So the cycle goes on, just as many of us were born and bred here when our forefathers came to this land as fresh immigrants from China, India and other parts of Asia and beyond.

Sir, many Members, including Mdm Cynthia Phua, Mr Zainudin Nordin and others, are worried and expressed concerns about how we are going to keep public housing affordable. Are we going to keep to our policy of housing as many Singaporeans as possible in HDB estates, especially when we are going to compete for limited housing resources? Let me just categorically state upfront that, going forward, public housing remains a key policy instrument to meet two major objectives. The first objective is obviously to meet the housing needs of the majority of the population and that will remain. The second objective is to provide a social safety net for lower income Singaporeans. Together with the CPF scheme, together with the medical healthcare support system and now together with Workfare, public housing will be one of the key pillars of our social security framework.

Let me turn to the specific questions about HDB policies, concessionary loans, housing grant, resale levy, rental flats, singles, elderly and so on. Let me try and put all these individual policies into a coherent framework, to put into context so that some of these individual policies start to make some sense.

In gist, the public housing programme serves to cater to the different housing needs of different groups of Singaporeans over the course of their lifetime. First, we meet the needs of the young couple who want a roof over their heads, and their first flat must be affordable and preferably near their parents. Next, as their income level rises and as the number of family members increases, they may want to upgrade to a larger home. Then, finally, as they grow old and their children get married and start their own families, they need cash for their retirement needs. So this is the lifecycle framework for public housing.

Let me elaborate on each of them. First, home ownership for first-timer families. To help young couples set up their first home, the Government provides subsidies in two ways, depending on the type of flat they buy. If they buy a new flat, the subsidy is built into the price of the flat. In other words, the flat is priced below its market price. Those who prefer to buy a resale flat because of location or size, the type of flat or they want it more urgently, they can obtain a CPF housing grant, which at the moment stands at between $30,000 to $40,000. In addition, the Government provides an additional CPF housing grant of between $5,000 to $20,000 for lower income households, ie, those defined as earning up to $3,000 a month. At the end of January 2007, more than 2,000 households have benefited from the additional housing grant. Over and above all these subsidies, the Government also helps first-time flat buyers by providing them with a subsidised mortgage financing loan in the form of an HDB concessionary loan. So if you take all these together - the housing subsidy and the concessionary loan - first-time flat buyers who purchased flats from HDB last year, as I indicated in the House just now, would use, on average, about 20% of their monthly household income to service their housing loans and more than 70% of those who purchase HDB flat can service their housing loans entirely from their CPF contributions. In other words, they do not have to touch their take-home pay at all.

Will affordability be affected if we have a larger population? Mdm Cynthia Phua asked this question. Our planners have concluded that we will have enough land for housing this number of people if we have to. Let me also assure her that at the same time, we will calibrate our housing subsidies such that up to 90% of Singaporeans can continue to afford a basic HDB flat. In other words, there is no change in our HDB home ownership policy. In addition, we will also not compromise on the quality of the HDB heartlands. This is where most of our people live and we will make sure that they will continue to live in an environment that is of the highest quality. So it is not just affordable but it is of the highest quality. I will leave my Minister of State, Ms Grace Fu, to elaborate on our new urban regeneration plans in her speech later on. So that was about the young family, the one who started off in life - first, HDB flat, housing subsidy, concessionary loan.

Next, I want to talk about social mobility for upgraders. We recognise that the housing needs of families will change over time. Their children grow older and there will be increasing demand for space within the home. So to help families upgrade to a larger flat, HDB provides eligible families with another housing subsidy in the form of a second concessionary loan. Flat buyers can also enjoy a second housing subsidy if they choose to buy a second subsidised flat from HDB but this second bite, so called second bite for upgraders, would be a smaller bite because they would be subject to the payment of a resale levy. This is to ensure that the Government's housing budget is skewed towards more help for first-timers who are seeking to set up their first homes. These first two objectives, ie, purchase of a first flat (the home ownership objective) and enabling them to improve themselves, upgrade if they need to (the social mobility objective) - collectively, help the household to accumulate housing equity over their lifetime which sets the stage for the third objective, which is monetisation in old age. This third objective has become increasingly important in the light of our rapidly ageing society.

So home ownership has provided Singaporeans with a valuable asset in the form of the HDB flats. How valuable? The Department of Statistics (DOS) did a study in 2005 and they found that HDB households on the average had about $154,000 in net equity. Net equity means the value of their assets minus any outstanding loan that is due, and this equity is captured within their HDB flat. We have put in place several policies to help HDB residents unlock this value that is stored in their flat, and I will elaborate on some of these options in my later replies. They can either cash out or move to a smaller flat, HDB studio apartment, or sub-let their rooms, etc.

4.15 pm

But we have also allowed flat owners to sublet their entire flats. This relaxation was done several years ago. Under certain conditions, they can sublet their entire flats. I would like to inform Members that we will be further relaxing some of these conditions. Currently, households have to stay in their flats for either five or 10 years, depending on whether they have an existing HDB loan or not before they can sublet their flats. With immediate effect, HDB will reduce the minimum occupation period for subletting to five years for a subsidised flat and three years if the flat was purchased without a housing subsidy.

Sir, while we have put in place a comprehensive public housing framework to cater to the changing needs of Singaporeans over their lifetime, how it benefits each household obviously depends on the individual choices and the judgement that they have made. As Mr Michael Palmer mentioned just now, whether they make right choices, whether it is a right judgement, poor judgement, etc, I would reply to him in greater detail later on.

But I think we have all seen in our meet-the-people sessions how families end up homeless, and come to us for help. When we check and trace their records, we will find that they have bought and sold two, sometimes, three, and in a few cases, more than flats. They bought and sold HDB flats when times were good, they made a lot of money. Instead of saving it, they went on a spending spree. Then they took on larger mortgages for subsequent flats, and at the end, when the musical chair stopped, property market took a downturn, many of them found themselves unable to service their mortgage loans.

This is a problem with some families. How do we help them? I think the starting point is that we have got to keep on advising and educating them - advising them that before you buy a HDB flat, it is a big ticket item, it is a long-term financial commitment, think carefully, exercise prudence, buy a flat within your means. This is a message that I have sent out, and I mentioned in the House many, many times. But I think that is not enough. We will have to put in place measures at the HDB end to also ensure that they exercise prudence and if they do not exercise it, we will take certain steps to ensure that they do not over-commit.

So to respond to Mr Michael Palmer as to what HDB is doing, we have offered financial counselling to flat buyers since 2002. We started credit assessment of HDB loans since 1997. From January this year, we will be requiring home flat buyers to produce a home loan eligibility (HLE) letter from HDB, or if you are borrowing from the banks, a letter of offer before they are allowed to proceed with their purchases. So before they buy and commit, and sign on the dotted line, they must know exactly how much they can borrow and what are their repayments like, and work out very carefully their commitments before they plunge in. This will help, I believe, to ensure that flat buyers do not over-commit when they are unable to afford it.

Sir, let me now turn to the issue of housing subsidies. Many Members have asked for greater allocation of subsidies to various groups of people. I acknowledge that, yes, there are people who are in special needs. But in general, if we are making public policy, we have to recognise that, on the one hand, we want to help, but, on the other hand, there is a limit to the amount of subsidies that the Government is able to provide. And more importantly, if we overdo this, if we over provide subsidies and give to people who actually should not be entitled to such subsidies, I think we undermine some of the larger public housing objectives that I outlined earlier.

So what is our general philosophy on subsidies? First, it is to encourage family formation and personal responsibility. We provide more housing support for first-timers versus subsequent flat buyers. First-timers who have not enjoyed any subsidies will receive more subsidies than those who are buying for the second or third time. Of course, there are certain cases where, for example, first-timers marry second-timers, etc. In such cases, we will have to tweak the situation such that if one party has already enjoyed the housing subsidy, the household would still enjoy a subsidy in the form of a grant, but instead of the full grant, he will get only half the grant.

Ms Irene Ng suggests that we relax the rules on the sale of new flats for singles. In the same spirit of giving more to those who need it more, we give more subsidies to families as opposed to singles. Why? Because families have more pressing housing needs. Yes, singles would also need housing, and that is the reason why we have, over the years, relaxed many of the rules for singles. Those who are aged 35 and above are allowed to buy resale flats. Those who earn up to $3,000 a month are eligible for single's grant of $11,000.

But why resale flats, why not new flats, Ms Irene Ng asked. For the same reason that they get a single's grant and not a family grant. In other words, the level of subsidy for new flats is much higher, and it is for a family unit. She asked why we cannot have differential pricing where you sell a new flat to a single at a different price. In cases where HDB is able to unbundle the housing subsidy from the new flat, it has actually made them available to singles. Recently, HDB released a batch of 250 unsold flats for sale as resale flats on the open market. For these flats, first-timer singles can apply for them and also make use of the single's grant to purchase these flats. So it is possible. But for the general stock of new flats, we are not able to have this differential pricing formula at the moment. But where we are able to do so, yes, singles will be able to continue to enjoy the subsidy and, at the same time, buy themselves a new flat.

Mdm Cynthia Phua asked about giving downgraders a concessionary loan. The policy is that second-timer households that are moving naturally or downgrading will not enjoy the second concessionary loan. Why? Because, generally, when they do so, they are unlocking the value from their first flat and they actually have quite a significant proceed from the sale which can then be used to finance the purchase of their new flat. So if you are selling your first flat and you have enough for your second flat, what is the rationale for us to provide the second concessionary loan. But there are downgraders who are facing financial difficulty. I recognise that. For these cases, HDB will grant concessionary loans to them on a case-by-case basis upon appeal. We have to do this because if we change our policy, as the Member wants us to do, then in fact most of the people who are either downgrading or moving naturally will be benefiting from something which they do not need to benefit from. But where there is a need, where the case is a compelling one, and we look at every case, HDB will grant a second concessionary loan, and even a third one, sometimes, even a fourth one, and it has been done before.

Similarly, those who have tried or unable to secure a bank loan, for whatever reason, can also apply for a concessionary loan from HDB. I am aware, as Mr Michael Palmer pointed out, that some banks may not be willing to grant mortgage loans below a certain quantum. HDB does check and consult with the various banks and financial houses, and they are told that it is possible for flat buyers to secure mortgage loans which are lower than $100,000 - in fact, I am told, as low as $40,000. So it depends on the banks and it depends on the credit worthiness of the individual and the individual circumstances. But we will have to leave this to the banks.

Sir, the point about the concessionary loan and the bank loan is that those who want a basic first flat, the first timers, and even the second timers who are upgrading, will continue to enjoy the concessionary loan. That will not be changed, and this is what I said when I spoke about the concessionary loan in this House. But those who require bank loans are those who are getting market rate loans in the past - those who have high net worth, those who have private property, and so on. This is still the situation that, as far as basic housing is concerned, as far as the first house and the second house are concerned, we will not change our policy on providing concessionary loans for eligible Singaporeans.

Let me now touch on Members' questions about the HDB building programme and the supply and demand for public housing. I think Members, including Mr Zainudin Nordin and Mdm Cynthia Phua, asked about housing for the elderly singles, and so on. Let me just briefly inform the House that we are making good progress with clearing our stock of unsold flats. We currently have about 4,000 to 5,000 unsold flats available for sale. This is a far cry from the 20,000-over flats that we had in the past.

