Lim Biow Chuan
Singapore
“Sir, just two short supplementary questions. First, currently, the United Nations define seniors as 65 years whereas we have set ours at 67 years. So, would the Ministry of Manpower (MOM) consider reducing to 65 years for the age eligibility criterion for getting the concessionary rate for the MDW?”
“In light of this, the existing practice of the Ministry, which disallows the repeated renewal of shorter term COEs, should also be eliminated to preserve the maximum flexibility for EV drivers to extend the use of an environmentally friendly car.”
“Sir, in June last year, the Thomson-East Coast Line (TEL) was launched. Sir, let me express my gratefulness to LTA for the TEL line, as there are three TEL MRT stations within the Mountbatten constituency. The TEL line has facilitated travel for many residents in my constituency.”
“Sir, I receive many queries from Polytechnic and GCE "A" level students wanting to know about their enlistment dates, asking about their Physical Employment Standard (PES) status prior to enlistment for. Sir, I also receive queries about NSmen hoping to study overseas.”
“MFA has said on several occasions that Singapore supports the right of Palestinian people to a homeland of their own. Singapore delivered not one, or two, but a total of six to seven tranches of humanitarian aid for Gaza in January 2025.”
“Even in Parliament, Sir, our Clerks and other staff work such long hours because MPs debate long hours, spend time debating Bills until late in the evening and sometimes until late at night. Sir, I have on many occasions, received emails from Ministers late in the middle of the night.”
The complete record
Every one of 802 lines we hold for Lim Biow Chuan, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 3 of 17.
“Sir, last year, I raised the concern about elderly singles having to share rental flats with another stranger. The problem is exacerbated because the rent a flat is small and elderly singles struggle to adapt to the different habits of another stranger. Thus, some of these seniors resort to living in a void deck. For seniors who do not wish to share the flat with a stranger, they keep appealing to HDB, to be allowed to rent a flat on their own. The amount of administrative time spent processing such appeals again and again must be massive. Can MND give an update on the Joint Singles Scheme Operator-run (JSS-OR) pilot which was rolled out in end 2021 as an alternative option to the JSS for singles in public rental. What has the response been to the scheme? Are there lesser quarrels among the tenants? Sir, I have come across a few cases where singles who live alone passed away without anyone else knowing about their deaths. And sometimes a death could have been avoided that had there been another occupant living in the same flat and who could alert emergency services to seek help. Thus, if a senior living alone has a heart attack or a stroke, having another person live in the same flat may mean a life saved. In some countries where the seniors live in retirement villages, the village is marketed as a place where seniors can come together to enjoy each other's company to partake in senior friendly activities and to come together to celebrate good food as they age gracefully. Could MND share more about the status of the Joint Singles Operator-run scheme. Is the operator able to think innovatively to place two seniors to a flat successfully? If so, would HDB consider expanding the pilot scheme to more sites? Strengthening Inclusivity in Housing”
“Sir, last year, I spoke about exam stress in schools and called on MOE to reduce the content curriculum of the students. I wish to repeat the call to MOE this year. With more technological advances, it is easier to do research over the Internet and secure the answers to most queries. The need to acquire so much knowledge is really no longer necessary because most information is easily available on the Internet. What a student needs to learn is how to navigate the Internet so that he is able to obtain reliable and accurate information. The advent of ChatGPT will also change the way students learn. In a Straits Times article just last week, Google was reported to say that one of the most valuable qualities that they look for in an employee is a "growth mindset". Google did not say they were looking for people with great academic grades or people who know everything. Google said they were looking for people who express curiosity – for people who continue to learn. The Straits Times article was not about a high flying employee who was a scholar but about a user experience engineer without a degree. Sir, students ought to be given more time to develop their own interests during their formative years in school. MOE should consider reducing school curriculum so that students will enjoy learning in order to acquire knowledge rather than learning to pass exams or to gain good grades. This will then cut down the stress from projects, continual assessments and exams. May I ask whether MOE will consider reducing the school curriculum further and to allow students to learn using more technology. A reduction in school curriculum and exams or assessments would reduce the stress on today's students.”
“Sir, in the past few years, I have been approached by parents who complain that they are unable to secure a place in a primary school in a nearby school for their children. Instead, their child was posted to a primary school that is several kilometres away from their home. This has caused them great inconvenience as the child would have to take public transport or wake up very early in the morning to take the school bus to the primary school which the child was posted to. Sometimes, the school may not have a school bus connection to the child's home. Hence, these parents appealed for their child to be admitted to a school that is nearer to their home. Sir, I am sympathetic to these cases. Young children should not have to wake up too early and travel a longer distance than necessary to their school. I urge MOE to review the Primary 1 admission scheme. MOE can maintain the priority scheme under the current Phase 1, 2, 2A, 2B and 2C. But pupils admitted to the primary school under any of the above priority schemes, should be subject to a 1- or 2-kilometre distance limit to the school. The younger students will then get more rest at home and this will reduce the need for the school to arrange for school transport for the pupils and reduce worries that a bus operator may not perform the expectation as we saw recently in St Stephen's School. Primary 1 Registration Reform”
“Their role is to ensure that parties, who are buying properties or assets worth millions of dollars, are properly protected and they are able to obtain title to the assets that they agree to buy. I am unclear as to what the digital conveyancing portal means for conveyancing lawyers, clerks, agents and bankers. Should they start planning for a new career as this portal would be fully implemented in three years' time? Conveyancing is not a straightforward process. Option to purchase are contractual terms to be negotiated between buyers and sellers. For title to properties, there are many leasehold properties being transacted. Many of these leases contain restrictions which have to be interpreted to the buyer. Some leases require a lessee to obtain consent from the lessor, in this case, sometimes, the state, before they sell the property; and some leases require consent before the lessee can mortgage the property. Typically, JTC leases require environmental baseline studies to be carried out before approval can be granted. Madam, how would the digital conveyancing portal assist to make this entire process easier and more straightforward? For e-payments, how does the portal prevent fraud from taking place? Would users of the portal be savvy enough to know the risk of paying to fake accounts? Would the introduction of this portal introduce more complications to the conveyancing process rather than cut the red tape? Perhaps the Minister can clarify?”
