Lawrence Wong
Singapore
“Sir, we will provide more information. I see the value of getting Ministries to put out more information, to share more about how their resources are being used and what outcomes they have achieved.”
“Sir, I agree fully with Mr Azhar that human capacity, human capital is critical. In fact, I would say the long-term potential of Singapore, how far we go really depends on us being able to maximise our human potential. That is key and that is why we have long invested in education. And it is not just about the investments.”
“Sir, we have been maintaining that commitment of 1% for some time now. I do not think it is about saying that we just have to do more and spend more. As many have highlighted, we want to ensure good outcomes from our R&D spending as well. So, we will continue if the outcomes are good.”
“This has never been the case. Temasek, when it started, was always very clear about its mandate from the very beginning – commercial, not doing national service, focused on commercial outcomes.”
“Sir, the MOF economists when they look at fiscal projections use Government's forecast of the economy, which is also published. We would typically use the mid-point of the range and then, of course, because these are in nominal terms, you have to factor for that. And the projections are done on those basis.”
“Sir, I was relieved that Mr Loh said he only has one question, but he asked the most difficult question. To answer the question, we will continue to monitor cost of living across all segments of society.”
The complete record
Every one of 3,205 lines we hold for Lawrence Wong, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 42 of 65.
“Mr Speaker, I am not familiar with the specifics of the case, but as I have said earlier, generally, if there are any financial difficulties or medical health issues, HDB would use these as considerations for granting exceptions. We can look at the case in specific if the Member would raise it to me separately.”
“Mr Speaker, about 3,100 households have taken up the Lease Buyback Scheme (LBS) since it was introduced in March 2009. This comprises 830 households in 4-room flats, 2,030 households in 3-room flats, and the remaining 240 households in smaller flats. Among those who asked for exceptions to the LBS criteria, the main reason for rejection is that they do not meet the age requirement. The qualifying age for LBS is set at the Central Provident Fund (CPF) Payout Eligibility Age of 65 to allow seniors to immediately receive their monthly CPF payouts when they take up the LBS. That said, the Housing and Development Board (HDB) has exercised flexibility for applicants based on their individual circumstances, such as ill health or financial difficulty, and has done so for about 50 households since April 2015. This includes households who did not meet the age requirement. We thank both Mr Gan Thiam Poh and Mr Alex Yam for their feedback and will take into consideration their views and suggestions as we continue to review our schemes.”
“Mr Speaker, with your permission, I would like to take Question Nos 8 and 9 together.”
“The Housing and Development Board (HDB) takes a needs-based approach in assisting public rental applicants and tenants, including those who are above the income ceiling. This includes taking into account their household size and expenses when assessing their requests for public rental, and their ability to pay rent. The majority of HDB public rental tenants have a household size of three or less. In addition, more than half of public rental households pay basic rents, which are $26 to $33 a month for a 1-room flat and $44 to $75 a month for a 2-room flat. The remaining households pay higher monthly rents based on their household incomes. If tenants face difficulty affording their rents, HDB looks into their individual circumstances and can exercise flexibility for them to pay a lower rent.”
“In cases where the flat is held in joint tenancy, the deceased's interest in the flat is passed on automatically to the surviving co-owner without the need for a transfer to the estate of the deceased. The surviving owner may lodge a Notice of Death (NOD) with the Singapore Land Authority to ensure that the title deed reflects the change in ownership. The Housing and Development Board (HDB) does not actively track when an NOD is lodged, especially if the NOD was lodged without HDB's assistance. On the number of HDB flats sold by an administrator or executor of an estate upon demise of all its owners, HDB's records indicate that there were 1,890 such cases in the past 10 years from 2008 to 2017.”
“We will implement the Home Improvement Programme (HIP) for the next batch of flats built between 1987 and 1997, and will undertake a second round of HIP upgrading for HDB flats when they are about 60 to 70 years old. The Government has announced ambitious housing plans for the next few decades. Singaporeans can do their part, too, by planning ahead and making informed housing choices. Working together, we can continue to strengthen public housing and home ownership for current and future generations of Singaporeans.”
“The Government has put in place strong support for Singaporeans to meet their housing needs across different life stages. We are committed to helping young Singaporeans own their homes, just like previous generations of Singaporeans. We will ensure Housing and Development Board (HDB) flats are kept affordable for first-timers by selling them at subsidised prices and providing generous housing grants. In this way, Singaporeans will continue to have a tangible stake in the nation’s progress, and their housing asset will appreciate as the economy grows. With evolving life circumstances, some families may subsequently choose to move to a larger flat, or near their parents or children for mutual care and support. They should be in a good position to do so, as they would have enjoyed some appreciation from their first flat. We also have schemes to help them live near their parents or married children, such as the Proximity Housing Grant, which was enhanced earlier this year. For seniors, the HDB flat provides a nest-egg for retirement. The Government is committed to providing home owners with many options to unlock the value of the flats for their retirement needs. For example, seniors can rent out a spare bedroom or right-size to a smaller flat and apply for the Silver Housing Bonus. They can also sell part of their lease to HDB under the Lease Buyback Scheme (LBS). We recently announced the extension of LBS to five-room and larger flats so that more Singaporeans can benefit from the scheme. Government upgrading programmes will also help to maintain the value of the HDB flats and ensure they remain safe and liveable through their lifespan.”
