Khaw Boon Wan
Singapore
“Motor vehicle dealerships and showrooms have been closed since the start of the circuit breaker. As COE bidding is done mostly by the motor vehicle dealers on behalf of prospective owners, the Land Transport Authority (LTA) suspended COE bidding for the months of April and May.”
“Though stressed by the financial pain, they press on with the immediate priority of fighting the virus and supporting essential services. Post-pandemic, we will see how public transport evolves. Will demand for public transport services simply return to the pre-pandemic level?”
“Under our rail financing framework, the Government fully pays for the cost of building new rail lines. In other words, we do not recover the cost of building the Cross Island Line (CRL) from commuters through fares. The CRL project is being implemented and the final costs will depend on tender bids.”
“There are around 5,000 private bus operators with a combined fleet of 13,500 private buses. As we do not track the number of private bus trips and passengers, we do not have data on their carbon emissions.”
“There are nursing rooms at 50% of our bus interchanges. We will provide nursing rooms at all new bus interchanges and integrated transport hubs. For the MRT network, we will provide nursing rooms at all new interchange stations. We will also explore providing such facilities when MRT stations undergo upgrading.”
“Over the last three years, Singapore carriers have reported a total of 20 incidents of food allergies on board their flights. None required the use of epinephrine or emergency flight diversions.”
The complete record
Every one of 2,685 lines we hold for Khaw Boon Wan, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 24 of 54.
“Mdm Speaker, “哑巴” refers to a mute; “黄连” is a very bitter Chinese medicine. So, you swallow hard, and yet you cannot verbalise it; or you are speechless – “有苦难言”. I often look at the way politics is being run in many other countries with great sadness. Instead of engaging one another to solve real-life problems, parliamentary debates are conducted more like political theatre – obsessed with only scoring political points against one another, while ignoring the serious issues facing the country. I really hope Singapore does not go down this route please − for the sake of our children and future generations. As I said, in managing Town Council matters, MND officials know me and my style. My specific instruction to my colleagues has always been: treat all Town Councils fairly and equitably. For instance, we apply the same formula when computing grants to be disbursed to Town Councils. Our technical training courses are open to all Town Councils. We provide technical and administrative advice to all Town Councils promptly whenever we are approached. HDB holds regular Town Council dialogues with all Town Councils to discuss future planning developments and shares best practices. I personally comb through nominations for estate upgrading to ensure that the projects are selected based on objective criteria and that we also respect the Town Councils' order of priority. Every Town Council wants MND to select more projects from their town. We try to make sure that all Town Councils benefit from upgrading within the overall budget that we get from MOF. I cannot satisfy all Town Councils but I will always try to be fair. Mdm Speaker, Parliament is now more diverse.”
“Thank you, Mdm Speaker. As I was saying, residents in Opposition wards are not excluded from selection of upgrading programmes, whether it is HIP or NRP. When selecting projects, MND will try to spread out the projects among the wards and the Town Councils. Priority is always given to older blocks. Within each town, we also give weight to the Town Council's ranking of projects. Ms Sylvia Lim will know that this year, her Town Council has been given three upgrading projects – two HIPs and one NRP. No Town Councils have more than three projects. My own Town Council has only one project. In accordance with the Town Council's priority ranking, two of these projects are in Hougang and one in Aljunied. However, let me add one point. Any smooth implementation and completion of upgrading programme requires cooperation among all parties. I think I have repeated myself several times now. I believe in give and take, because if you do not want to cooperate, no amount of work can be done. But if you are willing to give and take − both sides − things can move. While the HDB has done its part to roll out the upgrading programmes, there have been instances where the Town Council has apparently chosen to politicise the collaboration and not cooperate fully with the HDB. I am sorry to have to say this, but let me say it by giving an example. A Town Council – I shall not name it – refused to shut down the lifts to allow Lift Upgrading Programme (LUP) works to commence. It also refused to apply for the necessary licences for the switch room for the final phase of LUP works to be carried out. All these have caused unnecessary delays which inconvenienced the residents. And who gets the blame? HDB. We got the blame! As the Chinese saying goes, we were exactly like “哑巴吃黄连”.”
“After an election, newly-elected MPs assume office as Town Councillors immediately and assume legal responsibility for the town when the relevant orders are gazetted. But we recognise that the new team may need some time to fully take over the day-to-day operations. Hence, all contracts, including the managing agent contract, are transferred and the previous managing agent (MA) can continue to run the Town Council while the new management team eases in. But any future contracts will have to be negotiated under the ambit of the new team. Clearly, it will not be appropriate for the outgoing Town Council to make long-term decisions on behalf of the new team. Mr Pritam Singh and Mrs Lina Chiam added their flavour of this politicisation of Town Councils and raised old topics like MND's upgrading projects and CIPC. Residents in Opposition wards are not excluded from the selection of upgrading programmes such as Home Improvement Programme (HIP) and Neighbourhood Renewal Programme (NRP). In our selection process —”
“I assume the residents living in Aljunied are aware of all these and find them acceptable. Some Members talked about AIM not making any profit. Actually, there is nothing odd about this. As I said, AIM was set up by PAP to help its MPs run their Town Councils. Because if the Town Councils do not perform, it will reflect on the MPs and affect their future election prospects. PAP has every interest to ensure its MPs succeed, and that is why AIM did not seek to make a profit out of the 2010 transaction. As I said just now, Members are aware that Workers' Party's supporters set up FMSS after the General Election on 15 May and a legitimate question is: what was the motive behind the formation of FMSS? Surely, it is also to help the Workers' Party's MPs run their Town Council, is it not? The same latitude given to the PAP Town Councils is applied to the Workers' Party's Town Council as well by MND. Workers' Party's Members raised some examples from the Punggol East handover to illustrate a point that the handover process is highly politicised. However, the version from Mr Zainal Sapari carries a slightly different flavour. More importantly, I must clarify that the Punggol East handover and the Aljunied handover are different, from the point of view of the Town Councils Act. The Act allows up to 90 days handover for transfer of properties from one Town Council to another. This applies to Punggol East. The two parties have 90 days to complete the handover, but when the MP changes, either from the same or different party, changeover is immediate. This was what happened in Mr Sitoh's case in Potong Pasir. He moved in immediately, took charge, took responsibility, ensured a successful changeover. This was what was supposed to happen in Aljunied. But, sadly, it did not.”