“Thank you, Mdm Chair. One of the many challenges facing Singapore is that we are a small country of about 730 square kilometres in size. There is competing demand for the limited land to be used for residential, industrial, commercial, roads and parks. Given the limited land resources in Singapore, it is important that the state maximise the best use of its available resources. I had previously suggested that we consider the car park space at sports stadiums to be used for parking by heavy commercial vehicles at night when the stadium is not being used. This could free up some space for heavy vehicles or commerical vehicles to park. Thus, during off-peak hours, when there are no sporting activities at the stadium, the carpark is generally empty. Why can the state not allow better use of this empty car park space? We should look at different options to better make use of scarce land. There is a vacant piece of state land next to Haig Court which has been vacant for some years. May I ask what are the factors being considered by SLA before it allows state land to be repurposed and rejuvenated for community use? Digital Conveyancing Portal Madam, I declare my interest in this topic as a conveyancing lawyer. Second Minister for Law, Mr Edwin Tong, announced in January 2023 the appointment of a vendor to develop the online platform to streamline the current paper-based conveyancing process and transform it into a fully integrated, efficient, transparent and paperless digital conveyancing process for all property transactions in Singapore. This platform is due to be fully implemented in 2026, which is barely three years from now. Today, there are many people involved in the conveyancing process – lawyers, secretaries, clerks, agents and bankers.”
“The Singapore Discovery Centre (SDC) is about who we are and what we want to be. I am glad that almost two decades on from its last major revamp, the SDC continues to keep Singapore's history alive for our children and grandchildren, and to be a place for interactive learning. Over the past two years, Senior Minister of State for Defence, Mr Zaqy Mohamad, has updated the House about plans to refresh and transform the SDC. If we do an Internet search on SDC, it currently looks like a tourist attraction, but surely, it must be more than a tourist site. May I ask MINDEF, what can visitors expect at the SDC today? How can we use the centre to help our children learn more about our history, and also about our future? Military Museums”
“Sir, the past three years of the COVID-19 pandemic have been trying for all of us, but we have also made significant technology-related gains during this period. Many Singaporeans now enjoy the flexibility of remote working and catching up with friends online has become more commonplace. Many NSmen use their mobile phones connect to their family, to their friends and colleagues. And these phones also serve as their calendars, wallets, bus and MRT cards. I would say not just NSmen, but all of us as well. But for many of our young NSmen, the digital life is the only life they have ever known. Given that our NSmen devote precious time to serve the nation, it is necessary for MINDEF to make the best use of technology to ensure that the NS' administrative processes are efficient and convenient. So, may I ask how is MINDEF leveraging technology to improve NS administrative processes – particularly to cater to the preferences of a young and digitally-savvy generation of NSmen? Updates on OneNS Platform”
“Thank you, Mdm Deputy Speaker. I think conceptually, one must understand that if you cannot afford, then you simply do not buy. If you cannot afford to buy a car, you do not go and buy a car. If HDB flats are not affordable, simply put, people will say that, "well, I will find other options. I will rent a flat". In many parts of the world, people do not buy flats. They rent a flat because it is unaffordable. They simply cannot afford it. If you look at the countries around the world where home ownership is low, it is because people cannot afford to buy a flat. If I am not able to afford a 3-room flat or 4-room flat because my income is very low, then I will look at options like staying with my parents, I will look at applying to HDB to rent a flat. But the fact that many of them apply to buy a BTO flat suggests that they are affordable. There are so many schemes that the Government has put out to make these flats affordable. You cannot just look at the price. You look also at the number of subsidies, the grants that the Government gives. That makes the flat affordable. Of course, I want to qualify by saying that there will always be that small group of people who for whatever reasons will struggle – because their income is low, because they are not capable of holding onto a good job. But the Government's commitment to such people is that we will help you. If you look at those applicants who are living in rental flats, the Government has so many schemes to help you move from that rental flat to buy your own flat. I hope Mr Perera will look at the various schemes available, understand how they work and understand that this Government is committed to making flats affordable for all Singaporeans.”
“On the Millennial Apartment Scheme – what makes this scheme different from the private sector renting out flats at market rental? There are already such flats located at various parts of the Central Business District (CBD) like the The Sail at Shenton Way. These are currently being rented out by private developers at market cost. Why does HDB want to be involved in the private market sector if it is not to provide home ownership to Singaporeans? Mdm Deputy Speaker, I have visited many HDB flats in my estate. I also visit many friends who live in HDB flats. Recently, I went to Punggol. I paid a visit there and I walked down the river towards Coney Island. I posted on my Facebook that the flats look absolutely beautiful. In fact, I thought they were condominiums. My view, Mdm Deputy Speaker, is that many of these flats are really world-class and well built. Eighty percent of Singaporeans live in these HDB flats. Like Ms Carrie Tan who spoke before me, I was aghast to read that in a reply to a comment by someone on Facebook querying PSP's scheme, Mr Leong Mun Wai said that PSP's scheme was needed so that Singaporeans are not condemned to living in HDB flats. I am certainly glad that Mr Leong Mun Wai made a correction earlier on but I just want to say 80% of Singaporeans live in HDB flats. We should not – never – say that Singaporeans who live in HDB flats are condemned. It is a disappointing statement. While Mr Leong Mun Wai may or may not be living in a HDB flat, he should not say that people living in HDB flats are condemned. I appreciate that Mr Leong Mun Wai made that correction and I want to say that those who live in HDB flats ought to be proud of the flat that they live in because these are really world-class flats.”
“He did not give any information about how he would price the location premium and whether this would make the flat even more expensive. No information. But it also begs the question, why does PSP want to charge a flat owner for land cost when HDB currently prices its BTO flats based on affordability and they apply significant grants on top of this? How does that make the flat more affordable for the flat purchaser under the PSP scheme? Today, the amount buyers pay HDB is much less than land cost plus construction cost. The deficit is made up under the MND budget. Under PSP's proposal, land cost and construction cost are borne entirely by the buyer when he resells – plus interest accrued. If the buyer's children inherit the flat, if they were to decide many years later to sell the flat, they must pay the land cost plus interest charged over many years and perhaps even decades later. His children will be inheriting a huge debt as they cannot sell the flat without having to pay the land cost plus accrued interest. It thus will become a huge liability to the children of the flat owner and no longer an asset. Even charging construction cost plus, to the first buyer is problematic. Construction cost shot up 30% during the pandemic. This means that prices of flats may fluctuate wildly, depending on the market conditions for construction. Thus, while it may seem affordable to the first buyer, it may be even more expensive on the resale market than today. Because Mr Leong Mun Wai says that his scheme is designed to reduce resale supply and keep resale prices high. The resale price demanded by the seller will be higher because resale buyers will have to pay construction costs plus land cost, now payable by the flat buyer, plus interest and the profit the home owner wants.”