“The estimated expenditure spent in financial year (FY) 2017 on all Housing and Development Board (HDB) upgrading programmes was about $590 million. In FY2007, the total amount spent was about $580 million. If we look at just the Main Upgrading Programme and the Home Improvement Programme (HIP) alone, about 253,000 flats have benefited from the upgrading works so far, out of a total of 450,000 eligible flats built up to 1986. Another 230,000 flats will benefit from the extension of HIP to cover the flats built between 1987 and 1997. Upgrading works enhance the value of the flat in several ways, depending on the type of upgrading work. Under programmes, such as the Lift Upgrading Programme and the Remaking our Heartland Programme, the Government builds new amenities which improve the living environment and result in more convenience to residents and added vibrancy to the area. As for programmes, such as HIP, the Government heavily subsidises the works to help resolve common maintenance problems of ageing flats. By keeping the flats in good condition, HIP helps flats maintain their value even as they age. Without HIP, potential buyers of older flats and flat owners would have to undertake the works themselves, which can cost up to about $25,000 per flat.”
“As of April 2018, there are about 3,000 private residential units built on freehold and 999-year land but sold on shorter leases. This represents about 0.8% of the total stock of private residential properties in Singapore.”
“The National Parks Board (NParks) oversees about two million urban trees across Singapore. Depending on their species, trees are pruned at least once or twice a year prior to the monsoon seasons. NParks also conducts regular health inspections on its trees. Additional pruning may be carried out as a result of these inspections. While pruning is usually carried out to improve the structure and balance of trees, NParks also ensures that branches do not block the light from street lamps during its pruning exercises. In 2017, NParks received about 200 reports from the public about trees blocking street lamps. These made up less than 1% of the feedback that NParks receives per year on roadside greenery. If members of the public spot trees covering street lamps, they can report it through the OneService mobile app or by calling the NParks hotline.”
“We have a Real Estate Industry Transformation Map (ITM) and, under this framework, the various stakeholders from the Government and the private sector have been coming together to discuss how best to streamline and digitalise property transaction processes, and the implementation roadmap to go about doing this work. The workgroup consists of key Government agencies and industry representatives across the real estate value chain. The aim of the workgroup is to look into the feasibility of enabling property transactions to be conducted electronically from start to finish, but, importantly, to do so in a secure and verifiable way. Given the typical sizes of property transactions which the Member also alluded to, this would require very careful study in consultation with the industry and regulators. We believe that such a collaboration will help ensure that the interests of property buyers and sellers can be adequately protected, and we can then build confidence in digitalised property transactions. Mr Speaker, I believe I have answered the Member's queries and I beg to move. [(proc text) Question put, and agreed to. (proc text)] [(proc text) Bill accordingly read a Second time and committed to a Committee of the whole House. (proc text)] [(proc text) The House immediately resolved itself into a Committee on the Bill. – [Mr Lawrence Wong.] (proc text)] [(proc text) Bill considered in Committee; reported without amendment; read a Third time and passed. (proc text)]”
“Mr Speaker, I thank Mr Louis Ng for his support for the Bill. He raised two important issues. They are not exactly specific to the amendments that are being proposed but they are, nevertheless, important issues which I will touch on. First, the Government does recognise the rapid pace of technological developments, including in the emerging proptech sector and the use of blockchains for transactions, be it in financial industry or in the property market. Businesses and consumers would, indeed, benefit from greater legal clarity and certainty over such new technologies. And that is why Government agencies are separately studying the legislative framework for electronic transactions in Singapore as well as how best to streamline and digitalise property transaction processes. In particular, the Electronics Transactions Act (ETA) was first enacted in 1998 to create a legislative framework for electronic transactions in Singapore. Amongst other things, it provides for the legal recognition and usage of electronic signatures and electronic records, giving predictability and certainty to electronic transactions and facilitating e-commerce. The Ministry of Communications and Information and the Infocomm Media Development Authority (IMDA) are currently reviewing the ETA. The review includes the relevance of the current scope of the ETA and how to improve clarity with respect to emerging technological developments, like the ones Mr Louis Ng talked about, and business models. We will consult and obtain the views of the industry and the public before revisions are made to the ETA. The second issue that Mr Louis Ng raised was about the Government's plan to address concerns on security and reliability of using electronic records to execute real estate transactions.”