On smaller flats, we are now building smaller flats. We started building smaller flats under the BTO programme a few years ago, starting with the 3-room flats. We have offered about 1,000 of such 3-room flats up to now. We are going to build 2-room flats and, to date, we have launched for sale about 270 2-room flats. We have also launched about 1,400 studio apartments for elderly citizens so far. We are going to launch some more in the course of the next few years. For example, in 2007, we intend to launch 4,000 new HDB flats and half of 4,000 will be the smaller flats - the studio apartments, 2-room and 3-room flats.

Let me just make one other point about building of flats in mature estates. I wanted to make this point because Members of the House have raised this with me and I have also received many letters and emails about young couples wanting new flats in mature HDB estates. I want to make the point that we cannot build the new flats in the area of their choice all the time. This is why I mentioned earlier that first-timer young couples should also be looking at resale flats, not just new flats. This is important because we do not have space to build many new flats in mature estates, and if we try to over build new flats, then I think we will be storing problems for ourselves later. So I would like to urge young couples to also look at HDB resale flats as a first home for them and make good use of the housing grants that the Government is giving to them.

One final announcement I want to make is on DBSS, that is, the Design, Build and Sell Scheme. We launched the first one in Tampines. I think Mr Zainudin Nordin mentioned that it was very successful and, yes, it was. Are we building anymore? Yes, we will do so. We will launch more new sites in 2007 and the next site is scheduled to be in Kallang, Whampoa.

Sir, in conclusion, let me reiterate that we are well on track, in terms of public housing to prepare Singapore for the future. I want to assure Members that we remain committed to provide flat buyers with a range of housing options. We also want to commit that these flats would remain affordable. There would be flats that meet their specific needs and budgets. We would also work with Singaporeans to make this small island nation of ours their best home.

Rejuvenation of HDB Estates

Dr Muhammad Faishal Ibrahim (Marine Parade): Sir, the Minister has briefed the House on plans to rejuvenate HDB housing estates. Many of my constituents are excited about this makeover plan. This would change the way we live, work and play. Ultimately, I believe this would certainly enhance the attractiveness of our heartlands and improve the quality of life for all. May I ask the Minister on the timeline for this makeover? And will this makeover also involve other land users within the HDB housing estates? Related to the issue of rejuvenation of HDB estates, in recent years, we have seen changes in the retail landscape in a few of our HDB towns.

For example, we have seen the changes in the Toa Payoh Town Centre. We have also seen the NTUC Hypermarket in Ang Mo Kio. In Tampines, we have seen the emergence of new retail concepts in Singapore, with the development of IKEA, Courts and the upcoming Giant Hypermarket which is opening soon.

4.30 pm

The renewal of town centre retail landscape and the new retail forms in Tampines have given shoppers in Singapore's heartland an up-to-date retail environment and new options for them to do their shopping. While these changes have given the shoppers additional and more attractive as well as entertaining shopping destinations, it will likely affect the shoppers' patronage pattern in Singapore. In a small city-state like Singapore with an efficient transport system, the attraction of newer, bigger and up-to-date retail centres which are easily accessible by public and private transport are likely to dominate the shoppers' choice of retail destinations. Shoppers may give their shops at the neighbourhood centre a miss for the retail centres in this related town centre and new retail forms which are able to provide a large variety of goods and services, as well as a more entertaining shopping experience.

Currently, we have already seen some shops in the neighbourhood centres having problems in attracting shoppers within their catchment. There are arguments which direct the problem to the shopowners who are not able to keep up with the changes in the expectation of the shoppers. During my walkabouts, I am surprised to observe that a few of the shopowners are operating the same way they used to operate a few decades ago. I believe that many of the MPs have been working closely with their merchant associations to liven up the area to enhance their attractiveness. However, we cannot deny that there is a limit to the amount of money and time a shopper has in his or her resource allocation. Thus, a shopper has to make a choice in getting his items or in his search for entertaining shopping destinations.

May I ask the Minister on how will the makeover of HDB town centres and insertion of new retail concepts like IKEA, Courts and Giant affect the retail landscape in a typical HDB housing estate? In particular, how will this affect the retail landscape in the neighbourhood centre? Will the HDB be changing the retail planning parameters in its neighbourhood commercial space allocation? Will there be any exit strategy for these neighbourhood shopkeepers who would be competing with these new retail centres and big superstores? Are there any efforts to educate HDB neighbourhood centre shopowners on the business strategy in preparation for the changes in the retail landscape?

In its attempt to rejuvenate the HDB estates, I would like to suggest that the HDB relook at the relevance and adequacy of the neighbourhood retail facilities in a typical HDB neighbourhood. If required, we should redevelop existing neighbourhood centres which have little relevance during the current context. We have seen changes in the demographics of residents in the different HDB estates in the last few decades. I would also like to suggest that the HDB carries out a retail space needs survey and analysis to better understand the expectations of the residents with regard to the demand of shopping facilities in the different towns and neighbourhood centres.

Sir, in addition to our existing shopping landscape, the remaking of Orchard Road, the upcoming Integrated Resort in Marina Bay and new retail developments in the downtown area will provide an exciting and entertaining shopping destination in the central area. I believe that an exciting and vibrant retail landscape in the heartlands will add to the feast of shopping destinations for Singaporeans in this city-state of ours.

Lift Upgrading Programme

Mr Charles Chong: Sir, the Government has made a commitment to complete the Lift Upgrading Programme for all eligible HDB blocks, including blocks in Opposition-held constituencies by 2014. As this 2014 commitment is only applicable to eligible blocks, I would like to seek clarification from the Minister as to how many blocks are currently classified as being ineligible and, therefore, may not have their lifts upgraded by 2014.

Could the Minister also give us an update on the number of blocks that have been upgraded by the HDB and Town Councils since the commencement of the Lift Upgrading Programme? How many blocks have yet to be completed, and is the original programme running on schedule, such that the 2014 deadline will be met? Could the Minister also tell us if the Lift Upgrading Programme in Potong Pasir is progressing as scheduled, as promised by the MP during the last general elections? If I recall correctly, the promise was that all blocks in Potong Pasir will have their lifts upgraded within five years.

Mr Wee Siew Kim (Ang Mo Kio): Mr Chairman, Sir, the Lift Upgrading Programme provides lifts on every level and additional benefits, such as decorative tiles, security cameras, planters and better lighting. I would like to request that the Ministry consider implementing the cost cap to qualify for the LUP on a per-precinct basis, rather than on a per-unit basis. The Minister could consider using the cost cap per benefiting unit to identify the blocks that are eligible for LUP. After this, the cost could be looked at from an accumulated precinct-wide basis so that the blocks in a particular precinct would be treated similarly for the features that they will have. For example, the blocks in a single precinct will have different designs for point blocks, segmented blocks, common corridor blocks, etc. Because cost is capped for each benefiting unit in the block, the cost per block is fixed. The Minister says that when there is enough money to tile the lobbies of some blocks but not the others, there would be a stark difference between the tiled blocks versus the untiled blocks after the upgrading. We will also not want a situation that, due to this anomaly, all blocks are deprived of tiles. Hence, this suggestion that the cost cap, once the eligibility of the blocks has been determined, be based on a precinct-wide aggregate basis.

Ms Lee Bee Wah (Ang Mo Kio): Sir, may I take the cuts together, please?

The Chairman: Yes, please.

Ms Lee Bee Wah: Sir, the very successful introduction of the Lift Upgrading Programme for HDB is a hallmark of the PAP in its management of public housing in the heartlands. The benefits to the residents more than compensated for the cost that the flat owners have to pay, taking into account all the subsidies from the HDB and the Town Councils. Because of these, I have to ask the Minister what can his Ministry do to put the LUP on an even faster track.

Since the new LUP was launched in 2001, the residents in Nee Soon South are waiting for their turn. Without fail, at every house visit, they will ask me when are they getting their lifts upgraded. The current pattern for upgrading appears to be a sprinkling here and there and, somehow, the showers do not fall on Nee Soon South. I feel that there should at least be an indicative date given for these homeowners. This will enable them to make informed decisions about their future and not leave them in a limbo.

Furthermore, with the rising activities in our construction industry, many residents also fear that this will have an impact on the construction cost. They are concerned that, should there be an undue delay in LUP, what if the cost escalates? Will HDB and the Town Council raise their subsidies so that my residents will not be penalised? As it is, the price of readymix concrete has gone up spirally recently.

Water Seepage in HDB Flats

Next, I would like to raise another problem that very often crops up too when I go on house visits. And this is about leaks in their HDB flats. This is apparently a common problem, especially for older flats. In some instances, water also seeps through the external walls and windows. I am currently carrying out a survey of all the HDB blocks in Nee Soon South to ascertain the extent of the problem. Finding the leak is one problem. Getting to the source of the water and the right method of repair is the other. Very often, the leaks come back soon after the Town Council has repaired it. In some cases, it has also caused tension or quarrels among the neighbours, ie, those upstairs and downstairs. I am sure my other parliamentary colleagues too would have faced these problems. I hope the Minister can share with this House an overview of the situation in Singapore and whether the Ministry will consider rolling out a national programme to tackle the leaks so that it can be more cost effective to carry out such works on a larger scale.

On this note also, it would be good to know if the HDB carries out any R&D to determine how it can improve on the situation, perhaps through the use of better water-proofing materials, better sealants for windows, detailings, etc, to minimise the occurrence of water seepages.

The Minister of State for National Development (Ms Grace Fu Hai Yien): My Minister has informed the House on how we have comprehensively and systematically planned for our long-term land-use needs. This includes an investment plan to sustain and upgrade the quality of our living environment so that Singapore remains a home of choice for our people.

The Minister of State for National Development (Ms Grace Fu Hai Yien): 4.36 pm

With some of our flats reaching 40 to 50 years old over the coming years, it is timely for us to carry out total redevelopment of some of our HDB heartlands. The transformation of our older estates to a new generation of housing estates will raise HDB living to new heights. Given the scale and scope of such a programme, it is estimated to cost the Government about $1 billion a year when the programme is in full swing. In this new generation estate, not only will we adopt ideas on sustainable development, we will incorporate features that enhance our living experience. We will do so without compromising our commitment to maintain affordable public housing. This will not be just a HDB initiative. It will incorporate ideas and technologies from agencies, such as URA, PUB, NParks, LTA, NEA, and so on. Construction of this new-generation public housing estate in the Dawson area of Queenstown is expected to commence within three to four years.

Let me give you a glimpse of what this new-generation HDB housing will be like.

To begin, you will live in a park-like environment. We call this “Housing in a Park”, which mirrors our vision for Singapore as a “City in a Garden”. Looking out from your window, you will see lush greenery and landscaping, including sky gardens in neighbouring blocks. Depending on where you live, you may also enjoy water features, play areas and water-sensitive urban features. Car parks will be built beneath the blocks, so that more greenery and open spaces are available at ground level. With the car park podiums integrated with the blocks, you can walk to your cars, sheltered from the elements of the weather. In addition, the estates will be integrated with transportation nodes, such that there is accessibility to buses or trains. You will also find it easy to move around your estate using integrated covered linkways in a barrier-free environment. Your flat will adopt universal design features which enable residents to age-in-place. There will be environmentally-friendly features to save water and energy. Recycling will be very convenient with centralised chutes. Your regenerated estate will also retain some of its heritage and identity that are associated with the area.

One final point is this. The new generation of HDB estates will be built to encourage greater community participation and ownership. For example, you and your neighbours may collectively decide on what communal facilities to have. More spaces for interaction will also be provided to encourage social integration. The agencies are currently working together on the feasibility of the new ideas. HDB will launch a public exhibition later this year to showcase the new concepts and invite public feedback. Besides the new heartland regeneration programme, the Government remains committed to upgrading and maintaining our existing HDB estates so that they meet the needs of the residents.