“In fact, I received many, many appeals from residents asking whether they can get priority for these BTO flats. I believe the reason why these flats are in high demand is because they represent good value-for-money for that location and they are affordable to the applicants. One would not apply for a BTO flat if they feel that they cannot afford it. In December last year, HDB released a press release to explain that HDB flats are priced with affordability in mind. HDB does not apply a profit margin on costs. They look at household incomes, they look at the selling prices of flats on offer. Despite the media release, there are still people who may not be aware of the way HDB flats are priced. Hence, it is important that HDB conveys the relevant information to members of the public, so that the public knows that the Government prices the flats so that they are affordable to residents. I heard Mr Leong Mun Wai's speech yesterday and his proposed Affordable Homes Scheme (AHS) model. Mr Leong's proposal to charge for land upon sale simply does not make sense to me. He proposes that when the flat owner sells, the owner would be charged for the land costs, presumably at full cost calculated at the time of buying the flat. If HDB is not fully pricing for land when selling the flats, then surely, Mr Leong's proposal will result in a much higher charge to the owner when he sells the flat. How is the owner supposed to cough up the land costs when he sells the flat? Surely, he must pass on the costs to the next buyer. But then, why would anyone wish to buy the resale flat if they can get a much cheaper flat from HDB, which according to Mr Leong, is construction costs plus a notional location premium?”
“Mdm Deputy Speaker, I rise in support of the Motion by the Minister for National Development. I believe all Singaporeans want housing to be affordable. That has always been the commitment of the People's Action Party (PAP) Government. The PAP Government has committed that they will price new flats at affordable prices, so that Singaporeans are able to provide for a roof over their heads when they want to start a family. The way that they have done so is through the sale of Build-To-Order (BTO) flats. If we look at the prices of BTO flats in the non-mature estates, many of the flats sold are indeed affordable. Minister Desmond Lee has shown that the median prices in his charts yesterday, the average price of a 4-room BTO flat in a non-mature estate is kept at $342,000. For those who are lower-income, they can opt for a smaller 3-room flat, and in addition, obtain even more generous housing grants. And I have seen many such cases when I refer my residents to HDB during the Meet-the-People Sessions (MPS). These are actual figures; these are actual facts. And these prices that Minister Desmond Lee had quoted are before the Government grants. When you factor in all the Government grants, then it is within the range of most home buyers. That is the reason why the majority of Singaporeans live in HDB flats which they have bought and which they have lived in. If HDB flats are not affordable, then simple put, Singaporeans will not be buying these flats as they will be priced out of their budget. There are a few recent developments in my constituency – Dakota Breeze, Dakota One, Dakota Crest and Pine Vista. Every one of these BTO launches were over-subscribed, even though the prices of the flats in mature estates were priced slightly higher.”
“Thank you, Speaker. I just wanted to ask the Senior Minister of State, with the cases of littering are going up, why does the Senior Minister of State think that imposing fines will act as an effective deterrent against littering? Why is NEA so against issuing CWOs? We are not asking them to go to jail. We are asking them to experience what it is like to have to pick up litter and watch for themselves the effect of littering on the common areas. So, why is NEA so against issuing CWOs, even for the first offence?”
“The Minister replied then that "we would also like to give first-time offenders a second chance, so that they can learn from their mistakes." I would like to humbly urge the Senior Minister of State to reconsider the position. A CWO is meant to assist the littering offender to see for himself the huge amount of litter in the public area and to learn that it is hard work to pick up all the litter in order to keep the estate clean. And after picking up litter for two hours, the offender should go away with a better understanding that there is an urgent need to keep the public area clean. If the offender litters again, then double the CWO hours for the second-time offender. Finally, my third suggestion to NEA is for recalcitrant offenders, HDB should consider exercising its right as the lessor to terminate the lease of the flat owner and take back the flat for breach of the terms of the lease. This is a drastic action but for those residents who are not littering offenders, there is really nothing to worry about. The Government should send a strong signal that littering is not to be tolerated and that stern action would be taken to ensure that all citizens would be able to enjoy a clean environment. Sir, I also support the other clauses to the amendment Bill. I look forward to the day when Singapore is able to reclaim its position as one of the cleanest cities in the region – not because of our army of cleaners, but because everyone in Singapore takes their social responsibility of keeping the public area clean seriously.”
“The campaign sought to instil in Singaporeans the importance of keeping public places clean. For many years, Singapore was considered one of the cleanest cities in the region. Why have we deteriorated to such a situation today? Hence, I support clause 5 of the current amendment Bill to insert a presumption clause to better identify the litter bug in the flat unit. The onus now falls on the owner or occupier of the flat to identify the person responsible for any litter that originates from the flat. Sir, I would like to humbly make three suggestions to reduce incidents of littering. First, we should make more use of technology to ensure that litter bugs would be identified. Thus, in Marine Parade Town Council, we had bought a total number of 73 mini surveillance cameras to be deployed at areas where there are persistent complaints about littering. We also installed large signs to tell residents that there are surveillance cameras in the block. The message to the litter bug is this: if you throw litter from your flat, you will be caught and you have to face the consequences. The present amendment to the law will assist NEA in that they can then rely on the camera footage and identify the flat from which the litter originates. It is, thus, for the flat owner or occupier to identify the litter bug staying in the flat. In addition to any fine imposed, I would like to suggest that NEA impose a Corrective Work Order (CWO) on all littering offenders and they should serve the punishment in the estate where they were caught littering. In May 2022, I had asked the Minister for Sustainability and Environment about imposing a CWO on littering offenders.”
“Many Members of Parliament would also have received complaints about high-rise litter bugs who throw food waste, plastic bags, tissue paper and other types of litter – making the ground floor unsafe for residents walking by the area. I spoke about the issue of littering during Committee of Supply (COS) Debate in 2010 and 2018. I also filed a Parliamentary Question (PQ) in May 2022 asking NEA, what other measures can be taken to prevent littering. Minister Grace Fu in a Parliamentary reply in July 2022 said "NEA carried out enforcement actions on around 7,400 cases of littering between 1 January to 31 May 2021. For the same period in 2022, there were around 7,800 cases." In a subsequent Parliamentary reply in October 2022, Minister Grace Fu then said, "feedback on high-rise littering has continued to outpace our efforts to enhance capabilities and measures. Prior to 2019, an average of 16,000 feedback cases were received each year. From 2019 to 2021, the feedback had increased to 22,000, 35,000 and 32,000 cases respectively." The Minister further elaborated that "Investigation into high-rise littering cases remains resource-intensive and time-consuming despite our best efforts. Effort is required to gather information to guide camera deployments and, subsequently, identify the high-rise littering offender." Sir, this situation is really unacceptable. There is a need for the Government to send a strong signal that littering is an anti-social habit that society must frown upon. When the Keep Singapore Clean campaign was launched on 1 October 1968 by our then-Prime Minister, the late Mr Lee Kuan Yew, the campaign aimed to make Singapore the cleanest and greenest city in the region by addressing the problem of inconsiderate littering.”