“Precisely because software goes into obsolescence very quickly, if you examine the Town Councils Financial Rules, hardware is classified as an asset, to be depreciated. Software is not. Software is just treated as an operating expense; expense off straightaway. It does not get depreciated. Back to the TCMS and when it was first tendered out. Yes, it cost the Town Councils $24 million to develop. But by the time it was hitting obsolescence, how much was it worth? Very little; nothing; probably zero. And the tender bids proved it. Nobody was interested in it. AIM had to step in, because if they did not step in, the Town Councils would be left in the lurch, which was the point that Asst Prof Eugene Tan made in his TODAY article on 6 May. Anyway, I am glad that several Workers' Party members – Ms Sylvia Lim and so on – made comments expressing great concern about financial prudence and the need to ensure that Town Councils minimise the cost in the interest of their residents. Mdm Speaker, so do we; although, frankly, how the PAP and the Workers' Party do it may be different. For instance, in Aljunied, we found that the management agency rate which FMSS charged Aljunied-Hougang residents is 20% higher than the rate charged by the former Aljunied Town Council's managing agent, when it was under Mr George Yeo. To be precise, when it was under Mr George Yeo, it was $6.51 per housing unit per month. Now, it is $7.87 in Financial Year 2011, in the first contract. And then up to $8.04 per unit per month now – 20% hike. In fact, FMSS' rate is more than 50% higher than the rate charged in Tampines Town Council, which is of similar size. Tampines' rate is about $5.15 per month per unit. In fact, it came down a little bit to $4.99 last year.”
“When this AIM episode was raised, what struck me was this: I used to run National University Hospital. The then Health Minister Mr Goh appointed me to start up a newly built hospital. The hospital was almost built, and the deadline to open the hospital already announced to the public. My team had to start it up. We were given – relying on my memory – four or five months to start it up. One of the things that was missing at that time was software. To run a hospital, you need computer software. Yes, if you do not have one software, it is very hard to run a hospital properly, and to do it manually, that is impossible. But we managed it in four, five months. How? Because the software industry is very well developed. There are off-the-shelf software programmes which you can pick and buy, and then you just have to design your operational processes to suit the software, to be in accordance with the software. So, that is one quick and easy option, and that was the option I did in the case of NUH; successfully opened. But if you want bells and whistles, then of course, you have to spend time developing, modifying, changing the software codes; so it cannot be an off-the-shelf solution. In the case of NUH, we started with off-the-shelf solution, settled in, got the priorities right. And then over time, we added in all the bells and whistles, and then we had a very sophisticated software when I left the hospital. For the Town Councils, it is the same thing. It is not as if it is so crippling without one. There are solutions available. It is up to you. But in any case, the bottom line is this – AIM did not terminate. They were quite willing to extend, if only you asked. But if you do not ask, why should they offer, because you may feel insulted.”
“Ms Sylvia Lim has also questioned the prudence in incurring unnecessary expenditure during handovers to replicate systems already developed with public funds, when these systems could simply be handed over to MPs taking over. I agree that Town Councils should not incur unnecessary expenditure, whether during handovers or for day-to-day operations as these are residents' funds. That is why during a handover, contracts, assets and liabilities remain vested with the Town Council. They are accessible to the newly elected MPs when they take over. It is not necessary for the new Town Council management to terminate the existing contracts and incur additional costs to replicate existing systems unless they choose to. However, software contracts have unique difficulties with such an arrangement. There have to be significant software changes when boundaries are changed. This happens with Town Councils even when the political party remains unchanged. Where political parties change, the operating software inevitably has to evolve to suit the new MP's management style and operational preference. As Mr Zainal Sapari put it just now, the reality is that there will be cost incurred whenever there is a change of Town Council and which can be significant. But I agree that we should try to minimise it, and this requires some give-and-take on the part of the two parties involved in the changeover. There were some comments about the TCMS software by Mr Png Eng Huat, that this is a software that Town Councils spent almost $24 million to build up, so why hand it over, or tender it out, for $140,000. We all know that software has limited shelf life. IT platforms are so progressive and dynamic that upgrades are inevitable every few years.”
“And as events demonstrated, AIM readily acceded to her subsequent requests for extensions, not once but twice. Maybe pride or political motives got in the way and residents' interests became secondary. Please take a good look at Mr Sitoh who dealt with a similar transitional problem in Potong Pasir. He did not feel anything wrong to ask for an extension of the service of the General Manager who had served for many years under Mr Chiam See Tong. He placed residents' interests first and because he ventured to ask, he ensured a successful transition and handing over at Potong Pasir. The transition there was not without problems; there were many. But instead of bad-mouthing or finding excuses through attributing problems to his predecessor, he and his team worked quietly round-the-clock to minimise any disruption to their residents. That is the professional way of dealing with handing over. If there is anything suspicious about timing, it is really the timing of Ms Sylvia Lim raising the AIM issue. Why did she not raise the termination of the TCMS back in 2011 when they took over, instead of thanking AIM for agreeing to the extensions that they had requested. Why, after thanking AIM, then wait 18 months till December 2012 when the MND revealed that the Town Council's audit report had been delayed, to raise this complaint against AIM? I presume she will claim that they had been too busy setting up their own system to bother about raising this issue. Anyway, I must say it has been quite effective in distracting the public from the actual situation in the Town Council.”
“Seeing a snake in the cup when actually it is nothing more than a reflection of a bow hung on the wall. In any case, are we so stupid? As the Workers' Party themselves pointed out, the people who will suffer are the residents. Why would we want to deliberately disrupt the lives of residents in Aljunied? Would the WP just keep quiet and not make a political issue out of it? Who then would get the blame? Why would the PAP want to hurt the interests of residents in Aljunied and alienate them? How could we hope to regain Aljunied if we did this? Ms Sylvia Lim says that the PAP is not concerned about constituents sitting in their Cessna getting hurt should it crash land. This is self righteous, and – pardon me for saying so – arrogant. Many of us in this House have been serving Singaporeans for decades, long before she entered this House. Please do not behave as if you are the only patriot in this House. Do you honestly believe that the Workers' Party would blame themselves if they crashed, even if there is nothing to do with the plane engine, but because they are bad pilots? No way. I think they will start pointing fingers at everybody else. So, when Ms Sylvia Lim says that the AIM transaction shows that the PAP is hurting the people in Aljunied as just "collateral damage in a bigger political game", I am disappointed at such a comment. What is our bigger political game? It is about winning back Aljunied, not about doing something petty that will just upset everybody and make us lose Aljunied permanently. Indeed, who has been playing politics with this AIM transaction? If Ms Sylvia Lim was really concerned about the termination of the contract by AIM, why did she not simply write a letter to AIM asking for extension rather than assume that it would not be acceded to?”