Let me now update Members on the progress of the Lift Upgrading Programme (LUP). The Government has committed to provide lifts stopping on every floor for eligible blocks by 2014. We have made good progress. As at January this year, we have selected around 3,000 blocks for lift upgrading. This is more than half of the 5,300 blocks currently eligible for lift upgrading. We will maintain this pace so that all eligible blocks will have their lifts stop on every floor by 2014.

Mr Charles Chong has asked for the number of blocks that are not eligible for lift upgrading. My Ministry had set a cost cap of $30,000 per benefitting unit as eligibility criterion for the LUP. The purpose of the cost cap is to maximise the LUP budget and to allow as many residents to benefit from the programme as possible. The cost cap is necessary because the cost of lift upgrading can be very expensive, and it does not make sense to provide lift upgrading at any cost. At the present juncture, there are about 200 blocks whose LUP costs exceed the cost cap.

HDB will look at new technology and methods to bring down the costs so that more blocks can have their lifts upgraded. HDB has made significant progress in finding new solutions. In February last year, HDB introduced the use of machine-roomless lifts, lighter materials for lift shafts and new procurement methods to bring down the costs. This allowed 250 blocks that previously exceeded the cost cap to qualify.

In November last year, we announced new lift solutions again, such as shaftless lifts, smaller lifts suitable for low-rise blocks, and reconfigured lift access for blocks with internal voids. That allowed another 520 blocks to qualify for LUP. With these solutions, 96% of HDB blocks without full lift access are eligible. HDB will continue to pursue cost-effective solutions.

4.45 pm

Mr Wee Siew Kim suggested costing the blocks in the precinct on a shared basis so that the costs of the more expensive blocks can be shared with the cheaper blocks. While the intent of this approach may be good, it would not be fair. Certain block configurations, such as segmented blocks where a new lift shaft would benefit only two units per floor, are much more expensive to upgrade compared to a standard block with common corridors. The difference can be as large as two to three times more. It would not be fair for the residents of standard blocks to cross-subsidise the segmented blocks.

We are upgrading our lifts as quickly as we can. Our original target was to complete lift upgrading by 2019 and this was just for high-rise blocks. We have brought the target for completion forward to 2014, and have included an additional 800 low-rise blocks to the number. We have correspondingly increased the budget to cater to the accelerated pace of lift upgrading, from $410 million for FY2004 precincts to $630 million for FY2006 precincts. Taking into account the capacity of the construction industry, as Ms Lee has rightly put, and the funding involved, I believe that 2014 is a realistic target.

Mr Charles Chong has asked about the progress of lift upgrading in Potong Pasir. This issue has been discussed quite extensively in this House. I think the question is probably best answered by Mr Chiam at another time. In the interest of time, I will not go into that here.

Mr Charles Chong has also asked about Town Councils’ maintenance of estates so that they do not degenerate into slums. My Ministry shares that concern. It is for this reason that we have required Town Councils to build up their sinking funds over the years for the essential cyclical maintenance of their estates. These works include the replacement of roofing systems, water tanks and electrical systems, and repainting of blocks. HDB has issued guidelines to Town Councils for the recommended cyclical replacement schedule for these items.

Ms Lee Bee Wah asked for a nation-wide programme to address the problem of water seepage. MND is studying the feasibility of a more structured and systematic programme, as suggested.

In conclusion, we have a vision to bring public housing to new heights in Singapore, thus providing a first-class living environment for the 80% of Singaporeans who live in HDB estates. By making our HDB heartlands distinctive, attractive and comfortable, we can make Singapore a great place to live, work and play, and the best home for every Singaporean.

Housing for the Elderly

Ms Irene Ng Phek Hoong: Madam, we need to provide more housing options for our cash-poor and asset-rich elderly. Many of them with medical and household bills and worries for their future financial security have seen me at my MPS to ask for more options. But each option that the HDB has provided has created more problems. If they sell, say, their 4-room HDB flat, they may have a little profit but not enough to buy another resale flat after paying for all their bills. No bank would give them a loan. They are often jobless or lowly-paid and their prospects of better jobs are scarce.

Some who have approached the HDB get this reply. They can get a concessionary loan from the HDB if they upgrade to a 5-room flat, but not if they downgrade to a 3-room flat. I do not see how that will solve their financial problems. If they want to downgrade, then they have to get a bank loan. That is what the HDB tells them.

Madam, this is a no-go for the elderly. So option number two: can they buy a studio apartment for the elderly? I am assured to hear the Minister say that there will be more apartments built in the future. But the reply that came from HDB to my request is often that HDB has earlier announced that there would be no more studio apartments for sale in the future. If there are any studio apartments available for sale, HDB will announce the details of the sale in the mass media or the HDB's InfoWeb. This would not give any confidence to our elderly who are caught in a bind and who plan for how they are going to liquidate their assets so that they can catch up. In other words, they are just stuck. If they cannot buy an HDB flat from the HDB, can they then rent from the HDB? And that is where they get bumped up with another problem, which is when the 30-month debarment period kicks in. Those who have sold their flats in the open market cannot rent a flat from the HDB for 30 months.

Can they rent a flat from the open market? They cannot because the prices of rental flats have gone up in the open market. I did a check on the rent for a 3-room flat in Tampines in the open market. A whole unit would cost about $1,000-$1,200 a month. That is a whole lot of money. So, do we then tell them, "Okay. Just rent a room." If they rent a room, the master bedroom will cost about $400-$450 a month. I think it will be quite sad if we ask them to do such a drastic downgrade from a 3-room to a 1-room in a stranger's flat because they cannot liquidate their assets in a viable way.

If they cannot buy another flat or rent a flat from HDB in the open market, can they stay put in their flat and apply for a reverse mortgage? It is not a viable option either. Only NTUC Income offers a reverse mortgage scheme and the typical payout is $141 a month for a 3-room flat; $208 a month for a 4-room flat; and $274 a month for a 5-room flat, and this is based on a 28-year tenure from the age of 62 to 90. Madam, this sum from $141 to $274 for a 5-room flat is barely enough to buy food for a month, much less to rely on. And if you want to pay your medical bills, this is the not the way to go.

I would like to ask the Minister to make it easier for the elderly to downsize, to rent a flat and also to improve the attractiveness of the reverse mortgage scheme. The reverse mortgage scheme has proved popular in Australia, the US and also, recently, catching on in South Korea. In South Korea, the reverse mortgage scheme incorporates the provision of Government guarantees to boost its value. I would urge HDB to spur the reverse mortgage scheme by performing a market risk balancer role, by perhaps taking an underwriting role.

Another scheme worth looking at is the home reversion scheme which is gaining popularity, I read, in Australia. It involves a portion of the property being sold at a discounted price that is usually 36%-60% of its value. By providing the discount, sellers will not only receive cash upfront but also have their right to continue living in their homes until they sell it or pass away. The loan provider will be entitled to place a caveat on the property and enter into a forward sale that will put off settlement until sale or death. Can the Minister look into that?

Mdm Ho Geok Choo: Madam, it is estimated that there will be about 600,000 senior citizens by the year 2020, a number that is equivalent to five Toa Payohs. Most worrying will be those aged citizens in the low-income groups. With small CPF contributions and meagre savings, they may not have the means to own their own homes and may be forced instead to rent low-cost HDB flats.

There is another group who may be staying with their children but because of family squabbles, are forced to seek lodging on their own. Renting flats, even HDB flats in the open market, may not be economically feasible for this group of people with little or no disposable income as they are subject to market forces of demand and supply.

Madam, demand for rental of HDB flats has jumped in the past 12 months as a result of severe over demand from private sector where rents have also climbed. I would like to ask the Minister, in addressing the new developments, will HDB be reviewing the criteria for rental flats for the aged low-income?

Among the aged, there will be those elderly who can better afford housing, healthcare and recreational facilities. Last April, MND announced that it has shortlisted a few potential sites for construction of a retirement village. Can MND provide an update and details of this project and when such a retirement village could be launched? One possible challenge in such projects is the high cost of land in Singapore. Is MND studying the feasibility of locating the retirement village in lower cost neighbouring countries? One good example is the South Johor Development Zone which the Johor State government is wooing Singapore investors. Perhaps the lower cost of land there plus other attractions can make the retirement village economically feasible.

Barrier-free Access

Mr Siew Kum Hong: Madam, the Government recently announced that it will make available $32 million over five years to implement barrier-free access in housing estates. These funds will be disbursed through the Community Improvement Projects Committee (CIPC). Based on media reports, Town Councils will be required to co-pay 5% of the cost of projects using these funds.

The use of the CIPC, coupled with the requirement for co-payment by Town Councils, effectively excludes the Opposition wards of Hougang and Potong Pasir from access to these funds. CIPC funds are channelled through the Citizens' Consultative Committees, but the advisers to the CCCs in those two wards are from the PAP and are not the elected MPs, which is the case in the PAP Government wards.

So I think that is very unlikely that the CCCs and Town Councils in Hougang and Potong Pasir will be able to come to an agreement on how to use such funds. This penalises the disabled and elderly folks in those estates. If we are serious about making society more friendly to the disabled and the elderly, then this method of disbursing the funds is unhelpful and unfair. In fact, it directly contradicts the vision of an inclusive society for Singapore, knowing that the use of the CIPC will almost inevitably exclude Hougang and Potong Pasir from access to these funds.

Madam, these funds are for barrier-free access. In an ageing society, that is increasingly a must-have and not a good-to-have, like upgrading. They should not be subject to political considerations such as whether the ward in question is an Opposition ward. I would suggest that a better way to distribute these funds is to make direct grants to the Town Councils for their use. After all, the Town Councils would know the best ways in which to apply these funds and what are the most pressing areas of need for barrier-free access. This would truly further our vision of an inclusive society.

HDB

Mr Charles Chong: Madam, lately, MPs have been seeing more cases of residents with apparently no alternative accommodation being evicted from their flats by the banks due to arrears in their instalments. These evictions are sometimes done even when these families have young children with them. Some ended up sleeping in void decks or in public parks and at least one in his lorry in the carpark until alternative shelters can be found for them by MCYS.

Madam, I am not sure that each and every one of these cases involve people who are homeless by choice. Could the HDB work out an arrangement with MCYS to ensure that families facing eviction would be offered temporary shelters before their flats are repossessed? While it is not possible to ensure that everyone behaves in a financially prudent manner and avoid getting into such trouble, we cannot afford to aspire to be a top first-world country if we have our homeless sleeping in public places, whether by choice or by circumstance.

Rental Flats

Mr Teo Ser Luck: Rental flats are heavily subsidised and I agree we should leave it for those who are really in need. But with the increasing demand for rental flats and to avoid people trying to stay outdoors, will the Ministry actually consider a multi-tier approach for rental flats like offering rental flats at different rates based on the income affordability so that the rental flats can be made available to more potential residents that may lose possession of their flats?

Mr Mah Bow Tan: Madam, first of all, let me address the questions that were posed by Ms Irene Ng, Mdm Ho Geok Choo and Mdm Cynthia Phua about the need for more public housing support for the elderly and the low-income.

I have earlier explained earlier in this House the overall framework for Government's measures in catering to the housing needs of Singaporeans. Let me now elaborate a bit more on the specific measures that we are taking to help the elderly and the low-income households, especially those in financial difficulties.