“Sir, Parliament amended the Environment Public Health Act (EPHA) in 2014, about eight and a half years ago, to impose a legal obligation on flat owners or occupiers to provide information to the authorities to enable them to better identify the person responsible for high-rise litter. The Act was also amended to double the maximum penalties for litter-related offences. I recall speaking on the Amendment bill in 2014 and supporting this Bill. I was hopeful that with the enhanced powers, NEA would be able to reduce the incidences of littering. However, I was disappointed. Over the past few years, I regularly carried out litter picking exercises in my constituency. On each occasion, I get extremely frustrated by the huge amount of litter collected from the public areas. You can pick up used face masks, cigarette boxes, plastic bags, drink cans, drink bottles, carton boxes, all of which were thrown onto the ground. It seems that a small minority of inconsiderate litter bugs have made the environment less pleasant for the majority of residents. I also frequently receive feedback from residents complaining about their upstairs neighbour throwing down lighted cigarettes. Residents are fearful that a lighted cigarette may land inside their flat thereby causing a fire. They also expressed frustration that NEA could not identify the offender and were unable to stop the high-rise litter. I also get other complaints about residents who throw rice or bread from their flat to feed pigeons. The pigeons in turn cause a health hazard with the huge amount of pigeon feces all over the ground level.”
“May I ask that the Minister consider the above concerns when setting out the rules to operationalise the amendments to the Act? I support the Bill.”
“So, for many HDB heartland centres, the shops located at the fringe of the centre are usually considered part of the precinct. However, if the upgrading of the common areas does not benefit them – for example, if the merchants' association wishes to provide a roof shelter or landscaping for the town centre area to make the place more attractive to shoppers, these shop owners at the fringe are unlikely to support the upgrading works. So, may I ask the Minister whether the shops located at the fringe of the town centre, can they be excluded from being considered part of the precinct? Because if these shops do not benefit from any of the upgrading works, they would surely not support the upgrading proposal. It will also not be fair to them to ask them to contribute to the cost of the upgrading if they cannot see the benefit in any way. Next, for the poll of the prescribed owners of commercial property, will HDB distinguish between commercial properties of different sizes? Will a big shop, say for example the size of a supermarket, be given the same voting right as a small shop regardless of the size of the shop unit? So, if a bigger shop has a bigger vote share in a poll, would this affect the interest of the smaller shops? Finally, may I ask the Senior Minister of State, for the upgrading works to the common area, will the Town Council have any say in the decision? Here I need to declare my interest as the Chairman of Marine Parade Town Council. I say this because some upgrading proposals may carry higher maintenance costs which will eventually be paid from the service and conservancy fees. How does HDB balance the need to upgrade the common area versus the possible higher maintenance costs in the long run?”
“However, for the upgrading of the common area, there was a major obstacle as the merchants' association is required to garner the 100% support from the shop owners. The reality on the ground is that shops in the HDB precinct come in different sizes and different scales of business. The owner of a large shop space who had rented out his space to say, a supermarket; he has no interest in the upgrading of the common area as he already has a steady source of rental income. The owner of a small retail shop, say optician or a clothing shop; he will feel the strain of paying up to $5,000 for the upgrading fee without knowing whether the additional expense would result in increased business for his shop. So, without the support of 100% of the shop owners, then any proposal to upgrade the common area is doomed to failure. Even if one single shop owner refuses to sign off, then all the efforts of the merchants' association would be wasted. So, Marine Parade Merchants' Association tried to secure the ROS funding on several occasions but did not succeed on any one of them. Thus, Mdm Deputy Speaker, I support the proposed amendment to the Act to allow HDB to carry out polling for the upgrading works or ROS and to allow the works to proceed when at least 75% of the shop owners vote in favour of the works. This is similar to the polling process adopted by HDB for the MUP and HIP for residential estates. The majority of the shop owners should not have the upgrading works held back by a few owners who do not wish to contribute to the common good of all the shop owners and businesses. I have three queries for the Senior Minister of State. First, section 76 of the Act allows for the definition of precinct to be determined by the Minister.”
“A large majority of residents also felt that the heartland shops play an important role as part of our culture and heritage of Singapore. Unfortunately, with the introduction of large shopping malls, many of these heartland shops are at risk of disappearing. They face steep competition with the larger players in the retail industry and today, they also face stiff competition from sales done online. But these shops do provide a livelihood for many local residents. According to HDB, there are a total of about 15,000 shops spread out across town centres, neighbourhood areas and precinct shop clusters that are either rented out by HDB or owned by private operators. From the Heartlands Shops Study survey results, it is clear that the heartland shops provide an important service to residents living in the area. When the Revitalisation of Shops (ROS) scheme was introduced in 2007 to support shop owners and merchants' associations in order to improve the vibrancy and competitiveness of HDB shops by co-funding the upgrading of common areas and promotional events, I was fully supportive of the scheme as I felt that it would help rejuvenate the neighbourhood and give a big boost to the business of these shops. Marine Parade Merchants' Association was selected for the one-year ROS pilot scheme in 2007. I was then the Adviser to Marine Parade and was involved in the various meetings held by HDB, the Town Council, the Merchants’ Association and the grassroots organisations to work out the details of the pilot ROS scheme. There were no issues with the co-funding for the promotional events. These events help generate more footfall to the heartland shops, and this also meant more business for the businesses in the area.”
“Mdm Deputy Speaker, I spent my entire younger days living in a HDB estate, firstly at a rental flat at Selegie House and then later, my family moved to Rochor Centre. As a child, I recall going to the neighbourhood shops to buy stationery for school work or to buy drinks and food from the local coffeeshop. I cut my hair at the local barber and my parents would buy their groceries from the provision shop just downstairs. The shopkeepers would usually know you by name, which block that you stay in and the usual items that you buy. If you forget to bring money to pay, they allow you to pay another day. I still have vivid memories of all these shops in the HDB neighbourhood. For many residents, the shops like coffeeshops, barbers, clinics, opticians, clothing retail shops, provision shops or now known as mini markets, medical halls, stationery shops and so on, all these form part of their growing up experience in the heartlands. When my children were young, I recall bringing them to the neighbourhood shops at Ang Mo Kio, to walk around and to buy groceries. Before Price Kaki came about, I had already shopped around and found that you can get the best price for infant formula and diapers from an HDB shop. In November 2022, HDB released the result of the Heartland Shops Study which reveal that seven out of 10 residents surveyed visit the heartland shops at least once a week and about one-third of their monthly expenditure is spent at heartland shops. Many residents surveyed felt that: first, the heartland shops serve as a social space to facilitate interaction among residents; secondly, these shops provide affordable goods and services; and thirdly, they provide jobs for seniors and others who may prefer to work near their homes.”