“Mr Speaker, the Lease Buyback Scheme is an option that we make available to seniors. Inherently, the amount that you can unlock from the Lease Buyback Scheme, particularly for larger flats, may be smaller than the amount that you can get if you were to sell the flat in the resale market and right size. That is understandable because if you sell the entire flat, you get larger proceeds; but with Lease Buyback Scheme, you are selling only part of the lease. There will be differences in the proceeds that a senior can get from right-sizing versus Lease Buyback. That is to be expected. The point is that we are trying to make available more options so that seniors can decide, one way or the other, whatever their circumstances are. Some may prefer to right-size and move out, but some may actually prefer to say, "I want to live in my present flat and age-in-place". Therefore, if that is your preference, we allow you an option, which is the Lease Buyback Scheme, and we are now expanding that option so that it is universal; so that it is not just confined to those staying in 4-room or smaller flats, but anyone in an HDB flat can have access to it. I think that is the basis for our thinking around these schemes, and, as I have mentioned earlier, we will continue to review them and make sure that Singaporeans in HDB flats will have a range of options to unlock the value of their flats for retirement.”
“Mr Speaker, I thank Mr Ong for his suggestions and comments. As I mentioned, there is a series of CPF rules today pertaining to the purchase of shorter lease flats. First of all, one restriction is that your age and the lease of your flat must meet the minimum of 80 years, which is a point that the Member alluded to. Another restriction is that for a flat with a lease that is shorter than 60 years, there is a proration formula that kicks in. These are the existing rules today. We are reviewing these rules and, when ready, we will be able to share with the public what the revised rules are and the timeframe for when the new rules can be implemented, bearing in mind that, with CPF changes, it is not just about policy changes, but we also have to amend or update the information technology system for CPF. So, it may take some time. But we will be able to share when we are ready with our review.”
“Mr Speaker, owners of older Housing and Development Board (HDB) flats and private residential properties are generally still able to sell their flats in the resale market today. Potential buyers of such properties come from a wide spectrum of life stages and circumstances and have different housing needs. For example, elderly buyers, or families who are not yet ready to commit to a longer lease, may choose to buy a residential property with a shorter lease. Older residential properties are also attractive to some buyers as they are usually more centrally located and served by established amenities. The Ministry of National Development (MND) is also working with Central Provident Fund (CPF) Board on how we can provide more flexibility on the use of CPF monies to purchase flats with shorter leases while safeguarding retirement adequacy. We are working out the details of these changes and will share them when ready. Besides selling their HDB flats or private residential properties, elderly homeowners can consider other monetisation options to unlock the value of their properties. These options include renting out their spare bedrooms or the whole property or selling back part of their lease to HDB under the Lease Buyback Scheme. As Members would be familiar, we have just recently announced the extension of the Lease Buyback Scheme to 5-room flats and larger HDB flats so that more Singaporeans can benefit from this scheme. The Government will continue to monitor the market and review the policies to help Singaporeans with their housing monetisation options.”
“Mr Speaker, with your permission, let me now take Question Nos 5 and 6 together.”
“Mr Speaker, as Ms Denise Phua has said, it is, indeed, a concern that we have picked up and people have shared with us. They worry that the process of voting for VERS can end up with an acrimonious situation amongst neighbours. So, we are mindful of the concerns. But I would say this process of getting votes for upgrading is not new. HDB has done it before, of course, under more limited upgrading programmes like lift upgrading and HIP. We do have a mechanism to get residents to vote for upgrading. We have some experience. We will build on that experience. We will see what had been done in the private sector and we will work out what is the best possible arrangement for VERS in order to achieve the outcomes that we want while minimising some of the downsides that the Member has highlighted.”
“Mr Speaker, there will not be any delay in SERS. For SERS, we have already selected many of the sites with high development potential. For SERS, there are a few more sites. And we will continue to implement SERS in the coming years. We do not intend to hold back the SERS programme. On financial sustainability, that is a very important point that Dr Lily Neo has mentioned. And as I said earlier, we are committed to ensuring that even as we have laid out the broad roadmap for public housing going forward, we are committed to ensuring that whatever we do, it is done in a way that it is sustainable over the long term.”
“Mr Speaker, I would not want to restrict or indicate now specific deadlines. But we have been looking at this issue for quite some time. We have already indicated the broad roadmap, if you will, for how we think about housing redevelopment. From now, going forward, there are quite a number of major items that have to be put in place. First of all, in the more immediate plans, we are talking about extending HIP, which is already a major programme. We are talking about the next batch of flats that are built between 1987 and 1997. After that, we are looking at the older flats when they reach 60 years, to do the second round of HIP. That is a major programme, assuming we have the budget for it, to roll out HIP II. After that, we have VERS, and, as I said earlier, we will study how best to go about implementing VERS – the precincts that will be selected, the compensation amounts, the threshold, the mechanism for voting. These are details that will have to be looked at. When we put all these in place, it is really quite a major series of initiatives and programmes that will have to be implemented. We will do it step by step, systematically.”
“Mr Speaker, again, I think we are getting into a level of detail. I can understand the Member's concerns. Residents may be wondering whether their flats are eligible and when HDB will inform. So, these are issues that we will study and will take into consideration the timelines and ensuring that if and when we are ready for VERS, we provide adequate time to notify the residents who are affected.”