As Members noted, post-retirement financial security is an important consideration for the elderly. Fortunately for us, most elderly HDB lessees have a store of wealth and this is in the form of that HDB flat that they own, a flat which they have bought with their hard-earned savings and which the Government has facilitated through the provision of housing subsidies and concessionary loans. They have this store of value. The question is: how do we unlock this store of value? How do we help them to monetise their flats to supplement their CPF and also other savings?

In this regard, the HDB has put in place a range of options which would suit various elderly households, their different circumstances and needs. Let me just go through these options.

5.00 pm

First of all, staying with the family - I think this is an important option. This is an option that many MPs do not mention when they write to the HDB to appeal on behalf of their residents. But this is something which I think needs to be highlighted to the Members and also our residents. Staying with the family means making use of the availability of alternative accommodation provided by their children. And if they can do so, they can actually monetise their flat by either selling or sub-letting their flat and realising a steady stream of rental income. This is actually quite a lucrative option. The rental rate for a whole flat is quite substantial now. I think Members may have read in the papers that, in fact, it has gone up. I know that in Tampines, my constituency, the average rental for a 3-room flat is about $1,000. So far, about 12,600 households in Singapore have taken up this option to sub-let their whole flat. We have opened up the housing HDB market to allow people to sub-let their whole flats without having to do it surreptitiously, locking up one room and so on. So now they can actually sub-let the whole flat openly, legally, provided they meet certain conditions. In fact, we are going to further relax these conditions, as I have announced earlier. So this is one very viable and very lucrative option.

The next option, of course, is downgrading. They want to stay on their own and they do not want to bother their children. They can do so. How? By selling their flat, and buying a smaller flat or a studio apartment. An elderly household downgrading from a 3-room flat to a studio apartment can unlock about $80,000 in cash and CPF proceeds to meet their non-housing needs, assuming there is no outstanding loan. So, again, this is a fairly substantial amount. We have offered about 1,400 studio apartments to date, and they have been very well received. Almost all of them have been taken up and we intend to build more. So we will resume the building of studio apartments as well as other small flats such as the new 2-room flats which I have announced earlier. For this year, out of the 4,000 new flats that they are going to build, about a quarter of them will be studio apartments or 2-room flats which will allow more elderly lessees this option of downgrading.

Then there is the other option of ageing in place. I think Ms Irene Ng spoke about this as an option. This is an option that is favoured by quite a few of our elderly lessees. They like the flat, they like the neighbourhood, they like the neighbours, and they do not want to move. Fair enough. So there is another viable option for them. They do not have to move. They can sub-let one or two rooms if they are living in a 4-room or 5-room flat to earn rental income. Again, this is a very lucrative option because the current going rental rate for just a room in an HDB flat itself, depending on its location, can be anything from $250 to $500. No inconvenience to them, they stay where they are, rent out a room to a respectable couple or to a single person and collect $250 to $500 a month.

Yet, another option is reverse mortgage. Since March 2006, HDB has relaxed its regulations to allow the elderly to commit their flat to a reverse mortgage scheme and to receive a steady flow of income. Now, this is a scheme that is offered by the private sector and HDB does not intend to offer this scheme or to take up the risk, as suggested by Ms Irene Ng, but it is a viable scheme for a few people and they have taken it up. But, nevertheless, I accept that this is still not as many as we would like to see taking up such a scheme, maybe because they are not familiar with it. So we will keep on looking at it and see how we can further improve or tweak the scheme to make it more attractive. I want to assure Ms Ng that we will continue to also explore other monetisation options, such as the home reversion scheme that she talked about, to give the elderly a greater variety of choices.

Let me now talk about barrier-free accessibility which Mr Siew Kum Hong mentioned. It is an important part of our programme to help the elderly to age in place to make sure that the environment is barrier free and more elderly friendly. My MOS has already updated Members about the progress of the LUP which is also part of the barrier-free accessibility programme, and we are also supporting the Town Councils. We will extend the barrier-free accessibility to all HDB precincts by 2011.

How do we fund it? We have a CIPC fund. The CIPC fund is meant to help or improve projects within the community. So we decided that we will expand the CIPC fund to also fund the construction of the barrier-free accessibility (BFA) items such as ramps, railings and so on. All Town Councils will be invited to draw up their BFA masterplans for their estates and apply for access to the CIPC fund. I just want to make it very clear at this point that we are not excluding any Town Council from applying for these funds. Everybody is welcome to apply for the funds and, in fact, we have written to every Town Council, including to Mr Low Thia Khiang, to apply for the CIPC funds in order to implement BFA. So I do not think there should be any problem in so doing. This is not subject to political consideration, it is just commonsense. Here you have a CIPC fund and you are using it to improve the neighbourhood and the precincts and there we have a need to improve barrier-free accessibility. Why do we not put the two together? So that is the reason why we have expanded CIPC to allow for BFA and the simple procedure is to apply for it through the CCC. Why the CCC? Because they are the ones who are most familiar with the neighbourhood. If all Town Councils do this, follow the procedure, draft their BFA masterplans and apply for access to the CIPC funds, I am sure that by our target date of 2011, all Town Councils will be redeveloped and all the BFA facilities will be put in place.

Let me summarise how we are helping the elderly with their housing needs. First, we will continue to facilitate monetisation. We will help the elderly through downgrading and building more studio apartments and smaller flats. Second, we will explore the enhancement of other monetisation options to include those who wish to age in place. And third, we will continue to make our housing estates more elderly friendly through lift upgrading and BFA.

There is another issue which Members have consistently brought up. Mdm Ho Geok Choo raised this issue, and this is the issue of low income households. There is no doubt that even as we continue to ensure the affordability of our flats for the vast majority of Singaporeans, there are citizen households who do not have the financial means to afford home ownership. And I think it would be wrong for us to try and get them to go into home ownership flats when they cannot afford it in the first place. So for these households, we are providing a roof over their heads through the public rental scheme. And because they are very, very low income households, these public rental flats are very heavily subsidised. The public rental scheme is really meant for the very low income families in our community. They are not meant to be rental flats for those who want to leave their homes or their children want to throw them out of their houses or they feel that they want to live on their own because it is more convenient and so forth. I just want to make this point very clear that our public rental scheme is meant for those families who are extremely poor and in real need for the public rental flats.

To help these needy households, towards the end of last year I announced that we would increase the supply of subsidised rental flats. We started off by converting some old flats at Boon Lay and Woodlands into 1- and 2-rooms rental flats. This will generate about 1,000 new rental flats. We are also going to build new rental blocks at Chua Chu Kang, Sembawang and Yishun and we intend to convert another two blocks at Redhill to rental flats. All these will yield a total of 2,200 rental flats by 2009, but this is the supply of rental flats. Let me remind Members that we still need to ensure that the rental flat subsidies are targeted at those who really need them and not those who would like to have a cheap place to stay. That is the reason why we have aligned our rental rates to household incomes. The majority of our tenants, about 80%, who have household incomes below $800 a month will not be affected. They will continue to pay the heavily subsidised rent of about $30 a month. So, if you are staying in a 1-room flat, you pay $30 a month. Those who have incomes between $800 and $1,500, they will now pay about $110 per month. Those above $1,500, we are raising it to between $180 and $250 a month. This last group, those who are earning more than $1,500, actually are quite able to afford a small flat with some help from the Government. We will help them along this direction. We will give them an additional housing grant. Indeed, this is why we must continue with our home ownership policy - we want to help Singaporeans who can afford to, to own their own homes.

Let me now address Ms Irene Ng's point about the permanent debarment scheme. She asked whether we will review the rule that debars somebody for 30 months from coming back to the housing market. Specifically, she asked whether we could remove the debarment rule to allow the elderly persons to sell their flat and switch to a rental flat. The question in this case really is not about the debarment scheme, it is really about our subsidy policy. It is about whether we want to provide yet another subsidy, the third subsidy in some cases. Earlier, I have explained that we provide a first subsidy, and, in some cases, a second. The question now is whether we are going to provide a third one, since HDB rental flats are essentially subsidised flats. We should really be reserving these heavily subsidised rental flats for those who have no other housing options.

In the example she cited, she talked about those who are downgrading, renting from the open market, reverse mortgage, and so on. But there was no mention about staying with the family. In many of the cases, when we investigate, we find that they actually have three, four or even five children, all of whom have their own flats. So we asked them why is it that they do not stay with their children. They said, "Oh, it's inconvenient" or their children do not want them to stay with them. Why is it that the children they raised do not want to allow them to stay? Surely, it is incumbent upon the children to look after their parents' housing needs, rather than to toss them to the Government.

It is important for us to continue to maintain our family focus, to insist that if you have children, if you have somebody who can afford to house you, this is your first option and not your last option. So, this is the reason why every appeal case of elderly families who do not have a house or who have lost their house, and want to come back to the rental housing market, we examine it very carefully. One of the questions we ask is: "Do you have a family?"; "Do you have children?"; "Are they able to house you?". As for those who are having financial difficulty with the mortgage loans, HDB, as a general policy, says, "Look, this is between you and the banks. You may lose your flat because you are not able to repay your loan. We will help you to talk to the bank. We will help you to refer your case to maybe the CDC or VWOs. We will try and help you in these other ways."

But we cannot say that because you have lost your flat, therefore, automatically, you will be entitled to an HDB flat. HDB will always examine every case carefully and, if it is a deserving case, they will consider either granting them another concessionary loan to buy a flat or give them a rental flat.

5.15 pm

So these are the ways that we try to help these families - whether it is the elderly, the low-income or those who have lost their flats. I stress again that not all mortgagee cases need HDB's help with their housing arrangements. Many of them, after investigation, find that they can actually reside with their families, friends or relatives, and they do so, and we encourage them to do so until they are ready to purchase the next flat. My Parliamentary Secretary, in an answer to a question a few days ago, told the House that we have about 900 households that are affected by mortgagee sale action so far. This is about 1% of the total number of mortgage loan cases by the banks. Out of the 895 households that are affected so far, 273 have appealed for help. Of these, 131 were offered a rental flat while another 13, or 5%, who met the credit assessment guidelines, were provided a concessionary loan for another flat.

Madam, in conclusion, let me just restate again that our housing subsidies are limited. They need to be very carefully and equitably distributed, with focus on the truly deserving cases. So personal financial responsibility is the key; family support is the key and where such is not available, then the Government steps in to provide help to those who have no other options.

HDB Shops

The Senior Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Education (Mr Masagos Zulkifli B M M): Madam, the unique feature living in our heartland is the accessibility to retail shops. There are about 17,883 commercial establishments in 2005, comprising shops, eating houses, offices, kiosks, and so on. This is no small number. I have lived in three countries, each for a protracted period and in all these countries, you had to have a car to shop at the nearest grocery or supermarket or eat at a restaurant. Unless you have been subjected to this inconvenience, you will never appreciate the service provided by the proximity of HDB shops to residents, in terms of convenience and saving of transport costs and storage. For some, the shopkeepers are familiar faces of the neighbourhood and a source of friendly social chats. To the elderly, these are the familiar things that they cling to as the environment changes around them. Our HDB shops are, however, challenged by changing shopping habits and new forms of competition.

The Economic Restructuring Committee's report in 2003 highlighted many problems faced by the HDB retail setup. One of the three recommendations is to correct the over-supply of shops and this has been acted upon by the HDB through its restructuring programme for shops in 2005. But this alone will not help them to keep alive in the long run. Departmental stores and large supermarkets are now co-located with them in the heartland. The warehouse retail scheme in Tampines, combined with good roads, ample and free parking and cheaper COEs, is yet a new challenge to our heartland retailers. The RC correctly pointed out that these shops lack marketing savvy, have no scale individually, employ untrained staff and usually have strong resistance to change. Individually, without help, they would probably not survive in the long term. But the services they provide to residents and the character they lend to our towns, they are worth helping to continue to evolve and thrive. Recently, after Courts and IKEA opened in Tampines under WRS, the Tampines Business Council got retailers together and launched a counter-promotion exercise during the Christmas and Chinese New Year periods with light-ups, lucky draws and mini-concerts to retain and draw the crowds.