“Thank you, Mr Speaker. Sir, I want to acknowledge the good work of the Government in trying to reach out to the seniors who are not digitally savvy. I recently had a case where a resident wanted to file a complaint with the Community Dispute Resolution Tribunal (CDRT). He had to navigate through the entire digital process when he needed to lodge a complaint. So, I asked one of my volunteers to help him. At the end of the day, my volunteer said the Court would then communicate with him via email. May I ask the Minister what can a resident who is senior, not literate and who is unable to understand and navigate, such as how to go about applying for Government services, what can they do in situations like that? My resident tried to go to Court and the services rendered were not quite there. He is left struggling. So, perhaps, the Government can assist.”
“And this law should apply equally to those who are anti-gay and those gays who seek to bully others into silent submission. Sir, there should be no space for people to propagate hate messages within Singapore. Let me say that again. There should be no space for people to propagate hate messages within Singapore. Even as we move to repeal section 377A, I hope that the Government will also make clear its stand that our policies on sexuality education in schools, our content guidelines for publications, for video games and various type of media will remain pro-family, that we will not see a proliferation of materials, video games or media advertisements promoting the gay lifestyle, that we will not have laws that allow individuals to remove their gender in their NRIC or passport and that the Government will remind all organisations, companies and even embassies operating in Singapore that we are still a society that values family as the basic building block of society. Sir, I support the repeal of section 377A of the Penal Code and the amendment to the Constitution to insert Article 156 to the Constitution.”
“They complain that the minority in the gay movement are refusing to allow anyone to have a conversation about their concerns regarding homosexuality. Sir, I think this is sad because many homosexuals that I know are very decent people. And I have deep respect for such people because their sexual preference is really not an issue to me. But because of this small minority of militant homosexuals, they give the others a bad name by being bullies and by being difficult in their conduct. Sir, I have also received feedback that employees in international organisations or MNCs located within Singapore, they are harassed in their workplace if they do not support the gay beliefs or if they refuse to attend a pride event. Thus, it seems like there is a reversal of role. It is not the gays who are being discriminated in Singapore. On the contrary, if you do not agree with the pro-gay movement, you may be penalised at work or face discrimination. And likewise, for students studying in international schools, they are asked to take part in gay-themed projects as if it was part and parcel of the school curriculum. I urge the Government to look into this and ensure that no organisation, company or school in Singapore can compel their staff or students to participate in gay community projects if they do not subscribe to the same values. I submit that every organisation, company or school must have the scope to allow their employees or students to subscribe to different views on sexuality without being discriminated or having to receive hate mail. I also urge the Government to consider legislation to make it an offence for anyone to put out hate messages or derogatory comments just purely to intimidate others into keeping silent.”
“Many within the religious community are also concerned whether the repeal of section 377A would lead to a situation whereby the religious leaders cannot tell their congregation that they do not agree with the practice of homosexuality. The religious leaders are concerned that they cannot pray for someone who is homosexual to reflect on God's command. In other words, the religious leaders lose their freedom to preach on what is acceptable or wrong based on their faith. And that is their concern. There are many who expressed concern about the intolerant views of some gays who attack anyone who disagree with their homosexual views. There are fears about the activism of some of the LGBT community who push their ideology that their world view should be seen as the norm and acceptable. Therefore, anyone who disagrees with their world view should be condemned and ostracised. In Australia, when the Government held a postal ballot on same-sex marriage, it resulted in vitriolic abuse against people holding views in opposition to the legalisation of same-sex marriage. An Australian politician said, "A culture has developed whereby it is acceptable to vilify, mock, abuse and shame anyone who stands in the way, or even raises questions, about whether we should legalise same-sex marriage. I have been called a homophobe, a bigot and been told that my views are disgusting." So, said the Australian politician. And when such strong and intimidating language is used, it is impossible to hold a civil debate or respectful discussion about any topic regarding the gay community. Sir, I met with the organisers of the Protect Singapore Townhall. They told me that their townhall meeting was almost cancelled because of complaints and threats by the gay community.”
“Sir, the introduction of Article 156 relating to the institution of marriage has given me great comfort. It reinforces the Government's stand that the definition of marriage and laws to protect, safeguard, support, foster and promote the institution of marriage should be for Parliament to decide. And that Parliament's power to make such laws on marriage cannot be challenged under Part 4 of the Constitution to be discriminatory. It gives assurance to many Singaporeans that the repeal of section 377A will not lead to a drastic shift in societal norms. Sir, I am also heartened by the commitment made by Prime Minister Lee and Deputy Prime Minister Lawrence Wong that there will not be any change in the definition of marriage during their watch. Sir, after speaking to many Singaporeans across a wide spectrum, I have concluded that it is time to repeal section 377A. Many Singaporeans have accepted that homosexuals are fellow Singaporeans living in our midst and doing their part to contribute to Singapore. Societal norms have changed over the years. In particular, many of the younger generation are accepting of the homosexual people. And similar to the position of many Singaporeans, which I alluded to 15 years ago, we do not wish to see homosexuals being criminalised. But the message that I heard from many Singaporeans is that we need to protect marriage as a union between man and woman, that we need to support values that promote the role of the family as the basic building block of society, that we need to protect Singaporeans from being intimidated or harassed simply because they disagree with the lifestyle of the gay community.”
“They opine that is not the Government's business to tell our citizens, especially those who are gays, how to lead their lives. While some expressed concern about the open expression of homosexual relationship like hands holding and public kissing, they felt that there is no need to make this behaviour a criminal offence. Hence, it appears that the advocacy by the homosexual community over the years has made our citizens more accepting of gay people. There are also a number of citizens who felt very neutral about the matter. They have no views on the issue at all. In other words, it is not their concern. Sir, in 2007, I had said, "the majority of Singaporeans do not condemn a homosexual or a gay simply because of his lifestyle. Nor do they wish to criminalise a homosexual." Minister Indranee Rajah, when she was a backbencher, had also, in her speech said, "I think we do not want to have a situation where we demonise homosexuals. We certainly do not want to regard them as anything less than Singaporeans." The Government's stand at that time was articulated by Prime Minister Lee when he said, "There are gay bars and clubs. They exist. We know where they are. Everybody knows where they are. They do not have to go underground. We do not harass gays. The Government does not act as moral policemen. And we do not proactively enforce section 377A on them." Since the Government does not actively enforce section 377A on homosexuals, the question is whether is it time for Singapore to repeal section 377A today? Is the Singapore society more accepting of homosexuals in our midst? Will the repeal of section 377A mean that the family is no longer the basic building block of society?”
“Sir, in 2007, when Nominated Member of Parliament (NMP) Mr Siew Kum Hong petitioned to repeal section 377A of the Penal Code, I spoke to support the Government's position of retaining section 377A. I argued that Parliament should make laws to reflect the public morality of our times. The messaging by the Government is important – that Singapore is a society whereby the family unit is still seen as the basic structure of society. Further, the Government had indicated that there will not be proactive enforcement of those who are gays. At that time, Prime Minister Lee had said that the Government had decided to keep the status quo despite the legal untidiness and the ambiguity. Prime Minister Lee said, "It works, do not disturb it. It works, do not disturb it." Thus, 15 years later, when Prime Minister Lee made his announcement during the National Day Rally in August that the Government intends to repeal section 377A of the Penal Code, I was taken aback. What is the intended signal by the Government when it announced its intention to repeal this law? How do we explain to the many Singaporeans who are still pro-family and worried about the decline in family values? I spoke to many Singaporeans who had expressed their concern about the repeal. Many of them said that they do not wish to see homosexuals being prosecuted as criminals. But yet, they are concerned whether the repeal would lead to an erosion of family values and an increased number of gay people. And I believe that many Members of Parliament (MPs) in this House have received letters from concerned residents who expressed similar concerns. To keep an open mind about this issue, I also spoke to different groups of citizens who felt that we should allow those who are homosexuals to live the lifestyle that they wish.”
“Thank you, Speaker. May I ask the Minister of State, what if there is no one single organiser? For example, at Clarke Quay and Boat Quay, where many pubs organise New Year Countdown events. Who would the Police typically liaise with, in trying to manage the crowd, where there are large crowds of people in those areas? So, Clarke Quay and Boat Quay, where there are New Year Countdowns.”
“Sorry, Sir. I just wanted to ask the Senior Minister of State whether any hackers have been caught and will he say something about the punishment.”
“Sir, last year, it was reported that a total of $2.68 million was collected in fines for personal data protection breaches. And last month, it was reported that 2.6 million accounts of an online marketplace company were hacked and the data sold on the dark web. Is IMDA satisfied that enough has been done to encourage companies to protect the data, because it seems like this is going on and on? For the second supplementary question, have any hackers been caught? If so, would IMDA be willing to publish more information so as to send the signal to hackers or hackers-to-be that there are serious consequences that they have to face for hacking into people's data?”
“Thank you. Sir, I am concerned that foreign workers choose to make public their personal grievances or disputes with the companies because of non-payment of their salaries. Whilst I am sympathetic towards their concern, may I ask the Senior Minister of State whether MOM would be working with MHA to take action against companies that fail to pay the salaries and also the workers who choose to take the law into their own hands and make public protests? Would MOM be working with the Police to prosecute such workers?”
“Thank you, Speaker. May I ask the Minister, what can we do to encourage more clinics to open 24-hour services. Earlier this year, my 90-year-old mother was ill and I just found it so difficult to find a 24-hour clinic. So, if MOH can encourage more clinics to open for longer hours, that will certainly help. Otherwise, my option was to send her to the emergency department. The second question, Sir, is TCFs, will that be a difference in cost because these would be run by private clinics? So, if I am a patient going to a TCF, I would be concerned about the cost. And finally, what is the percentage of space that is available, when you free up the number of beds for COVID-19 purposes?”
“Thank you, Mr Speaker. May I ask the Minister of State for Home Affairs this question. Sir, I am sympathetic to the residents affected by hoarding. I have one such case in my own constituency. I must say that MND has been very helpful in helping to solve the hoarding issue. However, I am asking whether the Town Councils can get better support from SCDF to carrying out an assessment of the fire safety every time there is a reported case of hoarding. And also, whether NEA can also rapidly come to make an assessment of the health risk because, otherwise, by the Town Councils themselves, it is a big difficulty to try to persuade hoarders to clear the junk in their house, which Senior Minister of State Sim Ann has said represents a health risk as well as a nuisance to their neighbours. Assoc Prof Dr Muhammad Faishal Ibrahim: Sir, I thank the Member for the supplementary question. SCDF does not assess cluttered houses or homes, in general, to be a key fire risk. That said, we understand the Member and the general public's concerns and are working closely with the inter-agency HMCG to address the issue.”
“Sir, I support the Bill. Deputy Speaker (Mr Christopher de Souza): Ms He Ting Ru. 5.42 pm”
“Would it make any difference if the applicants seeking criminal defence aid intend to simply plead guilty? Why not allow the Chief PD the discretion to decide instead of having a statutory bar to giving criminal aid to more than one applicant in the same proceedings? For the excluded offences under the Schedule, while I understand the need to exclude offences for most traffic offences or most regulatory offences, may I urge the Senior Parliamentary Secretary to consider allowing criminal defence aid to persons accused of dangerous driving where the sentences may entail imprisonment of a few years? And these are not just regulatory offences. Before I conclude, I wish to refer to the speech made by the then Minister of Law, Prof Jayakumar during the Second Reading of the Amendment Bill to the Legal Aid and Advice Act in July 1995. He was seeking Parliament's approval to delete Part II of the Act. And the Minister had said, "The policy of the Government is not to grant legal aid in criminal cases except for cases involving capital punishment". And in his speech, Prof Jayakumar said that, "It is incongruous and inconsistent that public funds should be used to defend an accused person which the state has decided ought to be charged in Court and to use public funds at the same time to get him off." Sir, in the interest of transparency, since the Public Defender comes under MinLaw and prosecution by the Police comes under MHA, may I ask Senior Parliamentary Secretary to confirm that the Public Defender's Office (PDO) will be given full independence to represent their accused in Court without concern that the state is incurring public funds to prosecute the accused person. Can the Senior Parliamentary Secretary also clarify what brought about this change in the policy?”