“Mr Speaker, I can understand the interest in VERS and these are detailed questions that Miss Cheryl Chan and several Members have asked as well: what are the criteria for selection, what is the threshold for voting? I am afraid these are details that we will have to study and I do not have a reply today. I think it would be premature to talk about such details now, because we are, indeed, going through a very thorough study of how to go about implementing VERS. These issues will be incorporated into our study.”
“So, we will ensure that any redevelopment is done in a way that preserves the character of our HDB towns and supports HDB's mission to provide affordable and quality homes for Singaporeans. Mr Speaker, the Government has put in place ambitious housing plans for the next few decades. Whether they come to pass depends on our external, economic and financial situation. But this Government has a track record of delivering on our commitments. We will continue to work with all Singaporeans to translate our plans into reality and build a better Singapore for the future.”
“Because of the value unlocked, we share this value with residents through generous compensation, and the acquisition can be made compulsory. In the case of VERS, we expect more flats to be eligible, as the intention is to space out the redevelopment of the town. But the compensation terms for VERS will be less generous than SERS, because we will be redeveloping land that is more built up. Hence, VERS will be offered on a voluntary basis and residents will get to vote. We have outlined the broad concept of VERS. But there are still many details to work out, and we will need time to do so. This includes the extent of coverage of VERS and how the compensation will be computed. In particular, we will ensure that we implement VERS in a fiscally sustainable way, so that it does not become a burden for the next generation. For residents who do not get VERS for their flat, or who do not poll in favour of VERS, they will continue to live in their flats which would have benefited from two rounds of upgrading. If they need a place at the end of the lease, the Government will help them get another flat to live in. It could be a new flat from HDB for those who are eligible; a resale flat on a shorter lease; or a 2-room flexi flat for retirement. So, we will have various options to cater to diverse needs. Miss Cheryl Chan has asked whether private developers will have a role in the redevelopment programme. In fact, in the case of SERS today, we already, from time to time, inject some private development in the redevelopment process. So, for VERS, going forward, I will not rule out the possibility of having private developers being involved, and we will study her suggestion carefully. But let us be very clear. Our aim is to redevelop public housing estates.”
“Mr Speaker, over the last 50 years, Housing and Development Board (HDB) home ownership has uplifted generations of Singaporeans and given them a stake in the nation’s progress. The Government is committed to strengthening our institution of public housing and home ownership, so that it continues to bring tangible benefits to current and future generations of Singaporeans. This is why at the recent National Day Rally, Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong highlighted the Ministry of National Development's (MND's) plans to systematically upgrade older HDB flats through the Home Improvement Programme (HIP) and HIP II, and to progressively renew and rebuild older HDB towns through the Voluntary Early Redevelopment Scheme (VERS). Various Members have asked about the details of VERS. VERS will be launched in about 20 years’ time to pace out the redevelopment of our older towns. Some of our older housing estates were built up in a hurry to meet the housing needs of Singaporeans at that time. By spreading out the redevelopment of these towns over a span of 20 to 30 years through VERS, we can avoid having to rebuild entire towns in a similar hurry, which would be highly disruptive. This large-scale redevelopment effort is a good opportunity not only to rebuild some of our older precincts, but also to introduce new and exciting concepts of living in our newer towns into our older towns. To achieve this, we will need to carefully study how to select the precincts and stage the redevelopment, precinct by precinct, town by town. We have already explained the broad concept of VERS and how it is different from the Selective En Bloc Redevelopment Scheme (SERS). SERS is limited to precincts where there is high development value to be unlocked.”
“Mr Speaker, with your permission, I would like to take Question Nos 1 to 4 together.”
“Some assistance available to local retailers include: (a) the 12 small and medium enterprises (SME) Centres located islandwide, where advisors can guide SMEs in the use of digital technology to boost their productivity; (b) the Retail Industry Digital Plan (IDP), launched by the Infocomm Media Development Authority (IMDA) in partnership with Enterprise Singapore (ESG), provides SMEs step-by-step guidance on the use of digital technology at each stage of their growth; (c) HDB and ESG are also working to encourage HDB retailers to become more competitive via the Productivity Solutions Grant (PSG), which supports the adoption of pre-scoped information technology solutions in areas, such as customer management, inventory tracking and e-commerce. To date, more than 300 retail SMEs have applied for PSG support, and this number is expected to increase in future; and (d) IMDA will expand the list of pre-approved solutions in e-commerce to help SME retailers develop and strengthen their online presence. HDB retailers can also establish an online presence at no cost on HDB’s Where2Shop (W2S) website. To support these digitalisation efforts, HDB will be separately trialling free wireless Internet service under Wireless@SG and a shopper traffic monitoring system at some of the HDB shopping complexes. The latter will allow HDB to collect data to gain insights on customer footfall and customer profiles to help heartland retailers tweak their programmes and promotional deals to better meet the needs of shoppers. Kampung Admiralty and Oasis Terraces will be benefiting from these initiatives. In addition, MAs in our town and neighbourhood centres can tap on ROS to implement digital initiatives, including the installation of digital directories, wireless routers and footfall sensors.”
“Housing and Development Board (HDB) heartland shops play an important role in serving the needs of residents, and HDB has put in place several measures to ensure that our neighbourhood centres remain relevant and vibrant places. First, new neighbourhood centres come with well-designed plazas and gardens to draw residents to these community spaces. Second, HDB curates the trade-mix to improve the vibrancy of the neighbourhood centres. Third, HDB has extended the enhanced Friendly Faces, Lively Places grant to HDB retailers and Merchant Associations (MAs) so that they can organise community and volunteer events to attract footfall. Fourth, HDB introduced the Revitalisation of Shops (ROS) Scheme in 2007 to help retailers and MAs enhance the vibrancy and competitiveness of HDB shops, through co-funding the upgrading of common areas and promotional events, and granting rent-free periods for tenants to renovate their shops. The subsidies provided under ROS were recently enhanced in May 2016. Since then, 17 sites have been announced under the seventh batch of the ROS. These include (a) 13 sites which have applied for co-funding for upgrading of the common areas, of which, upgrading works at three sites have either commenced or will be commencing by October 2018; and (b) 11 sites which have applied for co-funding for promotional events have successfully organised events at the respective centres. In addition, to help our heartland businesses deal with the rising competition from e-commerce retailers and private shopping malls, the Retail Industry Transformation Map (ITM) was launched in 2016. A key strategy is to help local retailers integrate their e-commerce and digital marketing capabilities into their business models to reach out to more customers.”
“The Agri-Food and Veterinary Authority (AVA) works with 14 Animal Welfare Groups (AWGs) that take in and rehome animals. Nine operate their own shelters, including eight that have taken up or will be taking up tenancy at The Animal Lodge in Sungei Tengah. This was fully funded and built by the Government as an option for AWGs whose premises were affected by development plans. There are also some AWGs that do not maintain a physical shelter, but work with fosterers to temporarily care for the animals before they are adopted. AVA will continue to work closely with AWGs to manage the stray animal population. Members of the public can also help by volunteering with them, helping with their fund-raising, or adopting animals.”
“For HDB projects, HDB will also appoint an independent consultant to carry out checks on the HDB blocks with similar facade features to ensure there are no safety concerns. This is done regardless of the age of the building.”
“In the design and construction of Housing and Development Board (HDB) flats, HDB ensures that all its buildings, including the external facade features, are designed and installed in accordance with approved Codes of Practice, the Building Control Act and Regulations, as well as other statutory requirements. Inspections are carried out during construction to ensure that works are completed in compliance with the requirements. In the case of claddings and fixtures, these installations are usually designed and supervised by a Specialist Qualified Person, who is a Professional Engineer, and the plans must be approved by the Building and Construction Authority (BCA). Once the buildings have obtained the Temporary Occupation Permit, building owners are required to ensure that the building exterior is maintained in a serviceable state under the Building Maintenance and Strata Management Act. For HDB estates, Town Councils conduct regular inspections on the building facades as they are responsible for the maintenance of common property. Where necessary, they will engage a Professional Engineer to follow up on the repairs required. The Periodic Facade Inspection (PFI) regime aims to enable early detection of tell-tale signs of deteriorating facade elements. It adopts a risk-based approach to balance enhanced safety against increased costs for building owners. This is why the PFI regime is scoped to focus on buildings above 20 years old, and excludes private landed houses, temporary buildings and low-rise buildings. Notwithstanding the PFI regime, should any facade be dislodged from buildings, BCA will carry out an independent investigation on the incident to verify the cause of dislodgement.”
“The Agri-Food and Veterinary Authority (AVA) has worked with the National Parks Board (NParks) to prune the trees to discourage birds from roosting in the Upper Serangoon Road area. NParks will continue with regular tree pruning. AVA also conducted a trial to use lasers to disperse the birds in September 2017. However, the trial was unsuccessful in deterring the birds from roosting in the area. AVA is assessing other measures that can be deployed. The public can also play a part by maintaining the overall cleanliness of the environment and not feeding wild birds. AVA and the National Environment Agency will continue to work with the Jalan Besar Town Council to encourage residents not to litter or feed wild birds. Enforcement actions will be taken against those who do not comply. For instance, a recalcitrant feeder in the estate was recently sentenced in Court and received a $450 fine for pigeon feeding. He had previously been fined on four occasions for similar offences.”
“Farrer Park Field has been used as a sports field since the 1930s. Other sports facilities adjoining the Field, such as the Athletic Centre and Swimming Pool, were built in the 1950s, and served as the training grounds for many local athletes. Over the years, as newer facilities, such as the nearby Jalan Besar Stadium and Swimming Complex and the National Stadium were built, the facilities in the Farrer Park area were less frequently used as competitive sports venues. Today, they are used mainly by the public for recreational sports. The Farrer Park area is close to the city and the Little India Mass Rapid Transit interchange, making it suitable for housing. The current plan is to develop the area for housing and community facilities, including a park. We are mindful of the Farrer Park area's history as a sporting ground and will see how best to weave in elements of the heritage of the area in our future plans. We will seek feedback and ideas from key stakeholders and community partners as we develop more detailed plans.”
“These include the National Environment Agency's Environmental Protection and Management Act, and the Public Utilities Board's Sewerage and Drainage Act in relation to air, noise and water pollution, and the National Parks Board's Parks and Trees Act in relation to activities within nature reserves and national parks. For example, under the Parks and Trees Act, conducting activities within nature reserves and national parks which cause alteration, damage or destruction to any plant, or injury to or the death of any animal or any other organism, are considered offences. The penalty for these offences is a fine of up to $50,000, imprisonment of up to six months, or both. A fine of up to $500 is further imposed for every day or part of the day which the offence continues after conviction.”
“Development projects that are near to sensitive areas, such as Nature Reserves, Nature Areas, areas of significant biodiversity, and marine and coastal areas, are required to undergo an in-depth consultation process with the relevant technical agencies. Where necessary, agencies will stipulate the environmental requirements that need to be met and ensure that mitigating measures are put in place by the developer to minimise the environmental impact. Agencies will also work with developers to ensure that the recommended mitigation measures are implemented, through environmental monitoring and management programmes. Should the developers deviate from the measures, agencies will ask developers to take appropriate actions to rectify the situation. If there is any unanticipated environmental impact or when the mitigation measures prove insufficient, developers will need to modify existing mitigation measures or put in additional mitigation measures, in consultation with the relevant agencies. The Ministry of National Development and the technical agencies are reviewing the Environmental Impact Assessment framework to ensure that it remains robust and meets the intended objectives. As part of this review, we will study how best to ensure that mitigating measures are implemented in the right spirit, and whether there is a need to strengthen the penalties for non-compliance. Today, developers who violate regulatory requirements already face penalties under the various environmental Acts.”
“The Trap-Neuter-Release-Manage (TNRM) programme is a humane and science-based method to reduce the stray dog population through sterilisation. Our animal welfare groups (AWGs) have been working on localised sterilisation efforts in different areas in Singapore for many years. To take these efforts further, the Agri-Food and Veterinary Authority (AVA) has announced a nation-wide TNRM programme to sterilise more than 70% of the stray dogs in Singapore over five years. AVA plans to implement the programme progressively from the last quarter of this year, with support from AWGs, veterinarians and other stakeholders. AVA will provide funding support and resources, and maintain oversight over key operational work, such as trapping, sterilisation and outreach. However, AVA cannot do it alone. The success of this programme requires close partnership with many stakeholders. In particular, we will need AWGs and vets to continue contributing their experience and expertise. For example, AWGs can help with trapping and rehoming efforts while vets can assist with the sterilisation procedure. As for the Member's question on pet abandonment, AVA regularly reviews its regulations and programmes to promote responsible pet ownership. For example, AVA revised the dog licensing regime in March 2017. Pet businesses now have to license all dogs before they are sold. They also have to transfer the dog licences to the new owners when the dogs are sold or transferred. This helps to improve traceability and deters abandonment. AVA will continue to monitor the effectiveness of the revised dog licensing regime. AVA will take enforcement action against errant pet owners who abandon their dogs. A person found guilty of pet abandonment may be fined up to $10,000 and/or jailed up to 12 months.”
“The lift lobbies and common corridors at Housing and Development Board (HDB) Build-To-Order (BTO) projects are designed to be naturally lit and ventilated. This open concept design is eco-friendly and lowers maintenance costs. In Singapore's tropical climate, especially during monsoon seasons, rainwater splashing along more open areas like lift lobbies and common corridors in a heavy downpour is inevitable. Hence, for weather protection, common corridors are provided with an extended overhang, that is, a canopy. While this measure is generally adequate, it may not be able to fully prevent the corridor from getting wet during heavy downpours accompanied by strong winds. To avoid water-ponding and overly wet floors during rain, the floors at lift lobbies and common corridors are graded to allow excess water to flow to the scupper drain. HDB introduces rain screens where appropriate, based on feedback from residents as well as its own studies. Nonetheless, such screens are not installed in all locations as some locations need to be kept open and well-ventilated for fire safety reasons. Some residents may also view the rain screens as an obstruction to their view. Members who have feedback on issues related to specific blocks can approach HDB so that we can look into the details.”
“Mr Speaker, as I mentioned, they have to form two separate family nuclei. So, this would typically apply to multi-generational families. I do not have the numbers, but the applicants are not many. This also goes back to the reason why we have to better understand the needs of the families we are talking about. When HDB closed the 3-room register in 1982, the experience was that many of these families, in fact, preferred to buy, rather than to rent, the 3-room flats because it made more financial sense for them. They could pay using their Central Provident Fund and, at the end of the day, they would have a flat of their own. So, if you were to talk larger families who want to apply for two separate units, they would have to pay a larger rental amount. Some of them may prefer not to do so. They may prefer to save, for example. If it is a first-timer family, they may very well prefer to build up their savings first in order to buy a flat later. So, I think there are multiple needs here. The Housing and Development Board and the social service agencies are committed to engage these families to better understand their needs and to resolve and tackle them holistically.”
“Public housing first started with Housing and Development Board (HDB) blocks comprising 1-, 2- and 3-room rental flats. Subsequently, as part of the Government's overall move to encourage Singaporeans towards home ownership, HDB sold existing 3-room rental flats to the sitting tenants and closed the 3-room rental register in 1982. Hence, when HDB resumed the rental building programme in 2007, only 1- and 2-room flats were built. The rental rates for these 1- and 2-room public rental flats are heavily subsidised so that they remain accessible to the lower-income households. More than 90% of households in these public rental flats have four or fewer persons living together. Larger families who form two separate family nuclei, such as grandparents living with parents and children, and need more space may also apply for two separate rental flats. There are no plans to impose a limit on the number of family members who can live in a rental flat or to impose occupancy standards for such flats. And we take a similar approach for flats which are sold or rented in the open market because, in the same manner, there is no limit on the number of related persons who can stay together as a family in these units. We will continue to review how best to meet the needs of public rental households, including larger families, as part of the Government's broader effort to support vulnerable families.”
“Yes. Thank you for the reminder. I am taking Question Nos 32 and 33 together, with your permission, Sir.”
“I met up with the coffee shop operator. They told me that because of e-bidding, some of them are not experienced, just because they want to come into business, they put up a higher price and then when they come in, they cannot survive, they close down. It affected the residents because they serve the surrounding residents, residents have nowhere to go. And then HDB calls another tender. It takes quite a few months before it awards. So, I am happy to hear about the PQM and I hope that, in future, we will have to be very mindful. You do the sums. A small coffee shop, $30,000, $40,000; how much would they have to charge per stall? I think we can easily calculate whether they can survive or not.”
“To provide residents with access to affordable food options, the Housing and Development Board (HDB) ensures that there is a good supply of coffee shops in HDB estates to maintain healthy price competition. There are presently close to 750 HDB-built coffee shops, of which 70 were completed in the last five years. A further 31 are in the pipeline and will be completed in the next five years. To find suitable operators for new coffee shops, HDB has used an online tendering system since 2004. This system makes bidding more transparent as it allows prospective bidders to see all bids in real time and adjust their bids accordingly ahead of the close of tender. We are continuously reviewing the tendering mechanism to see how it can be made more effective in ensuring affordable food for residents. For example, instead of simply awarding to the highest price bids, HDB has been piloting the use of the Price-Quality Method (PQM) to tender out several coffee shops. Under the PQM, quality score accounts for 50% of the evaluation and operators with affordable food options will score higher. That is why HDB recently awarded a coffee shop in Choa Chu Kang to a food operator with affordable food options and with initiatives to improve productivity, even though their rental bid was 40% lower than the highest bid. We have seen good outcomes from this tendering approach. So, I am happy to share that HDB will be replacing the existing e-bidding system with the PQM tender for all coffee shops later this year. Er Dr Lee Bee Wah (Nee Soon): Thank you, Sir. The reason I ask this is that, there are a few coffee shops in Nee Soon South, the new one, not even, I think barely around for one year and it closed down, cannot survive. And now, a tender is called again.”
“Mr Speaker, as to Mr Leon Perera's question on the Jurong Lake District, we have discussed this earlier this week. As mentioned, we have not received official notification from the Malaysian government on their position regarding the High-Speed Rail (HSR) Project. In the event there are changes in the status of the HSR, we will study the implications carefully. While there may be a need for some adjustments, we do not expect major changes to the overall plans for the Jurong Lake District. And as I mentioned during the Sitting on 9 July 2018, the plans for the Jurong Lake District were formulated in 2008, well before the HSR project came about. The plans include new commercial and residential developments, upgrading of Jurong Lake Gardens and the building of a transport hub connecting the various MRT lines. These plans are still relevant today and we will proceed with the implementation of the plans when ready.”
“Mr Speaker, I thank the Member for his feedback. I will ask URA to make sure that they have sufficient resources to carry out the enforcement and make sure that this is done expeditiously.”
“Mr Speaker, on the websites and the ads that you see on the websites by STA operators, these, in and of themselves, do not necessarily contravene the rules because it is a posting of a place that is available for rental. They do not indicate timeframe. The postings themselves may not necessarily contravene the rules and, even if we were to block the websites, I am sure there will be different ways in which these advertisements can be put up. So, I think the key is not so much the postings or the websites, but the actual STA activities that are undertaken. And if URA knows of any such activities, they will take follow-up and enforcement action. I mentioned a number of cases. For all of them, enforcement notices will be issued. A good majority of them will then stop and immediately comply with the enforcement notice. But should there be cases that continue or there are egregious cases, then, indeed, URA will work with AGC on prosecution. There has already been one and we will see if there are others, if they were to come in the subsequent months.”
“Mr Speaker, I will take the questions in turn. On the first point on the hospitality sector, our approach to this has to be one that is based on fair competition. It is not possible to say, "Let's block any new entrants into the hospitality sector", simply on the basis that the existing incumbents have put in investments. This is an open market; new entrants can come in but the regulations must be fair and the industry must be regulated on a level playing field. That is the intent of what we have proposed. On the thresholds, as I have said, there were mixed views from the consultations, so, we are going to review what is the right way forward and what is the best way to ensure that all property owners do have a say in deciding on the appropriate use of their development. On the impact on rental and the property market, the Member's views are well-taken. We have seen this and we have studied this phenomenon in other property markets as well where, indeed, short-term accommodations have put upward pressure on rentals and on property prices. We are mindful that this may have an impact and that is why, as I have said earlier, we are not rushing to make changes. We are studying the matter very carefully. If and when we choose to do so, we will make sure that there are, indeed, appropriate safeguards.”
“The impact on the hospitality sector that I am looking at is, with the liberalisation of short-term leases, does the Minister think that it is unfair to those who had invested in the hospitality sector? They would have invested in the setting up, for example, of hotels and so on. The second question is, why is it 80%? Condominium owners, a lot of them who buy and want to stay in these units themselves, they will be adversely affected. I would think that for existing condominiums, it should be 100%. The third question, a lot of the residents think that if we allow short-term leases, it would drive up the rental costs and, hence, it would have a chain-effect and drive up the cost of living. So, what is MND's take on this? And, last, if we allow short-term leases, it would make investment in a property look more attractive and the returns more attractive and, hence, it would drive up property prices. On one hand, you have just implemented a round of cooling measures that is very unpopular; and on the other hand, you wish to liberalise short-term lease.”
“For example, under our proposed safeguards, STA hosts must collect and record the personal details of their guests and comply with fire safety regulations like the provision of fire extinguishers in their units. We have also proposed licensing platform operators, so that they can also help to ensure that STA activities do not cause problems for other residents. The intent is to provide a more level playing field between the STA sector and the hospitality industry. As I have mentioned, these are proposals that we had put out; we have done one round of consultation, received feedback, there are mixed views. So, URA is studying the matter very carefully to see what is the best way forward. Even as we do so, even as we consider the deliberations very carefully, I would emphasise that the minimum stay duration of three consecutive months for private residential properties still applies. URA will take enforcement action against those who breach this rule. Mr Alex Yam and Mr Melvin Yong asked about the number of such cases. From 2015 to 2017, URA received 1,808 reports of unauthorised STA in private residential units. In the same period, HDB received 390 reports of STA in HDB flats. The time taken by URA and HDB to investigate a report of unauthorised STA depends on the circumstances of each case. Conducting ground inspections and interviews to obtain evidence of an offence can take up to several months in some instances. However, if the party making the report is able to provide details and documentary evidence of the suspected offence, investigations can be completed more expeditiously. Er Dr Lee Bee Wah (Nee Soon): Speaker, Sir, I have four supplementary questions.”
“Sir, the Urban Redevelopment Authority (URA) conducted a public consultation exercise on short-term accommodation (STA) from 16 April to 31 May 2018. Many respondents supported the need for regulations on STA, given that STA can cause negative externalities to other residents. Key concerns raised include safety, security and privacy, as well as abuse of common property. Many also supported regulating STA platform operators, for example, through a licensing framework. One of the proposals was to require the Management Corporation of a strata-titled residential development to obtain the support of at least 80% of the share value in the development before STA can be permitted in any residential unit. The intent is to give homeowners a say in whether or not to allow STA in their development. There was mixed response to this proposal. Some respondents felt that an 80% threshold would be unfair to the minority who do not support STA, but have to accept the presence of STA guests in their developments. On the other hand, there were some who felt that an 80% threshold was too high and that it would be difficult to obtain sufficient votes in support of STA among homeowners. URA is carefully studying all the feedback that we have received and we will do so before deciding on how to take this issue forward, including how to structure the final regulatory approach and whether there is a need for any legislative amendments. Er Dr Lee Bee Wah asked about the impact of legalising STA on the hospitality industry. Indeed, this is something we had considered very carefully. The proposed regulatory framework for STA includes controls which are similar to those imposed on the hospitality industry.”
“Mr Speaker, with your permission, I would like to take Question Nos 2, 3 and 4 together, please.”
“Over $13 million has been awarded to 74 farms from the Agriculture Productivity Fund (APF) to date, of which over $7 million has been disbursed. Local enterprises received more than 90% of the funding disbursed. Fourteen of the farms are vertical or indoor farms. The Agri-Food and Veterinary Authority account managers will continue to facilitate the farmers’ efforts to transform their operations with the APF's support.”