During my walkabout, I know the neighbourhood shops are very happy with this campaign. Bringing them together and collectively executing programmes to counter competition is one way to inject new strength and level of entrepreneurship to these retailers. We should also not underestimate the strength of the merchant associations. In my constituency, the Merchant Association formed by Mr Yatiman in 1990 got together with the grassroots to revive a failing wet market and neighbourhood. Together, they relocated the many small illegally sublet stalls in HDB shops into a well-organised centralised wet market. Today, it is thriving and a great weekend hangout for food and socialising.

My question to the Ministry is: other than the RPS, what other assistance is the HDB offering to the retailers to help in their business, namely, is HDB well engaged with the retailers and hear them and review policies that may be counter-productive to their business? Secondly, how can they be trained and upskilled to reorganise and meet the new service level demanded by new shopping habits and the HDB heartlanders? Is there also a possibility that a dying shopping neighbourhood be turned over to a management company to change it into a themed shopping neighbourhood, much like the hip and happening Holland Village or a town to buy and bargain for the latest electronic gadgets like Akihabara in Tokyo or to a place where they can buy fresh fish, like the Sydney Fish Market?

Ms Lee Bee Wah (Ang Mo Kio): Madam, the growth of mega shopping malls and multi-purpose shopping centres has brought about a change in the shopping habits of Singaporeans. This makes it most often not just retail outlets but also entertainment from cinemas to game arcades as well as food and beverage outlets. They just become a draw for the younger generation who prefer to hang out at these complexes. Invariably, the parents of this younger generation are also sucked in as they go with their children to shop. Against this onslaught, what chance is there for our HDB shops? I hope the Ministry will be able to do something to help the HDB shop owners and breathe some freshness into their setting and operations.

Some merchants associations have banded their members together to face the challenge. However, I feel that the Government should look into the design and layout of HDB shopping areas so as to help them withstand the test of time. HDB planners and architects involved in designing the town centres should look at the concepts successfully implemented overseas and see how they can be implemented here. Our HDB dwelling areas have undergone a remarkable transformation each time they undergo upgrading but the retail areas need some catching up to do.

Dr Lim Wee Kiak (Sembawang): Mdm Chairman, I am glad the Minister mentioned in his speech earlier on that hawker food is still an option for our future 6.5 million people. The wet markets and our hawker centres have a unique position and a special place in every Singaporean's life. They are very much a part of our way of life and our culture in Singapore. They are among the commonest missed items for overseas Singaporeans.

As our society progresses, there seems to be a preference by many, especially the young, for buying their groceries and raw food from air-conditioned supermarkets and dining at air-conditioned food courts. And the authorities argued that there is a general decline in demand for wet markets and hawker centres.

The old wet markets and hawker centres are often deemed as dirty and unhygienic. They only function for half a day and are left vacant for the rest of the day and that seems to be a waste of our precious land resources. Because of these reasons, since 1997, there had been no new wet markets or hawker centres in the new HDB townships. Hence, the new towns like Sembawang, Punggol, Sengkang do not have wet markets and hawker centres.

There is a new phenomenon of the elderly diaspora in the new HDB estates. The elderly who moved into the new HDB estates with their children, or on their own, find the environment foreign and unfamiliar. Many still prefer wet markets and hawker centres to air-conditioned supermarkets and food courts. The Government has managed to revive some of the older wet markets and hawker centres and has given them a new lease of life through upgrading programmes. The upgraded markets have proved to be successful and have increased business as well as interest.

Mdm Chairman, I think the wet markets and hawker centres still have an important role to play. They are still useful and in demand by the young and old. The wet markets and hawker centres are natural community focal points for our residents. They enhance community interactions and cohesion between all races and all strata of our society. The stallholders and hawkers usually develop a close and friendly relationship with their customers. There is much warmth and concern in the community among the stallholders and the residents. Many of these stallholders are actually key community leaders today as they have good knowledge of the area.

The wet markets and hawker centres are important sources of entrepreneurial activities. They offer a low barrier to starting a business. Because of the low cost, they are also a source of cheap food. It is generally cheaper to eat in a hawker centre compared to an air-conditioned food court. This is one way of providing affordable living for our residents.

In the recent HDB heartware public consultation sessions, there were many calls to bring back the wet market and hawker centres to HDB estates. While we plan and cater for the needs of the young, I think we must not ignore the needs of the older generation as well. I hope the Ministry would give these calls due consideration and respond to the suggestions favourably.

The Minister of State for National Development (Ms Grace Fu Hai Yien): Madam, as the Members have rightly pointed out, the HDB retailers are in fact facing competition from suburban shopping malls and hypermarts. Mr Masagos has rightly focused on the role of HDB shops in meeting the needs of local residents. They add to the vibrancy of HDB communities. To enable HDB retailers to adapt to changing market conditions, HDB has progressively relaxed its policies on shop tenancy such as change of trade, subletting and assignment. However, HDB retailers must take the lead in upgrading and revitalising their shops. Miss Lee Bee Wah and Mr Masagos have called for HDB to enhance the vibrancy of HDB shops and help the retailers adapt to changing lifestyles. Where retailers are keen to improve the competitiveness of their shops, I am pleased to announce that the Government will provide assistance to them to help them upgrade. We have distributed a handout and Members may like to refer to that.

HDB will be introducing a new package of measures called the Revitalisation of Shops Scheme (ROS). The ROS will be targeted at areas where the HDB retailers, whether sold or rental shops, are prepared to organise themselves and take the lead to drive the project. Under the scheme, assistance will be provided through three components, namely, upgrading of the common area; promotional activities as well as rent-free period.

First, upgrading of the common area. HDB will co-fund upgrading of common areas and facilities. For rental shops, HDB and the Town Councils will pay for 100% of the upgrading cost, up to $20,000 per shop. For sold shops, HDB and the Town Councils will pay up to 50% of the upgrading cost or $10,000 per shop. The balance will be borne by the shop owners.

Promotional activities organised by the local merchants associations (MAs). To encourage more MAs to organise promotional activities, HDB will co-fund 50% of the expenditure incurred for the promotional activities, or up to $1,000 per rental shop per year and $500 per sold shop per year.

Rent-free period will be granted for HDB retailers who renovate their shops while undertaking the overall upgrading and promotional activities. To qualify for the ROS, the retailers must be represented by a merchants association to ensure that there are collective efforts and a common vision for their area. They can apply for all or a combination of the above items.

Besides HDB, SPRING has also enhanced its assistance for HDB retailers through the Heartland Retail Programme comprising two initiatives: firstly, SPRING will provide funding for revitalisation projects driven by the MAs, such as the engagement of consultants to develop marketing strategies. SPRING will co-fund up to 70% of the costs of manpower, equipment and professional services. Secondly, SPRING will fund individual shops to upgrade their business operations, skills and premises. SPRING will co-fund up to 70% of the upgrading cost or $10,000 per shop.

We will launch these assistance measures on a pilot basis for a few clusters of shops in the later half of this year and we will provide more details of the schemes later.

The Workforce Development Agency (WDA) is looking into a new Skills Upgrading Programme for individual HDB retailers to raise their service standards.

5.30 pm

Meanwhile, HDB will continue with the Restructuring Programme for Shops (RPS) to assist HDB shop tenants located in areas where there is an over-supply of shops to exit the business. The aim is to reduce supply of shops judiciously so that the remaining shops will become more viable. Since the RPS was announced in March 2005, HDB has offered the programme to a total of 455 shops in 44 blocks. Twenty blocks comprising 219 shops, or 48% of the shops, will be cleared.

Under the present scheme, HDB will consider only these blocks where more than 50% of the tenants wish to quit. With the majority expressing desire to quit, HDB will clear the entire lot of shops. Now that we have cleared the shops in relatively large numbers, we are ready to fine-tune our programme. Henceforth, HDB will also consider blocks where at least 30% of the tenants opt to quit, while those remaining agree to regroup, where necessary. Regrouping of remaining shops is necessary to avoid interspersed vacancies and inconveniences to the residents. As with the current RPS, eligible tenants who opt to quit will receive an ex gratia payment of $60,000. Those who need to be regrouped will receive a $10,000 removal allowance.

With this revision, we believe we would have reached an optimal level of shops, considering the needs of both the tenants and the residents. Therefore, we are likely to discontinue RPS after the next offering. Shop tenants who are keen to participate in the programme should take this opportunity to nominate themselves to HDB for the RPS through their Advisers.

Dr Lim Wee Kiak has asked the Government to build wet markets and hawker centres in the new HDB towns. We recognise the role of wet markets and hawker centres as a focal point for community interaction. However, with the changing lifestyle of Singaporeans, the general demand for traditional wet markets and hawker centres has trended downwards over the years. Singaporeans, including the elderly, are turning to modern amenities like supermarkets for their grocery needs.

Currently, the Government sets aside land in the new towns for commercial space development. The commercial operator is free to decide the type of eating and marketing facilities to provide, whether coffee-shops or air-conditioned food courts, wet markets or supermarkets. At the precinct level, however, HDB will ensure that basic facilities in the form of eating houses and mini-marts are provided to meet residents’ needs.

Defects in HDB Flats

Mr Liang Eng Hwa (Holland-Bukit Timah): Madam, the mission of HDB is to provide affordable quality homes. This is stated in HDB's mission statement. In our quest to create and rejuvenate our towns at breathtaking speed, have we overlooked the quality of our HDB flats? Here, I am referring to flats that are built only in recent years. For example, I come across six blocks of flats at Senja Road, Bukit Panjang Town, which had only just been completed in 2003. Since 2003, these residents have to live with external wall cracks and seepages, some as soon as less than one year after completion. Complaints about wall defects were as high as about 25% in some blocks. There are others who suffer in silence.

My question is whether MND is satisfied with the quality of work by HDB contractors. What does the Ministry intend to do to ensure good quality work by contractors? What more can HDB do to help those who are experiencing repeated defects? For the batch of flats that experienced high percentage of defects and poor workmanship, can the HDB take the contractor to task?

According to feedback on the ground, there is this feeling that HDB is placing low priority and setting aside minimal resources on rectifying HDB flat defects. Waiting time for inspection by HDB can take about two to three weeks and another few months before repair works get started. I suggest that for such situations with high numbers of defects and poor workmanship, HDB can tender out a contract to do the entire repair works at one go, thereby enjoying considerable savings, rather than taking care of it on a piecemeal basis. Alternatively, if HDB cannot cope with the numerous requests for repairs, it can outsource them to town councils who can respond to them more judiciously.

We need to give Singaporeans a positive experience in our public housing and build an endearing home that would foster home ownership. While I am excited by the scenario painted by MOS Grace Fu earlier on, we still need to plug those cracks and seepages judiciously.

Security in HDB Neighbourhoods

Mr Wee Siew Kim: Madam, in last year’s COS debate, I raised the issue of security in our HDB basement and multi-storey carparks. Thefts from vehicles and property damage aside, late-night drivers and passengers also feel unsafe. Today, I have another two items to add to my list of security concerns in our HDB estates. The increasing audacity and prevalence of harassment by loan sharks has compromised the security of our neighbourhoods. They vandalise and destroy public properties, and intimidate both the borrowers and their unfortunate neighbours. There is also an increase in the number of foreign worker dormitories in close proximity to HDB estates. Affected residents have expressed their unease.