“Third, the TCs' software maintenance contract with NCS was expiring in October 2010. That was why the Town Councils invited the open tender in mid-2010. These were compelling considerations which had nothing to do with the timing of the GE. Ms Sylvia Lim further argued that the residents' interests were placed at risk by AIM's one-sided termination clause. Now, all commercial contracts come with a termination clause. Termination can be initiated by both sides after observing a period of notice. The question is: is it one-sided? The Review Team has studied the specific termination clause in question and noted in its report that the Town Councils had valid reasons to insert it. The AIM contract is a lump-sum contract and a termination clause to address material changes to the scope and duties of the Town Council will help reduce the vendor's business risk and hopefully fetch a better price. There are now two interpretations of what actually happened. AIM insisted that it did not initiate the termination and that it was the Aljunied-Hougang Town Council which gave notice of its intention to use its own software. Only on receipt of that notice did AIM then terminate the contract. The AH Town Council's version is that they believed that it would be terminated and so decided to start sourcing for their own IT software system. The Review Team has included the full exchange of letters in their report, and we will let the readers draw their own conclusions. I am, honestly, Mdm Speaker, disappointed that Ms Sylvia Lim has chosen to construe the AIM transaction in such a sinister light and to suggest that the PAP has used the AIM transaction to trip up the incoming MPs. This is like what the Chinese say, “杯弓蛇影”.”
“Second, AIM has helped the Town Councils to extend the NCS software maintenance contract at no increased cost in the past 18 months. This has saved money for Town Councils, and hence their residents. Third, AIM has got the Town Councils onto a new generation software to be developed by NEC under a new leasing arrangement. This was a major objective of the Town Councils when they called the 2010 tender to sell-and-lease-back their obsolescent software. This necessary task has now been fully completed. The Town Councils have benefited from the AIM services. Ms Sylvia Lim further suggested that the timing of the sale of the TCMS to AIM just before the 2011 GE shows that the transaction was politically motivated. This is a rather paranoid view which distorts and ignores the facts. What are the facts? First, the Town Councils brought in Deloitte & Touche (D&T) to evaluate their software, not in the year just before the 2011 GE, but as early as June 2009. Second, software becomes obsolescent with time as the hardware and software platforms on which it is written are regularly upgraded. Those of us who have to deal with software installations and software platforms, we know that. The Town Councils knew that their software which had been developed in 2003, and built upon Windows XP and Oracle Financial 11 platforms, would have to be upgraded to the next generation soon. D&T confirmed it after conducting the review. Windows XP had been superseded, in fact, two generations, by Windows Vista and Windows 7. Worse, Oracle would also soon phase out its Financial 11 platform. They therefore recommended a software leasing arrangement for the Town Councils to consider, in line with the general industry practice.”
“The tender specifications further required the successful bidder to undertake to secure extensions of NCS' maintenance contract at no extra cost to the Town Councils. Essentially, AIM took on the financial risk of any fee escalation by NCS. By structuring the tender in this manner, the Town Councils had protected the interests of their residents to the maximum degree. This is the exact opposite of Ms Sylvia Lim's incorrect narrative. How did the Town Councils benefit? First, they enjoyed a net savings as AIM actually made a loss on the 2010 transaction. Second, the NCS maintenance contract was extended for 18 months at the same cost, without any fee increase. Third, the Town Councils are now on the development path to the next generation software. Ms Sylvia Lim also argued that AIM, as a $2 company, could not be qualified to deliver on its commitments and, therefore, placing residents' interests under undue risk. I accept the point that, in general, the fact that a company had just $2 of paid-up capital must raise a flag and need to be considered. But in this case, AIM is not an ordinary $2 company. It was set up by the PAP specifically years ago to help its PAP MPs do a better job at running their Town Councils. The party was standing behind it, effectively guaranteeing its performance. Moreover, there was a track record as it was responsible for the earlier version of the Town Councils' management software. That is the difference between AIM and any other "$2 company" that gave the PAP Town Councils confidence to enter into this contract with AIM. And as it turned out, did AIM perform as required? Yes, AIM performed its duties successfully. First, centralising the software did not cost the Town Councils any extra money.”
“MND accepted that, consistent with its approach to allow all Town Councils the same latitude with regard to party affiliation and we did not interfere with any of these transactions. And I think that should be the same, fair, consistent approach that we apply to all parties, whether it is PAP, WP or SPP. Ms Sylvia Lim and Mr Pritam Singh asserted that the transfer of ownership of the management software from the Town Councils to AIM was improper and against the residents' interests. Ms Sylvia Lim, of course, has been spreading this narrative ever since MND found her Town Council to be lacking in performance. She asked essentially: why should the Town Councils pass the ownership of an essential software to AIM only to lease it back at a fee from AIM? The Review Report has given a detailed explanation for this arrangement. This was a sale and leaseback arrangement which is perfectly normal in the industry. Just because at the end of it, the software has been transferred to AIM does not mean that it is at all improper. Now, why did the PAP Town Councils do so, just when the software was nearing obsolescence? Precisely because the software would soon be obsolescent, the Town Councils needed to move onto next generation software. Centralising the software ownership in one entity so that the latter could negotiate with potential vendors as one would greatly facilitate the process. But as the Town Councils needed to continue to function, the Town Councils would still need to make use of the software. The sale and leaseback arrangement was a practical solution to this problem. Moreover, as new generation software would need time to develop, the Town Councils would also need the NCS to continue to maintain the system in the meantime.”
“Apart from their long association with the Workers' Party's leadership, Mr Danny Loh and Ms How are Workers' Party supporters who acted as assentor and proposer to the Workers' Party team of candidates led by Mr Yaw Shin Leong to contest in Ang Mo Kio GRC in the 2006 General Election. Thus, if you look at the substance of this contract between AH Town Council and FMSS, the following points are quite striking: First, FMSS was formed on 15 May 2011, four days after the 2011 GE. The company was principally owned by two very close WP party associates. They were husband and wife and were providing services to Hougang as well. And they were Secretary and Deputy Secretary of AH Town Council. Second, the Management Contract, which was worth $5.2 million a year, was awarded to FMSS without tender. Third point: one year later, AH Town Council did go for a tender where FMSS was the only tenderer and a three-year contract worth $16.8 million was given to FMSS. Fourth point: subsequently, another three-year contract for EMSU (Essential Maintenance Services Unit) was also given to FMSS, which is worth $3.9 million. Mdm Speaker, when we talk about public interest, how would Ms Sylvia Lim characterise the FMSS transactions? In substance, has public interest been protected? Would she take the position that contracts like these given to close party associates be prohibited? In the AIM contract, public interest was enhanced. Can the same be said for the FMSS contract? In this respect, let me also remind Members that Mrs Lina Chiam too was appointed Potong Pasir Town Council's Secretary in February 2010 and she was paid a monthly salary. She was then the Singapore People's Party's CEC member and later became its Vice Chairman in August that year, 2010.”
“Latitude has always been given to MPs to manage their Town Councils according to their best judgement and be accountable to their residents politically. Town Councils run by MPs from all political parties have at one time or another appointed party supporters or former candidates to provide services to the Town Councils they run. The Straits Times gave some examples in an article on 7 May; so did Lianhe Zaobao on 11 May. Mr Pritam Singh suggested that, going forward, to avoid conflict of interest, companies owned by political parties should not be allowed to transact with Town Councils. As I mentioned, the Town Councils Act presently does not prohibit transactions with party affiliates. However, if we choose to do this as what Mr Pritam Singh has proposed, then we must impose it across all Town Councils, and also not just narrowly on party-owned companies but companies owned by people in various forms of party affiliations, like ex-party members and party supporters and even their immediate families. If we do this, we would of course be prohibiting the appointment of FM Solutions and Services by the AH Town Council as well. Ms Sylvia Lim mentioned about FMSS and made some comments about MND providing this information in response to a media query, and as she asked about this point, let me elaborate on this entity called FMSS. FMSS was formed by a group of Hougang Town Council employees. It is now principally owned by Ms How Weng Fan and her husband Mr Danny Loh, who although not a staff of Hougang Town Council, was a contractor of services to Hougang Town Council when his wife, Ms How, was the estate manager.”
“This particular requirement, coupled with the fact that there is no certainty that the vendor would be given the contract to develop the next generation software, explains why the other vendors were not interested. Ms Sylvia Lim mentioned that a vendor told the media that there was insufficient information in the tender document. There was a three-week tender notice period, during which potential vendors could seek clarifications from the Town Councils or ask for a tender briefing. So, there was sufficient opportunity for potential bidders to obtain the necessary information for their assessment. Mrs Lina Chiam asked how can there be no conflict of interest even if nobody made money. She said she is not sure if any lawyer would be satisfied with how "conflict of interest" has been defined in the review report. Let me share that the Review Team had consulted the Attorney-General who has confirmed the legal position taken in the report on this. Some Workers' Party members could not accept the Review Report's conclusion that there was no conflict of interest in the AIM transaction. I had explained earlier the background to the enactment of the Town Councils Act and the political nature of TCs. And this is the context against which the AIM transaction needs to be examined. Let me state the case from MND's perspective as the administrator of the Act. We are the authority, we own this policy. We are the policy formulator and the policy administrator for this Act. TCs are specifically set up to establish a link between elected MPs and their Town Councils. The Act by design does not prohibit transactions between the Town Council and party-related entities or persons.”
“We have to apply the Town Councils Act and the Town Councils Financial Rules fairly, evenly and consistently. Ms Sylvia Lim said that the tender was only open in substance because "each of the directors of the company had to have adequate experience in the operations and functions of a Town Council". The tender requirements had been drawn up in the interests of residents. It was important that the vendor should have an established track record in Town Council operations, given the extensive and specialised nature of Town Council administration, involving thousands of HDB blocks and associated common property. AIM was not the only company that could have qualified. For one thing, Ms How Weng Fan, with her extensive experience in Town Council work, could have formed a company with others like her and submitted a bid for this. After all, this is what she, her husband and her Hougang Town Council colleagues did when they set up FM Solutions and Services several days before the setting up of the AH Town Council. And they went on to win the contract to be the Town Council's Managing Agent, which is worth millions of dollars, without even a tender being called. In reality, the Town Councils did not receive any feedback from prospective tenderers to change or vary this requirement. In fact, from the informal feedback obtained, the sense is that stringency of requirement was something else. It was that the contract for the transaction ensured against any increase in maintenance costs – this is a maintenance cost by NCS – even as sourcing and development of a new generation TCMS was pursued.”
“Mdm Speaker, my apologies for my absence just now. I under-estimated the pace of reading of hon Member, Mr Liang Eng Hwa. Mdm Speaker, I thank all the Members who spoke, sharing their views on the MND Review Report, and also their actual ground experience running their Town Councils. Several MPs, including Ms Denise Phua, Mr Zainal Sapari, Dr Teo Ho Pin and Mr Liang Eng Hwa, offered many suggestions for Senior Minister of State Lee Yi Shyan to consider when he reviews the Town Councils and I am sure he will take them up. Let me respond to the key comments. The Review Team has established that the AIM transaction has complied with the Town Councils Act and the Town Councils' Financial Rules. Ms Sylvia Lim unfortunately continued to question whether the AIM transaction truly complied with the Town Councils Act since the tender period was only posted for two weeks in the first instance. Under the Town Councils Financial Rules, the minimum period of tender notice should not be less than three weeks. Nonetheless, latitude is given to the Chairman of the Town Council to approve a shorter period of tender notice. The Review Team has established that the PAP TCs had obtained the necessary approvals for a shorter two-week tender notice as well as a subsequent extension of one week. So, in the end, the tender period was three weeks. In fact, the Town Councils Financial Rules also provide latitude to Town Councils or their Chairmen to waive requirement to call for tender altogether. Ms Sylvia Lim would be familiar with this because she exercised this latitude when her Town Council waived competition and appointed FM Solutions and Services Pte Ltd (FMSS) as their Managing Agent in 2011. MND left the appointment to her best judgement and did not object.”
“We should not return to status quo ante where HDB administers estates all over Singapore, and MPs have no authority or responsibility over what is done or how well things work. I am hopeful that two decades of actual experience in running Town Councils will enable us to evolve a good practical approach. As pointed out by the Review Team: "How our public housing estates are managed is a very significant subject as it impacts the value of the homes and the experience of day-to-day life for a vast majority of Singaporeans living in the HDB estates." We owe it to them to find a good accommodative solution going forward. Mdm Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order No 44, I beg to move, "That the Ministerial Statement on Town Councils be considered by Parliament." [(proc text) Question proposed. (proc text)] 3.29 pm”
“After all, Town Councils are funded by public monies." But the same Straits Times article went on to quote several experts and most MPs as wanting to keep Town Councils as political entities. In a TODAY article published a day earlier, on 6 May 2013, NMP Assoc Prof Eugene Tan argued a view contrary to The Straits Times' poll findings. He aptly summarised it in the title of his article: "Let us not centralise Town Council services". It was a well-argued piece against a return to status quo ante. We need to consider this long-term issue objectively and carefully. There are at least three areas which need to be looked at: first, Town Councils' duties and responsibilities vis-a-vis HDB; two, adequacy of Town Councils' sinking funds and long-term financial sustainability; and, three, hand-over and transition arrangements when MPs change and, may I add, such change could take place between MPs of the same party or from different parties. I have asked Senior Minister of State Lee Yi Shyan to undertake the review focusing on these areas. And I urge all of you – MPs and NCMPs from all parties, as well as NMPs – to share your views, ideas and insights with him in this review. Mdm Speaker, 24 years after the formation of Town Councils, town management has been raised to a higher plane. The legislation to empower the elected MP to run the Town Council, so that he can respond more promptly to his residents' needs and work with his voters to shape their town's identity, has generally been a success. The need to create a nexus between an elected MP and his voters, through his work in the Town Council which has a direct bearing on the daily life of the residents, is a strategic imperative which cannot be faulted.”
“We know and we laugh about it. This division is inefficient but to consolidate the cleaning function into one will require the Town Councils to have to charge stallholders a higher S&CC. Most are reluctant to do so. These examples illustrate how political pressures on Town Councils can lead to Town Councils making sub-optimal decisions resulting in poorer outcomes for the residents. This is not a simple problem to tackle as it is an unintended consequence of the very nature of Town Councils and is deep-seated in the current practice of many Town Councils. The Team has thus recommended a review of the current Town Council framework. This brings me to the third part of the report: the need for a review. Twenty-four years after the formation of Town Councils, it is timely to assess the achievements of the Town Councils Act. The Review Team found that Town Councils have largely fulfilled the original objectives for which they were set up. Town Councils have delivered key estate services to residents in ways that conferred local flavour and met local needs. Residents enjoy far more customised services and Towns have developed their own identities in ways that HDB as a national agency could not have done. The Straits Times dated 7 May 2013 published the results of a straw poll on whether town management should return to pre-Town Council days and they found that 41 out of 50 persons agreed. In other words, "Let's walk backwards − go back to the good old days". It titled its article: "Residents prefer apolitical agencies: Poll". It quoted one resident as saying, "Municipal issues must be separated from political considerations so that Town Councils can be administered in a transparent manner, serving public interest and not party interests.”
“Some Town Councils are stricter in enforcing and recovering S&CC arrears. But others take a less stringent , shall we say, more populist approach towards such collections but at the expense of the Town Councils' long-term financial health and also, of the interest of the majority of residents who do pay on time. MND has significant concerns about the Town Councils' long-term financial health. Town Councils are required under the Town Councils Act to build up sinking funds which they will eventually need to replace big ticket items like lifts, mechanical and electrical equipment, major repairs and repainting programmes. Town Councils' sinking funds often run into millions of dollars while they build up but they will all be needed in due course many years later. Most Town Councils find it difficult to explain to their residents why their S&CC has to go up to build up the sinking funds further when the Town Council already has "millions of dollars" in its sinking funds. Some resort to kicking the can down the road, delaying S&CC increases which are necessary, and creating a serious problem that will emerge later when the replacements and maintenance works come due. This is clearly not sustainable. MND has also observed that Town Councils do not want to take on more responsibilities, especially if these carry a political cost. For example, some Town Councils are reluctant to enforce their own Town Council by-laws strictly, such as on obstruction of common corridors even though this is a fire safety risk. Another example is the disagreement over who should clean the hawker centres. There are currently two cleaning teams: one contractor appointed by the Hawkers' Association − they clean the table tops; another team by the Town Councils who clean the floor and also toilets.”
“More recently, after the Punggol East by-election, Pasir Ris-Punggol Town Council (PRPTC) had to hand over the management of Punggol East SMC to Aljunied-Hougang-Punggol East Town Council (AHPETC). Both Town Councils agreed to an official hand-over on 30 April 2013 but they needed to share the office space from 1 May as Pasir Ris-Ponggol Town Council needed more time to prepare its alternative office before it could move out. "How to share office space" from 1 May became a point of discussion. There was initial frustration when both parties could not agree to the proposed layout for the shared office. Differences also arose over several other issues. MND officers stepped in to facilitate the handover and broker an arrangement acceptable to both parties. Eventually both sides came to a compromise on the various issues. There are clearly some lacunae in the rules dealing with handovers of Town Councils. We need to look into this. The Review Team has made some useful recommendations to institutionalise some change-over rules to minimise disruptions to critical services during a change in leadership. One is for Town Councils to have in place contractual provisions for automatic one-off extensions following an election when there is a change of party in charge of the Town Council. Another is to set a minimum notice period for termination initiated by the contractor or key appointment holders such as General Managers. The Town Councils themselves have suggested that MND should consider extending the period of handover and play a greater role in the process. These are all useful suggestions and MND will take them in when it updates the Town Councils' rules. Another manifestation of the autonomy exercised by MPs is the uneven way MPs manage their respective towns.”
“That is why they have a Town Councils Coordinating Committee, currently chaired by Mayor Teo Ho Pin. That is also how the IT software got standardised for their Town Councils. In addition, the PAP as a political party stands fully behind the MPs and their Town Councils. And that was why the PAP set up AIM in 1991: to ensure that residents living in PAP-run Town Councils would be well served. I am sure later Mayor Teo Ho Pin can elaborate on how the PAP-run Town Councils work together for the benefit of their residents. The Review Team made observations on the process of handover of Town Councils from one party to another. After an election, a new team is required to take over almost immediately. And when there is a change in political party, it is not just the MPs who change because the other Town Councillors and even the Town Council employees may change too, as it is common for MPs to tap on the support of those who share their political cause to deliver their electoral promises for the estate. However, at present, the Town Councils Act does not contain adequate provisions to deal with such transitions. For example, when the Singapore Democratic Party, and subsequently the Singapore People's Party ran Potong Pasir Town Council (PPTC), it self-managed the Town Council, without any Managing Agent. When PAP MP Sitoh Yih Pin was elected in Potong Pasir in 2011, he had to appoint a Managing Agent quickly to ensure continuity of services for residents. He persuaded EM Services to step in to provide the service at short notice and managed to achieve a successful handover. But he told me that it was a trying time for him and his team.”
“" In the same spirit, when administering the Act, MND has given latitude to MPs to exercise autonomy in judging how best to achieve their agenda and advance their residents' interests. For example, Town Councils may, as they see fit, engage those who share their political cause or are affiliated to their parties. In particular, the Town Councils are able to transact with persons or entities associated with political parties. Over the years, many Town Councils have exercised this flexibility. For example, some Town Councils have appointed fellow party members and unsuccessful election candidates to various salaried jobs, including as General Manager. One Town Council waived competition – that means did not call tender – to appoint as its Managing Agent, a company owned by party supporters. MND has not interfered with such transactions. However, while MPs have considerable leeway, the substance of each transaction must still be proper and safeguard public interests. So, to recap, Town Councils are set up for to fulfil a political purpose. Town Councils are not part of the Singapore Public Service, and so they are not governed by Civil Service rules. They are governed by the Town Councils Act. What Town Councils can and cannot do is set out in the Town Councils Act. In the case of the PAP-run Town Councils, they work closely together to take advantage of economies of scale to benefit their residents. While PAP Town Councils operate in a decentralised manner, in the spirit of the Town Councils Act, they also work together as one team, tap on one another's strength, share best practices, and where relevant, make bulk purchases together so that they can get the best terms for their Town Councils and therefore their residents.”
“Madam, the MND Review Report speaks for itself and I am sure the Review Team will be prepared to defend their findings anytime. Second, the party political nature of Town Councils. Paragraphs 3 to 7 of the main Review Report provide useful background on why Parliament originally set up Town Councils in 1989, and on the strategic intent behind the Town Councils Act. Then MND Minister, Mr S Dhanabalan took the Bill through the House in June 1988. Then Deputy Prime Minister Goh Chok Tong set out clearly the purpose of forming Town Councils. I advise Members to read the Hansard records for a thorough understanding of this piece of legislation. Prior to 1989, all the common areas of HDB estates were maintained centrally by HDB, a Government statutory board. However, Parliament decided to give MPs more authority and responsibility over the HDB estates in their constituencies, in order to strengthen the nexus between the residents and their elected MPs. The strategic intent was to bring home to the MPs that how they manage and run their Town Council would affect their electoral fortunes at the next election. This would enhance accountability, push MPs to focus on what mattered to the residents, and in turn, encourage voters to scrutinise more closely the capabilities and the track record of election candidates. This would ultimately benefit both the voters and the residents. In line with this objective, the MND crafted the legislation to recognise the political nature of Town Councils. As the Review Team noted, and I quote, "The intent is to give the elected MPs as much latitude as possible to run the Town Councils within broad and general rules laid down to ensure proper governance and safeguard public interests.”
“As Members have seen the report, I will not dwell on the details. Basically, the Team reviewed all the facts of the 2010 AIM transaction. Its findings were summarised in paragraph 4 of Permanent Secretary (MND)'s letter to the Prime Minister of 30 April. Let me quote the highlighted sentences in this letter: (a) "there was no pecuniary or material interest by any Town Council member in AIM or in the contract awarded to AIM in 2010; (b) the PAP Town Councils complied with the open tender process under the Town Councils Act and Town Councils Financial Rules (TCFR); (c) the acceptance of a single bid for award is permissible under the TCFR as long as it satisfies the tender requirements and evaluation criteria; (d) AIM did not make a profit from the TCMS transaction in 2010; its Directors were not paid any fees and it charged only a fee to cover its operational costs; (e) there was no misuse or loss of public monies in the transaction; and (f) in the light of the above findings, the team concluded that the AIM transaction in 2010 has complied with the Town Councils Act and the Town Councils Financial Rules." The Review Team also examined the circumstances surrounding the termination of the TCMS for AH Town Council in 2011. They interviewed both parties and examined the communications between AH Town Council and AIM. They established the chronology of the exchanges. The chronology ends with AIM agreeing with AH Town Council's request to extend the use of the TCMS to 9 September 2011. The Review Team states that AH Town Council sent a letter first, on 10 June 2011, asking for termination of the TCMS, and further states that there appears to be a different understanding of the execution of the termination clause in 2011 by both parties.”
“MND was given the task as it administers the Town Councils Act and regulates the Town Councils. MND has a duty to ensure that public funds are safeguarded at all times and that residents' interests are not compromised. Permanent Secretary of MND, Mr Benny Lim, took charge of this task. He set up a seven-person review team, led by Mr Tay Kim Poh. Mr Tay is Deputy Secretary in MND and also formerly CEO of HDB. He has rich experience in public housing and especially Town Council matters. Madam, I notice that Permanent Secretary and Deputy Secretary of MND and one of their Review Team members are in the Visitors' Gallery this afternoon. The Review Team reported to the Permanent Secretary directly. I gave them a completely free hand in carrying out their task. They interviewed all interested parties, probed their records, sought views from relevant experts and had the full cooperation of all the Town Councils. They did not report back to the Prime Minister or myself until they had completed their work. On 30 April, Permanent Secretary (MND) submitted the review report to Prime Minister, with a copy to me. On 3 May, the report was released to the public, and has also been circulated to Members as a Miscellaneous Paper. The Prime Minister has accepted the Review Team's findings and recommendations. He asked me to deliver a Statement on this subject to Parliament. I will then move a Motion under Standing Order 44 that the matter be considered by Parliament, so that Members can ask questions and we can have a full debate. The MND report covers three parts: (a) the 2010 AIM transaction; (b) the party political nature of Town Councils; and (c) the need for a review of the Town Councils. First, the 2010 AIM transaction.”
“Mdm Speaker, thank you for allowing me to deliver this Ministerial Statement on Town Councils. Last December, MND published its fourth Town Council Management Report, what we call TCMR. As we know, this is a regular report which sets out the performance of Town Councils in key areas like the state of cleanliness, maintenance of the estates, management of service and conservancy charges (S&CC) arrears and also the standard of corporate governance. Among other observations, the fourth TCMR noted that the Aljunied-Hougang Town Council (AHTC) had yet to submit their auditor's Management Letter. This was material to the assessment of the corporate governance indicator. In response, the AH Town Council explained that completion of its audit had been delayed because Action Information Management Pte Ltd (AIM) had terminated the Town Council Management System (TCMS) with effect from 1 August 2011, making it necessary for AH Town Council to develop its own software within only two months. This led to an exchange of statements between AH Town Council, AIM and Mayor Teo Ho Pin, who is the Chairman of PAP's Town Councils Coordinating Committee. Questions were raised on the circumstances surrounding the termination of the TCMS for AH Town Council in 2011 and the sale of the TCMS software to AIM in 2010. There were questions about possible conflict of interest in AIM, a PAP-owned company, contracting with the Town Councils which were run by PAP Members of Parliament (MPs). In the interest of transparency and maintaining trust in the system, the Prime Minister ordered MND to review the AIM transaction thoroughly. MND was also to make observations on the nature of the Town Councils and how they had been run, with a view to improving the current framework.”
“The cost will depend on the local site conditions. Such "home lifts" can serve blocks of up to five storeys. For such lifts to be used in the Lift Upgrading Programme, the cost must be within the cap of $30,000 per benefiting unit. Page: 151”
“In June 2012, AVA appointed the Raffles Museum of Biodiversity at the National University of Singapore to study the ecology and population management of mynahs. The study will determine the current population size of mynahs, their roost preferences and roost site behaviour, and the distribution of their roosts. The study is expected to be completed by May 2013. With the study findings, AVA will work out the plan to manage the mynah population in Singapore, with the help of other agencies, such as the National Environment Agency, National Parks Board and Town Councils. An effective mitigation strategy is likely to require the full cooperation of many stakeholders, including members of the public.”
“CEA has investigated a case where a salesperson, who is also the Key Executive Officer of an estate agent, was involved in unlicensed moneylending activities. The Police has charged the salesperson in Court in November 2012 for unlicensed moneylending. The case is pending Court hearings. CEA has also investigated five salespersons who were engaged in conduct related to activities of licensed moneylenders. CEA has charged one of the salespersons in Court in December 2012 for six charges relating to referral of clients to licensed moneylenders, which is an offence under the Estate Agents Regulations. The case is pending Court hearings. The CEA investigations are still ongoing for the remaining four cases. CEA works closely with agencies, such as the Police, HDB and the Registry of Moneylenders, as well as the public, to investigate cases of salespersons involved in moneylending activities. CEA takes a very stern view of any estate agents or salespersons who work in collusion with moneylenders, and will not hesitate to prosecute any estate agent or salesperson involved in Court. The estate agent or salesperson may face debarment by CEA if convicted. Page: 150”
“In the last 24 months, CEA has investigated three complaints alleging illegal subletting of HDB rental flats. One involved a salesperson who had facilitated the rental transaction of an HDB rental flat and had collected rental deposits and commissions from the tenants. The individual has been prosecuted in Court on 28 March 2013 by CEA for eight charges relating to offences under the Estate Agents Act and Regulations for dual representation, handling transaction monies and failure to attend an interview at CEA. In addition, the individual has been charged by the Police for cheating Page: 149 offences. The CEA investigations are still ongoing for the other two cases.”
“The rate of breakdown is below one per month for every 10 lifts installed under HDB's Lift Upgrading Programme during the defects liability period. There is no significant difference in breakdown rates across the various models of lifts. The current breakdown rates are within the performance standards, as specified in the tenders.”
“The plot of land has been safeguarded for the development of the Rivervale Delta HDB estate. HDB launched the sale of the Page: 148 flats last November. We expect to complete the construction of the flats by 2016.”
“We are open to such an idea of housing some foreign workers at nearby offshore islands. We have, in fact, housed workers on Jurong Island and Pulau Brani, at different times, scales and duration. Page: 133 However, not all offshore islands are suitable, due to the availability of supporting infrastructure, such as sewers, as well as other planning considerations. But we will continue to look for suitable opportunities to help us house the foreign workers properly and without causing too much inconvenience to them or to Singaporeans.”
“Flat prices for projects launched in 2011 and 2012 were similar: between $180,000 and $240,000 for a 3-room flat, between $290,000 and $360,000 for a 4-room flat, and between $370,000 and $440,000 for a 5-room flat. The BTO prices are not identical as every BTO project is unique, with differences in location and flat attributes. But by and large, we have kept the BTO prices steady, even though resale prices have risen. And we will continue to do so, until the market stabilises.”
“Mdm Speaker, as I said, we have stabilised BTO flat prices by delinking them from the resale market. This is done by increasing the Government subsidy so that BTO flat prices do not follow the same extent of resale price increases. Let me illustrate with examples in three towns: Punggol, Sengkang and Tampines. These are the three towns where we have launched a good supply of BTO flats since 2010 and, therefore, they have comparative pricing data as requested by the Member. Page: 26 In Punggol, 3-room BTO flat prices were between $150,000 and $210,000 in 2010, and remained the same in 2011 and 2012. Four-room flat prices were between $240,000 and $330,000 in 2010. They increased slightly to between $260,000 and $340,000 in 2011 and stayed at that level in 2012. Five-room flat prices were between $330,000 and $410,000 in 2010 and remained stable in 2011 and 2012. In Sengkang, 3-room flat prices were between $120,000 and $170,000 in 2010, increased to between $130,000 and $210,000 in 2011, and stabilised at between $150,000 and $190,000 in 2012. Four-room prices were between $200,000 and $280,000 in 2010, increased to between $230,000 and $340,000 in 2011 and remained at that level in 2012. Five-room prices were between $280,000 and $350,000 in 2010, increased to between $290,000 and $420,000 in 2011 and moderated to between $280,000 and $410,000 in 2012. I am sorry for presenting so much data, but that is at the request of the Member. In Tampines, a mature estate, we did not have a BTO launch in 2010. But because this is the only mature estate where there are some comparative data, I have to quote Tampines as an example.”
“As I said, we are still awaiting new tender bids to come in and we will see. Tender bids, of course, partly depend on cost of the operator but also on the competitiveness in the industry. So far, there has been good stability in HDB tender bid prices in the last couple of years, which have been very reassuring for me. But even if tender costs should go up, we have already delinked the BTO prices from resale price index, which is the subject of the next question. If, indeed, it comes to that, then the Government subsidy just grows, and we will absorb that increased cost so that we can continue to be able to achieve the objective of ensuring affordability of HDB flats.”
“We monitor their utilisation of foreign workers outside the MYE quota, it remains at single-digit percentage. That is a very good sign. As I said, I believe that this can be done and can be achieved and let us work hard at it. Senior Minister of State Lee Yi Shyan is chairing an inter-Ministry committee because this work involves many agencies to try to make sure that this tightening policy maximises the upside that we hope to achieve. And what is the upside? The upside is increased productivity in the construction sector, and minimise the downside. What is the downside? The downside is delay in project completion or costs may go up. But if you do it well, we may be able to maximise upside with minimal downside. That is the intent that we want. Page: 25 On precast and prefabrication yard difficulties, their difficulties are my difficulties and we intend to work together as a team. Because when they succeed, I succeed.”
“Madam, the Acting Manpower Minister has repeated several times that there will be no turning back on this tightening policy. Let us forget about options or possibilities of further relaxation. If you look at the growth of the foreign worker population for the last few years, the construction sector is really a laggard in productivity. The bulk of the increase in foreign worker numbers is really due to this sector. We are determined to work together with the construction industry to try to upgrade and raise productivity. For the private sector, they can take reference from what HDB is doing. Even HDB itself will continue to push the frontier. Our internal guidelines state that by 2020, we should try to push up our productivity by another 20% to 25%, if possible. Let us forget about the option that we would go back to the good old days of freely available cheap, unskilled foreign workers. We just got to press on with the job of raising productivity. The tightening is necessary. Yes, there is heavy pressure on us to deliver on building more HDB flats and also MRT trains and so many other infrastructural projects. We must work together as a team, together with the developers, contractors, engineers and the architects, to try to achieve productivity that has been achieved in other countries. Indeed, we have been talking about this for a long time. I remember when I joined the Civil Service 36 years ago, we have been talking about productivity being very low in construction. Thirty six years later, now that I am in MND, we are still talking about this subject. The 45% MYE reduction is hefty, but is doable and we have been watching how our HDB contractors perform. They have been able to achieve that.”
“The impact on construction cost will be clearer when we receive new tender bids. HDB will continue to work closely with the contractors to improve productivity and minimise the impact of the recent changes on construction time and construction cost.”
“The foreign worker tightening policy will impact the construction industry in two ways. First, the man-year-entitlement (MYE) quota for new projects will be further reduced by 15% in July this year, so this would bring the cumulative MYE cut since 2010 to 45%, which is quite hefty. Second, the foreign worker levy will be further increased in phases over 2014 and 2015, with the exception of the levy for higher skilled workers employed within the MYE quota. These measures aim to steer the industry towards skills upgrading, mechanisation, and streamlining workflow to improve productivity and to reduce the reliance on foreign workers. During the process of adjustment, construction time and cost may be affected. Like other developers, HDB will likely be impacted by the tightening on foreign worker policy, despite there being no delay to the construction timeline for HDB's BTO projects so far. Having said this, HDB should be less affected as it uses prefabrication construction extensively, which helps to raise productivity and reduce on-site labour requirements. Currently, 60% to 70% of the super-structure of HDB projects is constructed with precast components. Indeed, HDB is the market leader in prefabrication. HDB is however, monitoring the situation very closely. If any contractor is unable to proceed with the construction work, HDB will consider allowing the contractor to novate the contract to another contractor. HDB could also terminate the employment of a non-performing contractor and engage a new one to complete the remaining work. Regardless of which option is adopted, delivering flats to Singaporeans on time remains our top priority. HDB has not closed any building tender since the announcement of the increase in foreign worker levy.”
“Madam, may I take Question Nos 5 and 6 together, please?”
“Mdm Chair, I will be very brief. The 2014 LUP referred to is based on current technology, current costing, and that is a commitment we made and we will deliver on that. I do not want to shut out hope for those few blocks where LUP, based on today's technology, is just not viable. Therefore, HDB continues to explore innovative solutions. I have confidence in technology and that the industry will always come up with better solutions. Just as not too long ago, we thought many more blocks could not be LUP-ed and it turned out to be not true. So, we are not losing hope but meanwhile I know there are some individuals who particularly, because of medical conditions, are in need, we would try special means, highly focused, just targeted on that family, to see how we can help them, including, if necessary, we would find alternative places for them to stay. Those have to be highly targeted at individual cases, case-by-case; and Members have to alert us to those individual cases and we will be as compassionate as we can.”
“Mdm Chair, Mr Gan Thiam Poh's suggestions are a little difficult to implement because the Member is talking about the resale market – both sale and rental. How do I interfere because that is between the homeowners or home sellers and the home buyers or potential tenants? For us to interfere means that we set prices, we determine those prices on behalf of the homeowners and buyers. So, I do have a practical difficulty there. What we can do is to try to cool down the market through various means. That is why there have been so many cooling measures and covering different aspects, including ramping up supply and trying to manage the liquidity flows. I explained to the media yesterday why is it that there are so many cooling measures. Why not have a big whack and aim to bring about a significant sharp price drop? But is that what you want? Is that what is good for Singapore? Our judgement is that such a move will hurt many. In fact, that will hurt the vast majority and it is far better to try to engineer a soft landing. A soft landing means we need a longer runway; which, therefore, means that we need more time and, therefore, it has to be gentle and it will take several rounds. That is the approach I am taking. That is our judgement and I think that will benefit Singaporeans much more, without causing unnecessary significant collateral damage to many innocent parties.”
“I would take the first query and then Senior Minister of State Lee can take the second one. As always, Mr Seah Kian Peng puts forward very thoughtful and useful suggestions, suggestions which any sensible chap should say, "yes" to, and therefore, I say, "yes".”
“I received a couple of emails which were negative. They said "Only a few can enjoy this scheme". That is not true, Mdm Chair. Among working singles above 35, excluding retirees, $5,000 is between the 80th percentile and 85th percentile. Put it in simple English, more than 80% of singles above 35 years old earn below $5,000. That is not "only a few singles who will be eligible". It is fair that we open this up to these 80th percentile singles and then we see. If the demand is manageable, I will certainly want to raise the income ceiling. That is my approach and I hope to get the singles' understanding and patience. When you open up and set too high a salary ceiling, what it means is when you have to ration and hold ballots, then it is luck-of-the-draw and you may end up offering many units to those who are earning $10,000 or whatever, while depriving those who are earning, say, $4,000 or $3,000 who may need it more badly and have less options. As for the 3-room flats in order to live with parents, I understand their wish. Some, in fact, emailed to me and say, "Can we have 5-room flats?" One step at a time. Let us do the 2-room flats because let us assess the demand. Then we slowly liberalise from there. Immediately, for those who want to stay with their parents, they can already do so, apply as a family unit to the 3-room, 4-room, 5-room flat BTO launches that they are interested in.”
“Madam, like Er Dr Lee Bee Wah, I had a lot of queries, too, when I had my Sembawang event yesterday. They were largely positive and appreciative. I appreciate their patience because they have been waiting for decades and now that there is an opening, they were positive in their feedback to me. Some of their questions were very similar other than the question on whether there will be BTOs in Yishun. We are planning the whole BTO programmes for the rest of this year and also going forward. As always, I would like to spread them out, whether it is Studio Apartments for the seniors or Studio Apartments for the singles. And also other flat types. I am quite sure that at some stage, there will be some BTO offerings which singles can apply to for those who want to stay in Yishun. The second point about salary, I gave an interview to the journalist which was quite well reported today. My explanation is a simple one – in policy making, we cannot hope to launch a perfect solution from day one when you offer it because no matter how carefully you planned it, you can never capture all situations. And the worse thing is to try to design a perfect solution that satisfies all. It may take you years, and then it will be very slow in implementing. My approach is to be clear where you hope the end point can be. We do not know how long or how far we can reach that point. But let us start off cautiously and progressively open up towards the end point. That I think is a much better approach than to open up in a very liberal manner, only to Page: 42 disappoint many at first stage and then you are forced to tighten up which, I think, will upset many. This first step of opening up to those earning below $5,000, I personally find it a reasonable step because what does $5,000 mean?”
“The $250 million Construction Productivity and Capability Fund supports companies in the built environment industry in (a) manpower and capability development, and (b) technology adoption, with a view to raise their productivity. Since its inception, about $20 million and $65 million have been committed under (a) and (b) respectively. About 2,200 firms will benefit from these disbursements. More than 80% of the firms are regarded as small firms under the BCA's classification system.”