“In practice, most accused persons have very little time to respond when they are charged in Court. Frequently, the Court allows the accused person one to two weeks to engage a lawyer before going back to Court for the next mention. Would the Chief PD be able to assess whether an applicant would meet the criteria for criminal defence aid within two weeks? In a situation where an accused is in remand, the Senior Parliamentary Secretary has said that the family member can apply for criminal defence aid on his behalf. How much time would be required before the Chief PD can assess the application for criminal defence aid if this person is in remand? The solicitor would presumably have to visit the accused in remand to determine reasonable grounds for defending. Would the State Court allow an accused person a longer period of time to engage counsel if the person in remand is applying for aid? Regarding the means test referred to at clause 12(1), how does the Chief PD ensure that a rich applicant does not hide his income and assets so that he can receive the criminal defence aid? Would the Chief PD investigate the declared sources of income and assets or would the Chief PD simply rely on the declaration made by the applicant? I believe this point was previously made by Minister Shanmugam in Parliament that the state should not finance the criminal defence aid of a rich applicant. For clause 14(2), can the Senior Parliamentary Secretary clarify why aid should not be granted to more than one person in the same set of proceedings? Supposing there are three to four persons who are youth or juveniles who are accused of rioting and all deny responsibility for the offence, why should the Chief PD deny criminal defence aid to more than one applicant?”
“For example, if the solicitor obtains privileged information about the guilt of an accused person, does he have an obligation to inform or disclose to the CPD or can he seek a discharge as the solicitor if the accused person refuses to take his advice to plead guilty? Next, clause 5(1) of the Bill provides for the exclusion of a solicitor from the panel of solicitors. Can the Senior Parliamentary Secretary clarify whether such a solicitor can still act in a personal capacity if the accused person wants him to continue outside the Public Defender's scheme? For example, if a solicitor insists on making frivolous applications to Court and is eventually removed from the panel, can he continue to act as a solicitor for the accused person and continue with such frivolous applications? Clause 6 of the Bill provides for the fees payable to the solicitor to be agreed. Can the Senior Parliamentary Secretary give an indication as to how fees can be agreed upon because it is difficult for a solicitor to determine his fees without knowing whether such a trial would drag for many days or even months? Or would the legal fees be determined after the trial is completed? Sir, I urge the Government to pay reasonable fees so that we can attract more talented solicitors to join the criminal bar and that we will have then sufficient lawyers to ensure a fair administration of criminal justice. Sir, I understand that even for LASCO, the fees payable to the lawyers involved are very low and way off the market rate for lawyers of that seniority who do capital offences. Clause 12 of the Bill sets out the process for grant of criminal defence aid. Can the Senior Parliamentary Secretary provide greater clarity as to the timeframe for such aid to be granted?”
“And whenever we have cases of wrong convictions, it is a blight on our legal process and the administration of justice. And there is no higher cost than the indelible stain of a wrong conviction, particularly, where the cause is one of lack of resources." Sir, I agree with Mr Hri Kumar's views. I also appreciate Minister Indranee Rajah's response to Mr Kumar's speech where she stated that, "The Government's KPI is not convictions. The Government's KPI must be and always has been justice." Ms Indranee had then replied that the Government had received suggestions about a possible Public Defender's Scheme and the Government is reviewing the suggestion. I wish to commend the Government for their funding support for the Criminal Legal Aid Scheme (CLAS) which had given various degree of assistance to persons charged with criminal offences and who require legal advice on criminal matters. Although it had taken some nine years since Minister Indranee's speech, I am glad that this Bill has finally been tabled in Parliament. Sir, I have some queries regarding the Bill and hope that the Senior Parliamentary Secretary can address my concerns. Clause 4(5) of the Bill states that despite any privilege arising out of the relationship between solicitor and client, a solicitor has a duty to disclose any information to the Chief Public Defender (CPD) which may enable the CPD to perform his functions under the Act. Can the Senior Parliamentary Secretary clarify whether this requirement would expose the solicitor to allegation of breaching his professional duty to the accused person?”
“Sir, I declare my interest as a lawyer whose practice involves criminal law. I welcome the introduction of the Public Defenders Bill. In the course of my work as a lawyer, I find that many accused persons struggle to understand the legal process whenever they are faced with a criminal charge. Many times, they are not given a copy of the charge sheet and do not know what is the exact allegation being made against them. They do not understand the concept of bail and sometimes, they just want to plead guilty without understanding the consequence of a criminal conviction. In fact, a few of my clients had informed me that when they are charged at the Police station, it is the Police investigator who advised them on the legal process and what to expect when they attend Court. Sometimes, the Investigation Officer informed them that if they plead guilty, the Police will ask for a lighter sentence from the Court. Sir, this is, of course, unsatisfactory because the interest of a Police investigator is different from that of an accused person. Allow me to quote from a speech made in Parliament in February 2013 by my former Parliamentary colleague and the current the Deputy Attorney-General, Mr Hri Kumar. He said, "It is not the Government's role simply to arrest, try and jail. Government's role is to ensure the rights of all citizens are protected and that includes making sure that those who are accused have a fair hearing. Its KPI should not be the number of successful prosecutions, but rather that in every case, a fair and just result was achieved." He continued, "There have been cases of accused persons seeking what they consider to be the easier path – pleading guilty to an offence they did not commit simply because they cannot afford the cost of a trial.”
“Sir, I want to thank the Minister for sharing with us the Kallang Alive plans. I am very excited to hear about it, especially since the bulk of it falls within my constituency. But, Sir, Members of Parliament in this House need to hold the Government accountable for Ministries' expenditure. The Minister has explained that the cost of taking over the Sports Hub is about $2.3 billion, which is about the same price as what the Government would have to pay to 2035. May I ask the Minister, what about revenue from sports or entertainment events that SHPL would have carried out during this term between 2014 and 2035? Does the Government take a share in any of this revenue taken from sports or entertainment events? For example, I think Liverpool played recently at Sports Hub. Did the Government take a share in any of these major events? Because if it does, then we also need to balance how much we will lose in terms of lost revenue in taking over the Sports Hub.”
“Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong had previously said that it will be more difficult to attract quality candidates into politics as potential candidates will have to face negative comments on social media. They have to put up with a greater financial sacrifice from switching careers and also face less certainty of winning in elections. If we do not find the right people to serve in Parliament, Singapore, as a country, will suffer, because of weaker leadership at the national level. Thus, we should amend the Constitution to ensure that the type of people who are disqualified from becoming MPs are the ones that we want to exclude and not citizens who have made minor or technical mistakes in their lives.”
“Sir, section 45 of the Charities Act sets out the criteria where a person is disqualified to serve as a director in a charity if the person is convicted of dishonesty, including fraud, corruption, bribery and deception, or offences involving terrorism, terrorism financing or money laundering. Section 154 of the Companies Act sets out the criteria where a person is disqualified to serve as a director of a company if the person is convicted of any offence, whether in Singapore or elsewhere, involving again, fraud or dishonesty punishable with an imprisonment of three months or more. These disqualification criteria suggest that the state frowns upon persons who have behaved dishonestly and are disqualified from holding positions where they act as fiduciary to either a charity or a company. So, I would urge the Government to do likewise – signal the type of dishonest conduct that we wish to guard against and not just by adjusting the quantum of the fine. Sir, I also wish to ask the Minister to clarify, for persons who are convicted of offences overseas, may I ask the Minister whether the same criteria of referring to the quantum of fine will apply? For example, it was previously reported that in some Scandinavian countries, the fine for traffic offences is pegged to the person's earnings. Thus, if you are a high earner in Singapore and, for some reason, you are caught speeding in a Scandinavian country, the fine for speeding may far exceed the sum of $10,000, which is the proposed new criteria for disqualification. In fact, that fine in that Scandinavian country is supposed to be pegged to your salary. So, is that the intended objective of the amendment to the Constitution?”
“He had turned left and he hit a motorcycle because he missed a blind spot. The motorcycle rider suffered a fractured arm and my client was fined a total of $4,000. I was thinking to myself: this could happen to anyone of us in the House; anyone of us who was driving and had missed a blind spot would be charged for careless driving and fined more than $2,000 and it would result in us being disqualified. So, it begs the question as to whether a momentary lapse of judgement whilst driving is the kind of reason that a person ought to be disqualified to serve as an MP. And I would humbly submit that we ought to set a bar in the Constitution that disqualifies a person from being an MP if that person is convicted of an offence that relates to dishonesty, fraud, corruption, bribery or, as Mr Murali Pillai has suggested, sexual misconduct, but not for careless driving. For other offences that are technical in nature or what we call statutory offences, we ought to review whether such offences ought to result in disqualification to be an MP as well. Take another example – a company director who had gotten a fellow investor who becomes a shareholder and he cannot get his fellow shareholder to hold an Annual General Meeting (AGM). Thus, he fails to file an Annual Return and is convicted in Court. Should the fine imposed by the Court exceed $2,000? Should that Director also be disqualified for such a technical offence, that he had made a mistake in choosing a fellow investor or a shareholder wrongly?”
“Sir, I support the proposed amendments to the various Articles of the Constitution. Article 45 sets out the criteria for the disqualification of MPs. Article 45(e) states that a person shall not be qualified to be an MPs if he has been convicted of an offence by a Court of law and sentenced to imprisonment for a term of not less than one year or a fine of not less than $2,000 and has not received a free pardon. The fine quantum of $2,000 has not been revised since Independence and I agree that it is appropriate to adjust the fine quantum, to ensure that the fine quantum is commensurate with the reasons why a person ought to be disqualified to be an MP. Take, for example, the sentencing guidelines for traffic offences. They have been enhanced after Parliament amended the Road Traffic Act in 2019. In recent Court cases for careless driving, the Courts came up with a sentencing framework whereby a person charged for careless driving resulting in grievous hurt will face a fine of $2,500 even when his culpability is low. This means that if a person were to make an error of judgement when driving and his careless driving results in an accident, whereby a victim suffered a serious injury, then that person would be disqualified to be an MP as the fine for careless driving would exceed the sum of $2,000. And this is the current fine quantum for disqualification under Article 45(e) of the Constitution. Thus, if the Constitution is not amended, any aspiring person who wishes to stand as a candidate to be an MP would not be qualified, and any sitting MP would be disqualified if they have been convicted of a similar kind of traffic offence. Sir, last year, I advised a client who was charged for careless driving.”
“Sir, I am trying to see whether the unvaccinated can live their lives normally, as with the other Singaporeans. I spoke to some unvaccinated people and they shared that, for many of them, they choose not to be vaccinated because they are worried about the severe adverse reactions. The Minister had said that the health care system is not overwhelmed, the majority of Singaporeans are vaccinated. So, is there any way in which we can really consider removing some of the VDS, so that those who choose not to be vaccinated for whatever reasons can lead their lives as per the rest of Singaporeans? There are only about 3.5% of such people and, really, they ought to take responsibility for their own decision not to be vaccinated.”
“Sir, I hate to belabour this point, but really, I know that the doctors, the healthcare workers have been trying to get the unvaccinated people vaccinated, but to no success. So, I do not see how the number of vaccinated people will go up. The question that many people have asked is, when will all this end? Like what Mr Liang Eng Hwa said, all these are at great inconvenience to the malls, because they have got to have manpower to man the entry and exit points of the malls. It inconveniences the shoppers who have to go into the malls, because now they have fewer entry and exit points. So, surely, MOH ought to consider the principle of self-responsibility, which is that, those who choose to be unvaccinated have to take the consequences of their action. I mean, if they choose to do so despite all our efforts to persuade them, then they have to take responsibility.”
“But when a prominent "No Cycling" sign was put on the floor of the footpath bridge, I saw marked improvements in the behaviours of cyclists and a large majority of cyclists dismounted and pushed their bicycles across the foot path. Without the prominent signage, many cyclists would just ride across the bridge. 11.15 am Safe and Pleasant Pedestrian Experience”
“Sir, last year, during COS debate, I spoke about the frustration caused to many pedestrians due to a minority of reckless cyclists, who speed along shared paths and footpaths. Their inconsiderate behaviour is a cause of danger to other users of the shared paths or foot paths, who may be injured by such riders. I have seen regular enforcement action taken by LTA and NParks' officers, but this situation does not seem to have improved. The enforcement officers cannot possibly be at the park connector or other shared paths every day. Pedestrians tell me they do not feel safe using the shared paths or footpaths, when cyclists zip by them at high speeds and in a dangerous manner. And this is especially so for pedestrians who are seniors or with young toddlers. One wrong step by the toddler or the senior person may mean serious injury if a speeding bicycle crashes on them. It does not help that many shared paths do not have clear demarcation as to which side of the path is for pedestrians and which side is for the cyclists. Indeed, I myself have walked along such paths and I felt it was very stressful not knowing whether a reckless cyclist would crash into my back. May I ask LTA to do more – to educate and remind all cyclists using shared or footpaths that they should not speed and be considerate to other users? Can LTA put up more prominent signs along the paths reminding cyclists on the dangers of speeding and riding recklessly? In Tanjong Rhu, there used to be a sign – a small sign – that the cyclists are not supposed to ride beyond the bicycle lane. But nobody obeyed it.”