I would like to reiterate my request to the Ministry to consider installing more security features, such as cameras in our HDB common areas and carparks. While the police is responsible for maintaining the general level of security, they cannot be everywhere, at every hour. While residents and grassroots organisations can help to keep an eye out for criminals and mischief makers, there are limits to what they can do. I seek the Ministry's consideration for hardware, such as surveillance cameras and other building design features, that can help to minimise crime and put the residents at ease.

The Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for National Development (Dr Mohamad Maliki Bin Osman): Mdm Deputy Speaker, I would like to assure Mr Liang Eng Hwa that HDB has not gone soft on the building quality of HDB flats. HDB subjects all its flats to assessment under the BCA’s Construction Quality Assessment System, or CONQUAS.

Nevertheless, given the number of building projects that HDB oversees, there may be isolated cases of contractors not meeting HDB’s standards. HDB takes a very strong view of such cases and constantly reviews the workmanship of its contractors to keep such cases to a minimum.

I assure Mr Liang, for affected lessees, the defects detected and are reported will be addressed. For those which are within the liability period, we will recall the contractors to do the repairs. For those after the liability period, HDB will arrange for repairs without charge if the cause is found to be of poor design or workmanship.

Madam, for all new flats built from 2005 onwards, HDB offers an extended warranty scheme which covers three types of defects - ceiling leakage, water seepage and spalling concrete. This reflects HDB’s commitment towards providing high-quality workmanship to flat buyers. I understand that at the Senja Road situation, which Mr Liang mentioned earlier, 120 units have been rectified, with only 38 still undergoing rectification works.

Mr Wee Siew Kim mentioned the issue of security and we know that he has been raising this issue several times. HDB takes the security of its residents seriously and factors this consideration into its design plans, for example, minimising blind corners and facilitating good visibility within public areas. As Mr Wee has mentioned earlier, the Singapore Police Force works together with the town councils on a new project by installing CCTVs on void decks as well as multi-storey car parks. The feedback so far has been very positive that it has been effective in deterring against crimes like housebreaking, robberies and harassment from moneylenders. Town councils will continue to work with the Singapore Police Force to see if CCTVs could be made available to more HDB blocks and car parks, subject to the availability of funds.

I would also highlight that we do have community programmes like the neighbourhood watch groups to ensure and to continue with the community's efforts to try to minimise the possibility of crimes in HDB estates.

Construction Industry

Mr Charles Chong: Madam, we heard the Minister tell the House earlier in the day that sand and granite prices are expected to go up due to the ban on land sand from Indonesia and, more recently reported, disruption of granite shipments from Indonesia. I would like to ask the Minister if he is aware of any instances of profiteering by suppliers and, if so, what measures would the Building and Construction Authority, or BCA, take to curb such profiteering.

On another subject, the Minister announced sometime ago that the Singapore Contractors Association Limited (SCAL) and the Specialists Trade Alliance of Singapore (STAS) were negotiating a standard form contract for use between domestic subcontractors and main contractors. This, I believe, was being done in order to reduce disputes between main contractors and subcontractors. Could the Minister give us an update on the progress of the formulation of standard form contracts? Would BCA take a more active role in curbing profiteering in the construction industry as well as assisting to facilitate agreement between SCAL and STAS on standard form contracts?

Infrastructure for the Disabled and Elderly

Ms Eunice Elizabeth Olsen: Madam, I am very heartened to know that this Government recognises the needs of the disabled and elderly of this country. The Government has shown priority in making Singapore a barrier-free country and we are certainly making progress in certain areas. We have seen our public transport become disabled friendly. There are now wheelchair-accessible buses and more MRT stations have installed lifts at their stations.

Madam, it is truly a commendable effort. Since we are going to invest a substantial amount of money in this area, I think we have to get it right for whom we are building these. There is no point building something that ends up being not completely suitable for the disabled. The reason why I say this is because I spent half a day on a wheelchair to better understand the needs of the disabled and elderly. Firstly, it is no easy task to wheel oneself around. Biceps are paramount , especially when it comes to ramps. One would think that it is sufficient to just have ramps for the disabled. But it is only when you are wheeling yourself up the ramp that you realise that the gradient and length of the ramp makes a huge difference, and I thought climbing stairs was bad enough. You would think that manoeuvring up a ramp is hard enough work, but the neighbourhood mall that I was at decided to place glass doors right at the top of the ramp that was leading into the mall. Had it not been for some kind-hearted Singaporeans who held the doors open for me, my next best option was to be an octopus, as I had to try and wheel myself up the ramp and open the glass door all at the same time.

Just when I thought these obstacles were over, I decided to cross over to the community library which had great accessibility features, barring the fact that there were no clear directions as to where the ramps were situated. As I was about to wheel over, I realised that it was almost impossible because there were no ramps at the traffic light junction that I needed to use to get across. If not for a friend who knew where there was a small ramp right in the small corner that was used to transport goods and trolleys into the mall, I would not have made it across to the library without having to wheel myself all along the pavement looking for one. So, in this case, one building was accessible but there was no proper connection between the two buildings.

Madam, even when I was trying to get across at another traffic light that had ramps, the ramps were too steep and I thought I was going to roll back onto the oncoming traffic. In view of my experiences, I would just like to ask the Ministry, firstly, whether it could provide for synergy and coordination between developers to better facilitate access between buildings. Secondly, I would like to ask for an honest and genuine consultation process to be put in place involving stakeholders like the disabled people in the entire planning and construction process from start to end. I would also like to ask the Ministry to look into implementing, if not already in place, the best in accessibility seal, just like how our environmentally-friendly buildings get a Green Mark, and set up an independent body to check accessibility of buildings and functionality of facilities. I believe as we want Singapore to be a barrier-free country, we need to go beyond the mentality that ramps and lifts equal accessibility. It is not about accommodating the needs of the disabled, but it is about understanding the user's needs.

Sustainable Built Environment

Mr Liang Eng Hwa: Just now the Minister has touched briefly on sustainable development. I would still want to express my views and ask some specific questions. Although Singapore is a small nation, we, too, must do our part to ensure that our future development is sustainable.

One of the latest initiatives is the Singapore Standard (SS) 530 launched by SPRING Singapore in January this year. The new standard specified the minimum level of efficiency required of all technology and equipment in new offices, commercial, industrial and institution buildings. It will help developers meet the requirements for the Green Mark scheme which was launched by the Building and Construction Authority (BCA) in 2005. The Green Mark scheme covers the areas of energy efficiency, water efficiency and indoor environment quality.

While I fully support these wonderful initiatives, I would like to ask, firstly, if the Ministry has plans to encourage more existing buildings to attain the Green Mark certification. Currently, only 34 buildings have the Green Mark. Secondly, SS 530 only targets commercial, industrial and institution buildings.

Does the Ministry have any plans to spread such requirements to existing and new HDB and private residential buildings? Due to our warm weather, many households have air-conditioning. We also utilise many other energy-consuming household appliances. Individually, their consumption levels may not seem like much but, if we add them up, I expect the collective impact can be quite substantial.

5.45 pm

Thirdly, Singapore-based companies and individuals can presently obtain grants from the $50 million MND fund for R&D of green technologies for the building industry. Would the Minister give an update on the status of R&D in this field?

Finally, sustainable development can only be sustainable if we have public awareness, public and private support, as well as it has to be hip and cool. How would the Ministry intend to step up awareness in this area?

Energy-efficient Buildings

Mdm Ho Geok Choo: Madam, we live in an equatorial climate that can be very warm and humid. In the old days, including the colonial era, houses and buildings were constructed with high ceilings and raised flooring on stilts to provide natural cooling and ventilation. Even high-rise buildings had high ceilings with fans. Those were the days before air-conditioning.

Today, our modern buildings from homes to skyscrapers are designed from a western perspective based on a temperate climate. These designs prevent air from circulating into our buildings. I imagine winter winds could be cold indeed, but our architects often forget we welcome our tropical breezes. As a result, we depend increasingly on air-conditioning. The accent today is on energy-efficient building design. A great deal of attention is given today on the orientation of the building to maximise the use of daylight versus artificial lighting as well as other construction factors.

Given these trends, Madam, I would like to ask MND if the buildings under its jurisdiction could be designed and constructed to be more energy-efficient. It would not only reduce maintenance costs, but would also help us to do our part in conserving energy. If indeed there are plans to convert to build more energy-saving buildings, when and how would the Ministry review the procurement of energy-saving materials for such purposes? What kind of change management programmes would the Ministry put in place to convert Singaporeans to be less dependent on air-conditioners and to stay in tune with the natural conditions of the environment?

Ms Grace Fu Hai Yien: Madam, to achieve our goal of a world-class built environment, we are adopting a three-pronged strategy. First, we will evolve a more sustainable built environment by encouraging the design and construction of green buildings. Second, we will promote sustainable construction which would enhance our resilience against supply fluctuations in basic construction materials. Third, we will push for barrier-free accessibility in our built environment to cater to the needs of our rapidly ageing population.

Let me elaborate. As the physical transformation of our city is intensified, we need to ensure that development is carried out in a sustainable manner. Our buildings must be “green”, that is, they should be energy-efficient and environmentally-friendly. In 2005, the Building and Construction Authority (BCA) launched the Green Mark Scheme to promote green building technologies. To-date, 33 local buildings have been Green Mark certified. I am pleased to share with Members that we are undertaking the following key initiatives to achieve wider adoption of the Green Mark scheme.

First, the public sector will take the lead in adopting the Green Mark scheme. With effect from 1st April 2007, all new public-sector buildings and those undergoing major retrofitting works would have to be Green Mark certified. Since January 2007, HDB has required all new public housing to be Green Mark certified. In addition, HDB will launch its first “eco-precinct”, a new Build-to-Order (BTO) project, at the end of this month to showcase environmentally sustainable design principles and green building technology that can be deployed in future public housing projects. The project will feature a generous provision of green spaces, with the guiding design principle of harnessing wind, daylight, rainfall and greenery, wherever possible. A wide range of technologies will also be adopted to promote energy conservation, efficient use of resources, recycling, as well as to reduce maintenance cost. More details of the eco-precinct will be unveiled closer to the launch date.

Second, MND has recently launched the Green Mark Incentive Scheme to encourage private-sector developers and building owners to go green. This is a $20 million incentive scheme that offers cash grants over the next three years to private buildings that achieve at least the Green Mark “Gold” award.

To enhance the industry's capability in green building technology, MND is also setting aside $50 million over the next five years for the new "MND Research Fund for the Built Environment". This Research Fund was launched in January this year, with green building technology identified as a key research area. We are currently evaluating the first batch of applications received.

Mdm Ho Geok Choo asked about how our buildings are adapted for the equatorial climate to improve energy efficiency. Currently, our building regulations require all air-conditioned buildings to comply with minimum energy efficiency standards. Moving forward, we are looking at mandating minimum requirements on environmental sustainability for new buildings and existing ones undergoing major retrofitting works to achieve at least the basic Green Mark standards.

As we evolve a more sustainable built environment, we are also promoting sustainable construction. This involves adopting alternative construction methods and materials that reduce our reliance on certain basic construction materials, and diversifying our supply sources of these materials.

Madam, MND has stated in this House that the Indonesian ban on land sand export will not have a major impact on the construction industry. Recently, we have also experienced disruptions in supply of granite. These developments are a timely reminder of the importance of diversifying our supply sources and switching to sustainable construction. The industry should continue to diversify our supply sources. Going forward, the industry should switch to alternative methods and materials, including the use of steel, dry walls, glass and metal claddings.

Mr Charles Chong has pointed out that concrete prices have gone up more than the anticipated increase in sand prices. Concrete price is dependent on a number of factors, including the costs of raw materials. We have urged our industry players to take a collaborative approach to mitigate the impact of rising prices for existing projects. BCA will continue to closely monitor the situation, and put in place the necessary measures to ensure construction activities could proceed without major disruption.

On the topic of barrier-free accessibility, we must create an environment where our elderly can “age in place”. To achieve this, BCA has put in place measures to create a barrier-free built environment in a holistic manner.

First, strengthening the BCA Code, and that is the best way to ensure the barrier-free environment is built in a cohesive way, and BCA is strengthening the Code of Barrier-Free Accessibility, so that we improve the accessibility between buildings, and from buildings to nearby facilities.

As Ms Olsen has correctly pointed out, the provision of disabled and elderly-friendly built environment should focus on the needs of the users. BCA has, in collaboration with the Singapore Institute of Architects and the Handicaps Welfare Association, launched the Universal Design Award for Built Environment to recognise developers and designers for their efforts in this area. For public housing, HDB has also incorporated Universal Design features in its projects from July 2006. To ensure that barrier-free facilities being put in place are well maintained and remain functional, we will propose amending the Building Control Act to require continued compliance with the BFA requirements. This is to ensure that disabled and elderly-friendly infrastructure remains usable.

BCA has mapped out a five-year plan to ensure existing buildings in key areas are accessible by 2011. For a start, BCA is working with public-sector agencies to review and improve the accessibility of their existing buildings. HDB is working with the Town Councils to make all precincts barrier-free by 2011. We have also set aside $40 million under the new Accessibility Fund to help building owners to defray some of the costs of providing basic barrier-free features in their existing buildings. This Fund will be made available from 1st April 2007.

Avian Flu

The Senior Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Education (Mr Masagos Zulkifli B M M): Madam, WHO, on its website, says: "The current outbreaks of the avian influenza which began in Southeast Asia in mid-2003 are the largest and most severe on record. The H5N1 virus has caused death or destruction of an estimated 150 million birds." The virus has now spread seemingly through bird migration to Egypt and various other countries like Turkey and parts of Europe. Two weeks ago, an outbreak happened again in Laos where more than a hundred birds were found dead. Our neighbouring countries continue to struggle to bring the spread of the virus under control. This is understandable, as these countries are vast and many depend on backyard poultry farming to supplement their food or income.

There are at least 167 known deaths in humans infected by the virus. I understand that humans get infected when they are in direct contact with infected poultry or surfaces and objects contaminated by their faeces. Exposure is also considered most likely during preparation of poultry for cooking. Avian influenza is not transmitted through cooked food, but runny yolks and juices from raw poultry may be risky.

Other than an attack by terrorists, a pandemic spread of the avian flu virus is a known possible setback to our economic prospect. The scale of the problems is probably comparable if not bigger than the situation we faced during SARS in 2002 and 2003. I was not in Singapore then. But even when overseas, many Singaporeans during this period faced hardships. I was in Australia at that time, and my Australian colleagues were extremely wary of Singapore visitors. We finally agreed on a procedure to get visitors from Singapore to be certified fit by the doctor daily for 10 days each day before they come into the office. It was not only inconvenient; it was expensive and the stigma was quite unbearable.

Given the probable large impact it will make to Singaporeans and Singapore's economic outlook, my questions to the Ministry are:

(1) What is the level of threat that the current avian flu outbreaks pose to Singapore?

(2) Is mutation of the virus to human-to-human transmission established?

(3) Given the outbreaks in our neighbours and import of our poultry and eggs from these areas, how are we cooperating with them and international bodies in the fight against avian flu?

(4) How have we prepared ourselves for a possible avian flu outbreak in Singapore?

Dr Mohamad Maliki Bin Osman: Madam, the Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenza (HPAI) virus is endemic in Southeast Asia and continues to pose a threat to Singapore. There are ongoing outbreaks of the deadly H5N1 strain of HPAI in several countries in this region, and countries such as Indonesia, China and Egypt have also reported new human cases.

The main route of HPAI virus transmission from birds to humans is through direct contact with infected poultry or their faeces. To date, sustained human-to-human transmission of HPAI has not been observed although there have been suspected cases of limited or inefficient human-to-human transmission of the virus in rare, isolated clusters.

Singapore is now better prepared to prevent and contain the spread of HPAI. However, we cannot afford to be complacent, as the recent outbreaks show that a resurgence of the disease is possible. Thus far, AVA has kept the virus out of Singapore by adopting a multi-layered defence strategy. Let me highlight the five key elements of this strategy.

First, AVA works closely with our ASEAN neighbours through the ASEAN HPAI Taskforce which was set up to coordinate regional initiatives for avian flu control. We also collaborate with international agencies to expand our capacity to deal with HPAI.

Second, to prevent the incursion of the disease into Singapore, AVA bans import of birds and avian products from HPAI-infected countries. We only import live poultry and shelled eggs from Malaysia, which is currently free from avian flu. AVA has also worked with its Malaysian counterpart to establish Disease-Free Zones from which we can still import poultry even if isolated cases of avian flu are detected in other areas.

Third, at our borders, AVA imposes stringent checks and surveillance on all consignments of live poultry and birds to reduce the risk of HPAI being introduced into Singapore.

6.00 pm

Fourth,

for local control, AVA has intensified inspection and surveillance at our local poultry farms and poultry slaughterhouses. Strict bio-security has been imposed on the poultry farms and slaughterhouses. Birds in Jurong Bird Park, the Zoo, the Botanic Gardens and Sentosa have been vaccinated against HPAI.

Fifth, we have prepared ourselves for a possible HPAI outbreak in Singapore by drawing up contingency plans. These plans involve the activation of manpower to cull poultry in affected local farms. AVA has also stockpiled personal protective equipment and culling equipment for the culling operations. Training exercises in culling have also been conducted to ensure operational readiness.

Sir, the ongoing outbreaks and re-emergence of the disease in some countries are a stark reminder of the need for us to remain vigilant. We will continue with our multi-layered defence strategy, and to fine-tune it, when necessary, to safeguard Singapore against HPAI.

Pet Ownership

Mr Seah Kian Peng (Marine Parade): Madam, we read of how Singaporeans are splurging on their pets, grooming them elaborately, feeding them gourmet food, even supplements. Having a well-groomed and beautiful pet is the height of the middle-class syndrome in Singapore. Yet, in the papers, we read of more abandoned dogs, fish, and cats.

Madam, did you know that 8,000 pets are killed every year in the SPCA? In other words, 22 pets are put to sleep every single day. We say "put to sleep" because it sounds good. But the fact is that many Singaporeans are buying large animals like stuffed toys and throwing them out when they feel like it. The Botanic Gardens is not just a place for families to enjoy themselves, but the pets' dumping ground.

The reason for the surplus in unwanted animals is two-fold. First, there are many pets readily on sale, leading to more cases of abandonment. Second, strays breeding uncontrollably with no effective preventive measures to curb the population. And to compound the problem, SPCA's adoption rate is less than 100 per month, or less than 1,200 per year against 8,000 culls. It also competes with commercial and private breeders and pet shops to find homes for its animals. Effective measures are required to stamp the surplus in unwanted animals.

It is time for us to sit up and confront the fact that educational measures, like the Government's education campaigns on responsible pet ownership run by AVA, are not good enough. The public does not seem to have caught on the message and will probably need more time to learn it.

Also, can the procedures to buy a pet be tightened in light of the large numbers of pets culled at the SPCA each month? Can we make it harder for people to buy pets? I have two suggestions for consideration.

First, limit the sale of pets for commercial breeding, especially dogs. Many pedigree dogs are ending up at the SPCA. Up to a third of dogs there are pedigree. The authorities have previously said any limit on the sale of pets may result in smuggling because there may not be enough pets to meet the demand. However, this concern is unwarranted given the high number of abandoned pedigree dogs. There are obviously a limited number of homes to adopt them. Animals can be bought, even on the Internet. So the limitation of sale argument is thus justified. The benefit of a limit on pet sales is that it serves as a barrier of entry of frivolous impulsive buyers who turn pet owners. The serious owners are aware that pets are a lifelong commitment. They understand and will take any extra hassle in purchase procedures in their stride.

Madam, many pets are bought at the whims of children who do not realise the full extent of animal care. Culling the animals does not solve the problem. The situation has not improved throughout the decades of doing so. Rather, we should pursue a combination of tactical with existing educational measures to reduce the abandonment cases and over population of strays.

Madam, I myself do not have any pets, but to the many thousands of Singaporeans who love their pets, the current situation leaves much to be desired and causes them a lot of grief. Minister Mentor speaks of how we want to be in the first half of the First World. We can only truly do that, join the ranks of the civilised countries, not just by cranking up our economy, churning ever brighter students, but by caring for those who cannot speak and 100% dependent on us for the quality of their lives - animals.

The Chairman: Dr Maliki, although you have indicated that you wish to make a reply, you have only 20 seconds left. I think it will be less disruptive to this House if I allow Dr Lam to make his cut first and you may then do a consolidated reply after that. But since your consolidated reply will take more than 20 seconds and you would then have exceeded your Ministry's allotted time, please, before you speak, give me an indication of the amount of time that you will take because the "guillotine" time is 6.40 pm, but you may not go up to that time. Dr Lam.

Housing for Foreign Workers

Dr Lam Pin Min (Ang Mo Kio): Madam, this cut on the foreign workers' accommodation is the last on the list as well as for the day. But I certainly hope that it will not receive the least attention and priority in the Ministry's agenda.

The successful award of the two Integrated Resorts development will see an expected growth in the construction industry with corresponding increase in demand for foreign workers. There have been reports in the media on the poor welfare of foreign workers and the living conditions of their dormitories in Singapore.

Recently, I came across a particular blog site entitled "Foreign workers in Singapore", showing pictures of the pathetic living conditions of Bangladeshi workers. The pictures depicted 20-30 workers living in a crammed and dark dormitory room, some even cooking and dining in a small corner next to the double-deck beds.

Do we want to portray this appalling image of the plight of foreign workers in first world Singapore to the rest of the world? It is only logical and obligatory for employers to provide safe, hygienic and proper accommodation for their foreign workers as a comfortable and decent place of residence will allow proper rest and in turn increase productivity of these workers.

I would, therefore, like to ask the Minister for an update on the inter-agency review of the provision of accommodation for non-domestic foreign workers, if there are any guidelines for contractors or employers of the minimum standards required for a worker dormitory and whether there are measures put in place to ensure that Singaporeans will not be adversely affected or inconvenienced by the suggested housing plans for these workers.

The Chairman: Dr Maliki, may we have an indication of the time that you will take, please.

Dr Mohamad Maliki Bin Osman: Madam, thank you for your forbearance in allowing me to speak beyond the time allowed for my Ministry. With your indulgence, I would like to request for not more than seven minutes to answer the two cuts.

The Chairman: That is granted, Dr Maliki.

Dr Mohamad Maliki Bin Osman: Thank you, Madam. In response to Mr Seah Kian Peng's amendment, managing the pet shop industry and controlling the problem of stray animals require a multi-pronged approach that includes such regulatory action as education, sterilisation and culling.

The Agri-Food and Veterinary Authority (AVA) licenses pet shops to ensure that animal welfare standards are met. Potential pet shop owners undergo stringent evaluation by AVA before they are issued a licence. AVA also requires pet shops to educate customers on pet care and promote responsible pet ownership.

To raise the standard of pet shops, AVA will be starting a grading programme for pet shops this year. Besides being graded on compliance with licence conditions, pet shops will be urged to adopt best practices that promote responsible pet ownership.

Mr Seah suggested that the sale of pets be limited. Pet shops are currently restricted in the type and number of pets they can display for sale at any one time, depending on factors such as the experience of the shop licensee, and the size of shop. Limiting the sale of pets could lead to over-regulation of the industry and may not be effective in curbing pet abandonment. A more effective long-term solution is public education, which Mr Seah has rightly pointed out.

Buying a pet on impulse and the lack of knowledge on the care of pets are the main reasons for pet abandonment. To tackle the issue, public education on responsible pet ownership is imperative. AVA has been reaching out to students to inculcate responsible pet ownership through talks at schools. The ongoing Responsible Pet Ownership Public Education Programme urges members of the public to consider carefully before getting a pet, bearing in mind that life-long commitment is required.

Madam, animal welfare groups have also raised concerns on the treatment of stray animals. We recognise their concerns, but we have to strike a balance, as there are also others who are not so tolerant of nuisance created by animals. Sustained public education will be needed to inculcate responsible pet ownership and for the public in general to appreciate pets in their midst. To achieve this aim, all interest groups must continue to work together.

Let me now address the amendment by Dr Lam Pin Min on foreign worker accommodation. There are currently a variety of housing options available for foreign workers. For example, workers from factories, services sector, and marine sector may stay in residential areas or within approved dormitories set up within factory premises or on independent sites. Foreign construction workers may stay in quarters within the construction site, or in worker dormitories.

But housing for foreign workers in proper accommodation is a multi-faceted issue which requires the efforts of many different Ministries and agencies. Hence, a Foreign Worker Housing Coordinating Committee, co-chaired by MND and MOM, and involving the various agencies, had been set up since early 2006 to look into this issue.

To meet the housing needs of more foreign workers, we are in the process of releasing more sites for operators to build worker dormitories, especially for foreign construction workers. Guidelines have also been reviewed to allow foreign workers to reside in worker dormitories located within an industrial or warehouse development. We are also facilitating on-site housing at or near project sites where site conditions allow.

However, given that Singapore is becoming more built up, it will be a challenge to find suitable sites for worker dormitories. Increasingly, therefore, residents may find more foreign workers living in their midst, or dormitory sites located near to their premises.

We are mindful of the potential impact of foreign worker housing near residential areas. For the new dormitory sites, the Building and Construction Authority (BCA) will require successful bidders to provide a range of amenities within the dormitories. Apart from adequate living space for the workers, the dormitories will be required to have, for example, mini-marts, barber, remittance services, etc. These amenities will make the dormitories attractive and self-contained, insofar as daily living and recreational needs are concerned. Dormitory operators will also play their part in educating the foreign workers on our culture and way of life.

Notwithstanding the facilities provided within the dormitories, it is inevitable that foreign workers will go outside their dormitories and make use of common facilities within the area. Hence, they may patronise our neighbourhood shops or eat next to us in the hawker centres. As foreign workers are here to contribute to our economic growth, we hope that Singaporeans will be more understanding and accommodating in this aspect.

The Chairman: There is sufficient time for clarifications as the "guillotine" time is 6.40 pm. Dr Lily Neo.

Dr Lily Neo: Madam, earlier, Minister Mah said that we now have a new supply of sand. Could I ask the Minister whether this arrangement is going to be permanent? Does this new source cost more and how much more? Does it cost a burden to our construction industry?

Minister Mah also said earlier that MND is assisting, not private construction companies, but public construction companies. Therefore, I would like to ask him: what about private construction companies, especially in the supply of sand and granite?

Mr Mah Bow Tan: I would like to thank the Member for her questions. First of all, let me say that the new supply sources of sand are reliable sources and I have no reason to doubt that they will continue to supply, so long as the demand is there from us and also the price is right.

Would it cost more? These supply sources are usually much further away, so the transport cost alone is higher and, therefore, I expect that the total cost of these materials will be higher. That is the reason why, going back to the third limb of her question, the Government has decided that we will, because this is an unusual situation, co-share in the increased cost with the contractors for public sector projects.

Why only public sector projects? Because Government is the developer of these public sector projects. As the developer, we undertake to co-share part of the increased cost due to the higher cost of sand. I expect that the private sector developers will be similarly forthcoming when they negotiate with their contractors and the concrete suppliers to co-share the cost of their projects. We do not co-share for private sector projects because we are not the developer.

6.15 pm

How much is the additional burden? I think I indicated to this House, in answer to an earlier question, that I do not expect the increase in cost will exceed 1-3% of the total project cost. If we increase the cost of sand, and even the granite, construction cost will go up by about 4-5%. If we take into account the total project cost, including land cost, etc, the increase in cost will be about 1-3%, which is, I submit, quite manageable.

Dr Teo Ho Pin: Madam, I have two clarifications. One, on the proposed 220 km park connector by 2012, are there any special considerations in terms of phasing in the construction? Because I can suggest to the Minister to consider building those park connectors within housing estates first, so that at least the residents can use instead of building the Changi boardwalk or the Kallang River park connector where there are actually no housing estates near them.

The other question is on spalling concrete. Just now, Mdm Lee Bee Wah mentioned that the Town Council did not do a good job in repairing the spalling concrete. I just want to clarify with the Minister whether spalling concrete within a flat, from what I understand, is the responsibility of the flat owner. It is not the responsibility of the Town Council. So I am a little bit puzzled by her comment. Can the Minister clarify on the responsibility of repairing spalling concrete within a flat?

Mr Mah Bow Tan: The park connector is a very extensive one. When we finally complete the 200 km we are talking about, it will link not just the neighbourhood parks but also the major parks, like East Coast Park all the way to the West Coast - Kent Ridge Park. So we will have to phase it in. We cannot do it all together. In fact, I indicated in my reply that we expect to complete it only by 2011-2012 or so. Obviously, the ones that will bring the most benefit to the community will be done first. By definition, those in the housing estates will be given priority. But, at the same time, there are certain needs in other areas that also need to be satisfied. The reason why we built the Changi boardwalk was because we wanted to rejuvenate the Changi area. We wanted to bring back the rustic charm of the Changi area, redevelop some of the infrastructure that was getting a bit weak and tired, relocate the bumboat jetty in that area. That is the reason why, in conjunction with all those works, we decided to build the Changi boardwalk.

Yes, as a general policy, we will build the boardwalk in areas where there will be maximum benefit, which means that housing estates will get priority, but it does not mean that we will not start work on the other areas. We will continue to do so depending on the redevelopment plan for these other areas.

As regards spalling concrete, if it is within the flats, outside the liability period, yes, the spalling concrete problems within the flats will be the responsibility of the flat owners. As the Member knows very well, the cause of spalling concrete is because of the deterioration of the materials - wear and tear over time. Like other wear and tear items within the flats, the flat owners themselves would have to bear responsibility.

Mdm Cynthia Phua: Madam, the spalling concrete within the flat itself, currently, the repair method is poor. It will resurface after two or three years. The warranty given by the contractor, or even the HDB contractor which residents engage, does not last long enough, and the residents have to pay and pay for the repair again. Could MND look into doing research into the repair methods of spalling concrete, so that it can last longer - maybe five years?

Ms Grace Fu Hai Yien: Madam, in reply to the point raised by Mdm Cynthia Phua, HDB is aware of some of the spalling concrete issues, and it is looking at a systematic repair method, and we will also study her suggestion about going into research on the cause and repair of spalling concrete.

Mr Siew Kum Hong: Madam, the Parliamentary Secretary has shared with us some of the policies on pet ownership. I would like to ask the Parliamentary Secretary whether the Ministry would review the existing ban on cats in HDB flats. I understand that, very often, HDB dwellers who do keep cats will let them roam around so that they can deny owning the cats when confronted. They also do not bother to sterilise the cats. This need for possible deniability leads them to be irresponsible pet owners. If cat ownership is permitted ---

The Chairman: A clarification, Mr Siew, not a speech.

Mr Siew Kum Hong: Yes, Madam. I would like to clarify with the Parliamentary Secretary whether he agrees that if pet ownership is permitted, subject to sterilisation and the need to keep the cats within the flats, then many problems attributed to stray cats will be resolved.

Dr Mohamad Maliki Bin Osman: Madam, this issue of pet ownership, cats especially, in housing estates has been discussed several times. There are two groups effectively - one, the pet lovers who feel that it is okay for pets to be in housing estates. As long as they are sterilised, they will be able to manage and live among HDB dwellers. However, there is also the other group of HDB dwellers who are very particular about the nuisance created by pets of this kind.

The policy of HDB has been that we do not allow cats to be kept in HDB flats because cats are nomadic in nature and are difficult to be confined within the flat. They have also given rise to problems such as defecation, noise and shedding of fur, which will affect the living environment of our housing estates. Having said that, I think we continue to try to engage the pet lovers group to try to bring both parties together. I think what is important is a sense of appreciation of each other's side and to see if, at some point in time later, they will come to an agreed position.

As of now, I think we receive a significant number of complaints from HDB dwellers with regard to nuisance created by cats. Therefore, at this point in time, the position of the HDB remains the same - cats will not be allowed in HDB flats.

Mr Michael Palmer: Can I just ask the Parliamentary Secretary whether he will consider allowing dormitories for foreign domestic workers, other than foreign workers, for those who may be in transit or awaiting training?

Dr Mohamad Maliki Bin Osman: If I got the question correctly, which is transition housing for foreign domestic workers, I think this is the purview of the Ministry of Manpower. If we understand the responsibilities of employers as well as the agents who are supposed to bring in the domestic helpers, they are supposed to be the ones who should be responsible for the welfare as well as for the accommodation of the domestic helpers in transition - by the time they come in and before they get transferred to their employers. I think the roles are pretty clear today as to what the responsibilities of the different players are, and I think they should continue to be able to do that.

Ms Eunice Elizabeth Olsen: I would like to thank the Minister of State and her Ministry for the comprehensive set of measures to make Singapore barrier free. Can I just ask the Minister of State if it is possible to include the proposal to have the "best accessibility" seal for buildings as part of the Ministry's proposed set of measures so as to send a strong signal to developers?

Ms Grace Fu Hai Yien: Madam, as I have mentioned in my reply earlier on, we are conducting a design contest, and we hope that by giving an award to the winning contestant, it will give a very strong signal.

Mdm Cynthia Phua: I would like to congratulate the Ministry of National Development for the revitalisation measures for HDB shops. On behalf of Members of Parliament of the Aljunied GRC, I would like to say that Aljunied will offer one of the neighbourhood centres as a pilot.

The Chairman: Any other Members who wish to seek clarification? If not, Mr Chong, do you wish to withdraw your amendment?

Mr Charles Chong: I would like to thank the Minister, the Minister of State and the Parliamentary Secretary for their comprehensive answers to all Members. I would also like to thank you, Mdm Chairman, for your patience and for your clinical efficiency in maintaining time for both the front and back benches.

The Chairman: We endeavour to do our best, Mr Chong.

Mr Charles Chong: With that, I beg leave to withdraw the amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

The sum of $783,918,000 for Head T ordered to stand part of the Main Estimates.

The sum of $4,331,536,400 for Head T ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates.