Mah Bow Tan
Singapore
“The previous generation of Singaporeans overcame huge odds together to create this improbable nation which we call home. Let this generation work as one to define our country for the next lap of our journey. Sir, on this note, I fully support the amended Motion. Page: 143”
“Like all upgrading programmes, there is a certain budget, and a certain pace at which we will build. We have completed the LUP and now we are going on towards the HIP. The Estate Upgrading Programme (EUP) is ongoing.”
“For those who cannot afford home ownership, we will provide rental flats. For the rest where there is hardship involved, that is where the safety net comes in. I do not think we should make the safety net so wide as to bring in everybody.”
“Building a studio apartment is no different from building any other HDB flat. If a person applies now and the building works start now, he can get it in two-and-a-half years to three years. We have stepped up the building of studio apartments over the last couple of years.”
“Mdm Halimah Yacob asked the Minister for Health (a) how many people have signed an Advance Medical Directive (AMD) and how many have revoked them since; and (b) whether there is a need to review the current rules on AMDs which do not require a person who has revoked the AMD to inform the Registrar, thus causing uncertainty for hospitals t…”
“Parents who wish to exert more control over the maximum mobile service charges incurred by their children may consider service options such as mobile pre-paid cards. IDA is aware of the public's concerns on mobile subscriptions, and will continually review policies and look into measures to further protect the interest of consumers.”
The complete record
Every one of 3,030 lines we hold for Mah Bow Tan, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 52 of 61.
“Mr Speaker, Sir, the Vehicle Entry Permit (VEP) Scheme was introduced in 1973 to ensure that Malaysian-registered cars and motorcycles pay roughly the same cost as Singapore-registered cars and motorcycles for using our roads. This is only fair because they also occupy road space and contribute to congestion. VEP fees for cars and motorcycles were revised in October last year because the cost differential between using Malaysian-registered and Singapore-registered vehicles on our roads had widened, due to rising COE prices. The Government will review the VEP fees regularly to ensure that the objective is met, ie, all vehicles, whether local or foreign, are subject to the same costs when used on our roads.”
“Sir, I would ask the Public Transport Council to consider the Member's suggestion. But may I assure her that there is no shortage of feedback on the adequacy or otherwise of bus services through many, many channels, including Members of this House.”
“Sir, the question of a monitoring system goes part and parcel with the bus service standards that have been set up. I think the setting up of bus service standards is a very important first step to further improving the bus services. Because with these standards, operators now are put on notice that these are the standards that they have to adhere to. At the same time, commuters also know that if operators do not meet these standards, they have a way to seek redress. Therefore, it is very important for the PTC and ROV to be able to monitor whether bus services on the ground actually do meet these standards. So the monitoring system will be set up. It will be made public. There will be regular reports on the state of bus services which will be reported on by the PTC. On the question of feedback, yes, the complaints from commuters on bus services which do not meet these standards will be actively taken up by the PTC, ROV, and, of course, the bus operators themselves. Because, do not forget, it is most effective if commuters can communicate their unhappiness, if service standards are not met, directly with the operators. Because then you short-circuit the process and you do not have to go through the regulator. But, yes, there are sufficient channels and, if necessary, we will widen the channels of feedback in order for bus commuters to be able to seek redress on these standards.”
“To smoothen the way for buses on our roads, my Ministry is working with PWD to expand the network of bus lanes, and to introduce other bus priority measures, for example, priority for buses to turn at traffic junctions. Bus operators are also encouraged to look into other ways to improve control over bus schedules, to improve reliability of bus services and to provide better information to commuters waiting at bus stops, including information on the expected arrival times of buses. The bus service standards also address the issue of directness of bus routes. Long, circuitous bus routings are discouraged. Bus links to the MRT are encouraged. The standards also require that at least 95% of all point-to-point journeys do not require more than one transfer. This excludes feeder-to-trunk transfers. The current bus service is largely in compliance with the bus service standards set by the Council. In those areas where they do not meet the standards, the bus operators have been given six months from November last year to comply. The PTC and ROV will conduct regular surveys and audits to monitor the service level. Lastly, good driving and courteous service are qualitative elements of a total bus service package which cannot be addressed by the bus service standards. Over the years, the bus operators have developed a comprehensive and extensive training, monitoring, and education programme, as well as disciplinary and incentive measures to promote good driving and courteous service. I will ask the PTC to ensure that they continue to accord top priority to these two important aspects of customer service.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, public bus services are provided by private operators, who agree to offer a good service at reasonable fares to commuters, in return for reasonable returns for their shareholders. A comprehensive set of bus service standards was drawn up by the Public Transport Council in November last year to serve as the basis for the Council, bus operators and commuters to agree on what constitutes a good service at current fare levels. These standards cover the key areas which are of concern to bus commuters, including the planning and design of bus routes, service efficiency, hours of operation and service information. Take, for example, the standards on service headways. These standards require 85% of all trunk services to be operated at not more than 12 minutes during peak hours, and not more than 15 minutes during off-peak hours. The other 15% of services, which are usually the extremely low demand services to remote areas, are allowed to operate at longer headways, up to 20 or even 30 minutes. If commuters want a higher standard of service, for example, 100% of bus services to be operated at not more than 10 minutes headway, then they can mandate the Council to raise the standard accordingly. In return, they must be prepared to pay higher bus fares to support the higher operating costs incurred. The bus service standards refer to "headways", which measure the intervals at which operators despatch buses from the terminals. Arrival times at bus stops are difficult to control, especially when roads are congested during peak hours or inclement weather or when accidents occur.”
“(a) The complaints against trade fairs and mini trade fairs were received verbally or in writing by various government agencies, the media, Shopkeepers Associations and Members of Parliament. The aggregate number of complaints is, therefore, not available. (b) Members of the public complained about noise nuisance, poor food hygiene, littering, gambling, illegal engagement of foreign workers and traffic obstruction. Shopkeepers complained about unfair competition. (c) Locations of fairs which have attracted complaints included those held in void decks, spaces next to flats, along roads and sites near to shops. (d) Prior to 1st July 1994, no licence was needed to hold such fairs. Between 1st July 1994 and 31st December 1994, the following licences were issued: _______________________________________________________________ Organisations Number of Applications Approved _______________________________________________________________ Grassroots 172 Social/Civic 34 Tertiary/Institution 24 Religious 11 STPB 5 Town Council 4 School 3 _______________________________________________________________ Total 253 _______________________________________________________________ HOUSING AND DEVELOPMENT BOARD FLATS AND LICENCES (Deprivation of citizens' rights) 21. Mr Ling How Doong asked the Acting Minister for National Development whether it is the policy to deny citizens of their rights to register for Housing and Development Board flats and to apply for or renew their licences if they fail to pay their fines, compositions, dues, levies and Central Provident Fund contribution and if he will specify the circumstances under which these rights are being deprived.”
“Prior to 1st July 1994, a licence was not needed to hold trade fairs and mini trade fairs. The new licensing requirements were introduced on 1st July 1994. There were 301 applications received between 1st July to 31st December 1994. The applications were from the following organisations: ___________________________________________________ Number of Applications Organisations ____________________________ Approved Rejected ___________________________________________________ Commerical -- 16 Social/Civic 34 14 Grassroots 172 12 Political -- 3 Town Council 4 2 Religious 11 1 School 3 -- STPB 5 -- Tertiary Institution 24 -- ___________________________________________________ Total 253 48 ___________________________________________________ NUMBER OF COMPLAINTS AGAINST TRADE FAIRS 1990 - 1994 20. Mr Low Thia Khiang asked the Minister for the Environment, for each of the years from 1990 to 1994, (a) what is the number of complaints arising from trade fairs and mini trade fairs (pasar malams); (b) what is the nature of these complaints; (c) where are the locations of the fairs complained against; and (d) what are the organisations to which the licences for the fairs were issued.”
“There is no statutory lifespan imposed on private cars. Hence, owners can renew their cars' 10-year COEs upon expiry by paying the prevailing quota premium. No limit is imposed on the number of such renewals, provided the vehicles concerned meet ROV's roadworthiness standards and pass their annual inspections. NUMBER OF TRADE FAIR LICENCES 1990 - 1994 19. Mr Low Thia Khiang asked the Minister for the Environment, for each of the years from 1990 to 1994, (a) what is the number of applications for licences to hold trade fairs and mini trade fairs (pasar malams); and (b) how many of these were approved and rejected and who were these organisations.”
“WECs which are not converted to normal cars by the end of the grace period, will remain as WECs until ERP is implemented islandwide. The exact date, which is expected to be beyond year 2000, can only be determined after ERP is implemented. By then, as promised by the Government, WECs will automatically be converted to normal cars at no cost to the owners. (e) Whether the OPC scheme has inadvertently penalised owners of bigger weekend cars and, if so, what is the remedy. The WEC Scheme was implemented to help more Singaporeans to own cars. Its tax package was formulated with the intention to help the marginal car owners, who were expected to be the buyers of small or medium-sized cars. The revised WEC Scheme and the new OPC Scheme preserve this intention. There is no justification to allow owners of bigger WECs to enjoy more tax concessions than owners of smaller WECs. It is only fair that all owners of OPCs or WECs, regardless of their engine capacities, be subject to similar usage restraint and be given similar tax concession. LIFESPAN OF CARS (Extension) 18. Mr Imram bin Mohamed asked the Minister for Communications whether there is a limit to the number of times by which the lifespan of a car can be extended on payment of the prevailing quota premium.”
“(c) Whether an OPC can be converted into a normal car after 10 years, on payment of the quota premium An owner can convert his OPC to a normal car anytime during the lifespan of his car, by paying an administrative fee of $800 and refunding the "unused" portion of the upfront rebate, calculated as follows: $17,000 ---------- x (120 months - age of car at date of conversion) 120 months There is no need to pay another quota premium, as the OPC owner has already bid for a COE. The top-up amount to convert an OPC to a normal car is "depreciated" over 10 years and equals to zero when the car is 10 years or older. The prevailing quota premium is payable only if the owner wishes to revalidate the car's COE for another 10 years. (d) Why a deadline is imposed for conversion of weekend cars to normal cars; Under the former Weekend Car (WEC) Scheme, owners who wanted to convert their WECs to normal cars were required to obtain a normal car COE. When the WEC Scheme was revised in October last year, to cap the road tax discounts eventually at $800, it was decided to give WEC owners the option to convert their cars to normal cars without having to bid for a new normal car COE. They are required only to pay an administrative fee of $100 and a top-up charge, as follows: (Upfront tax rebate + savings in COE premium (120 months - age of car at point of tender) x at time of conversion) ---------------------- 120 months The top-up charge is pro-rated to the age of the WEC concerned and takes into account the savings in COE premium at the point of tender, and will "depreciate" over time. As this is a concession, owners are given up to end September 1997 to exercise the option. The 3-year grace period to exercise the option will help owners to depreciate their top-up charge.”
“(a) How many Certificates of Entitlement have been issued and how many cars have been registered under the Off-Peak Car (OPC) scheme since 1st October 1994 The Registry of Vehicles has issued a total of 15,280 Certificates of Entitlement (COEs) since 1st October 1994, excluding those for registration of Category 5 (commercial) and Category 6 (motorcycles) vehicles. As at end December 1994, there are a total of 127 Off-Peak Cars (OPCs), 97 of which are registered new and 30 of which are converted from normal cars. (b) How is the strike price determined and whether the OPC bids influence the strike price; There is no special COE category for OPCs. All car buyers will bid for normal car COEs and the strike price will be determined by the lowest successful bids in the respective COE categories. At the point of registering their cars, owners are then required to indicate if they wish to register OPCs or normal cars. If they choose to register OPCs, they will then receive a maximum upfront tax rebate of $17,000 on the net Additional Registration fee (ARF), customs duty and COE premium. In addition, they get a discount of $800 on the annual road tax subject to a minimum road tax of $50. There is no evidence to suggest that the OPC Scheme has led to higher COE prices. The scheme is designed to help those who can marginally afford to own cars. It will not be in their interest to push up COE premiums, as it will then nullify the tax concessions given to them.”
“The Corrective Work Order (CWO) is served on persons who have committed serious littering offences or who were repeat offenders. Since CWO was introduced in November 1992, a total of 572 littering offenders have been issued with CWOs by the Courts. The fact that none of those who had served CWO has been caught for littering suggests that CWO has been effective in deterring them from repeating the offence. Places at which CWOs have been carried out, eg. East Coast Park and void decks in some Town Council estates, are now much cleaner. This suggests that the sight of offenders carrying out the CWO has also been a deterrent to others, from littering. Overall, the number of littering offences has dropped from 432 per month in 1990 to 349 in 1994. RESURFACING OF MANHOLE COVERS 11. Mr Cheo Chai Chen asked the Acting Minister for National Development if he will instruct Public Works Department to direct the road construction contractors not to resurface manhole covers of sewage and telephone wire pipes with tar when they reconstruct the roads or do tar-topping.”
“There is also a lot of bones. So if private operators are prepared to take some of the bones as well, then we can consider their application. KIDNEY TRANSPLANTS PERFORMED OVERSEAS 10. Mr Ling How Doong asked the Minister for Health (a) how many persons have gone overseas for kidney transplants; (b) how many persons are on the waiting list for kidney transplants; (c) what is the waiting period for such transplants; and (d) how many of those persons who had gone overseas for kidney transplants contracted HIV or died.”
“As I have explained earlier, the main bus operators, in this case, SBS and TIBS, are obliged to operate a universal service obligation, which means that we expect them to run both the good as well as the bad services. In other words, they enjoy the meat but they also have to operate some bones. If we allow private bus operators to only go for the meat, then I am afraid it is very difficult for us to also equally require the operators to go and take some of the less profitable or even unprofitable services. So there is a question of fairness involved here.”
“As I have indicated in my answer just now, if the application is from a private operator who wishes to run the service which is targeted at a different market segment, then the Public Transport Council will consider that application.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, private operators will be allowed to operate bus services which do not duplicate the basic bus service operated by the main operators. This is because the main bus operators are obliged to provide universal service, in other words, they have to operate both profitable and unprofitable services. Private operators, on the other hand, do not have to fulfil this obligation and therefore they can choose to run only profitable services if they wish to do so. However, private operators can play a useful role in supplementing the services provided by the main bus operators. The Public Transport Council will consider bus service applications from private operators, based on the following principles: (1) If the proposed bus service is comparable to the basic bus service in quality and fares, it must operate within the main basic bus network, so that there is no wasteful duplication of services. This is necessary so that basic bus fares are kept affordable. (2) If the proposed service offers a higher quality service at higher fares, for example, Bus-Plus services, there will be no restriction on the route because it serves a different market from the basic bus service.”
“Sir, I have referred the Member's request to the Public Transport Council, which is the authority that approves changes to bus routes. The Council will follow up with SBS to evaluate the proposal for new bus links from Simei Estate to the Changi Airport. HDB UPGRADING PROGRAMME AT SIN MING ROAD 10. Mr Leong Horn Kee asked the Acting Minister for National Development whether his Ministry has any plans to implement the interim upgrading or main upgrading of Blocks 22, 23, 24 and 25 at Sin Ming Road.”
“However, over time, this policy will allow the entire estate to be redeveloped into a two-storey estate.”
“I thought we were conducting an experiment as to how people would behave. If we change the rules, how would people behave. In this particular case, I am saying that it will not change anything because there is a certain value attached to this scarce commodity known as the COE. Whichever way we change it, whatever bidding system we put into place, people will finally come to the conclusion that this is the fair market value. This is what I am saying. I believe that this is what we are trying to prove or disprove so let us test the theory out. RENOVATION OR RECONSTRUCTION OF SINGLE-STOREY TERRACE HOUSE (Consent of neighbours) 5. Dr Lau Teik Soon asked the Acting Minister for National Development whether the renovation or reconstruction of a single-storey terrace house into a two- or two-and-a-half-storey building will be disallowed if the neighbours do not consent to it. The Acting Minister for National Development (Mr Lim Hng Kiang): Mr Speaker Sir, land for landed properties is scarce in Singapore. With high land prices, many owners in single-storey conventional houses in the older housing estates wish to redevelop their houses to two or more storeys, in order to have more intensive use of their land. There is no single-storey height control for landed properties in Singapore. Even the strictest landed housing control, ie, in a good class bungalow area, allows bungalows to be built up to two storeys. We have considered the possible impact of such redevelopments in existing single-storey estates, and have concluded that they will not cause unacceptable amenity problems to the surrounding residence. It may look odd initially to have double-storey houses amidst single-storey ones.”
“Sir, I think when we conduct an experiment, we need to keep all variables constant except one and vary that one. I think this is what I was taught in school when I was doing experiments. If we are really interested in doing an experiment, let us do it this way. I am not against trying out the pay-as-you-bid or variations that have been proposed by Members of this House. The point is that if we want to have a fair result, let us do it one at a time. It will take a few months or a few weeks if we can speed it up to try and get some of the details worked out. And I think we can discuss some of these possibilities subsequently.”
“We shall try after we have done the other one. We shall try.”
“Sir, I think Mr Chiam's suggestion is a hybrid of the current system and the pay-as-you-bid system, as it were, whereby everybody pays what he bids. It is neither here nor there. If we want to try it, I think we will try the pay-as-you-bid system, as the people have suggested, whereby you pay for whatever you bid.”
“But there is only one way to prove that and when the time comes, we shall do so. Mr Chiam See Tong: Sir, the Minister says that the people are now bidding close to the strike price. If you amend the pay-as-you-bid system, as canvassed in the newspapers, you have a system whereby you take the top 25% as the actual prices. Those who bid at that price must pay. Are you willing to amend the pay-as-you-bid system, instead of taking the actual prices of everybody who bids until they reach the strike price? You cream off the top 25%. Then people will understand the system and there will be two sets of bidders. Those who want to get the COE at the top will bid very high and those who want to try their luck in the 75% will bid at a much lower price. If the Minister is not clear, those who bid the highest price, for the first batch of 25% who bid, you take the actual price. Assuming you have got 4,000 COEs available. You take the first 1,000. Then the remainig 3,000, you go on your normal strike price basis. That will stop everybody from clustering around one strike price.”
“I think I have answered this question many times before. But let me just go through the reasons once again. In the case of pay-as-you-bid, there is a belief that there are people bidding very high prices, much, much higher than the successful strike price. Every month when we release the results, we not only release the results of the successful strike price, the lowest successful bid price, we also release the results of all the other bid prices. And if you look at these results which are readily available in the ROV, you will find that people are bidding close to the successful strike price, plus or minus 10%. Therefore, if you are going to implement a pay-as-you-bid, even under the current system, the prices are already close to the successful bid price. They are clustering around the successful bid price. How is it going to change under the pay-as-you-bid system? We have operated the COE bidding system for about four years now. In the beginning when people were getting used to the system, there were a few stray bids, very high bids, but that has changed. The tenderers know more or less what is the market price and what they are able to afford, and they are bidding accordingly. So even under the existing system, the bid prices are already fairly reflecting what is the market value of the COE. In a pay-as-you-bid system, it will not be any different. It will cluster around the successful bid price. The bids will be narrower and it will not make any difference. Why do I say that? It is already happening. As more and more people are bidding, as the people are getting more intelligent on the bidding system, they are already bidding in the way that we believe reflects the true market value. So when we introduce pay-as-you-bid, it is not going to make any difference.”
“Sir, I honestly do not have the figures at the moment. But if all the projects that we are looking into come into being, I have no doubt whatsoever that the total cost will be much higher than what we are collecting in any one year. Just to give you an example, for the first phase of the MRT system, we spent $5 billion. For the extension to Woodlands, we are spending another $2 billion. For the North-East sector line, probably more. If you take into account all the other projects - the LRT systems, the tunnels, the Kallang extension, the extension to Tuas and so on - conceivably, it will be much more than what we are collecting. But that is besides the point. The point is: are these projects worth doing? If they are, then we will do it. Mr Chiam See Tong: Earlier on, the Minister said that his Ministry had studied these two schemes - the pay-as-you-bid scheme and discouraging double transfers - and came to the conclusion that they are not feasible. Can the Minister give reasons or tell us why the Ministry came to such a conclusion, when many members of the public think otherwise?”
“I thank the Member for his agreeing with the Minister on something. But I am afraid that there are many other people outside who seriously believe that it is because of double transfers that COE prices are high. Let us try double transfers first. We can then move on to pay-as-you-bid or anything else that we perceive to be the high cost of COE prices subsequently.”
“There is absolutely no reluctance at all. As I have said in my answer, we are prepared to try it. But I would like to start off with double transfers because this is a natural follow up to the major adjustment that we made to the VQS system. When we removed transferability, the Member may recall, we had a big debate as to whether transferability was the cause of high COE prices. The Government said no. But many Members and many members of the public said yes, because of transferability, COE prices were high. We conducted an experiment. The experiment showed that it did not make any difference. But, nevertheless, we decided since we have already started it, let it be. Having done that, we now have things like double transfers, proxy bidding and so on. So if we are really going to start an experiment, it is natural for us to start off with double transfers. That is the reason why we have decided to start on that. I am prepared to move towards pay-as-you-bid after this. We can work with the GPC for Communications and any others to get an experiment in place very quickly. We can start fairly quickly within a few months.”
“Sir, when you are talking about public transport, you are talking about transport which is used by many people and operated by a few, in other words, an efficient mode of transportation. I grant that taxis do provide a service. But I do not accept that taxis are an efficient mode of transport when compared to buses or, worse still, when compared to MRT. So there is a cost associated with providing this service and in providing the level of comfort that people are expecting from taxis. And I think this level of comfort and convenience must be reflected in the cost of providing that service and, ultimately, in the price of that service to the commuter.”
“Sir, my Ministry has considered that particular scheme and many, many more. The conclusion we have come to, I have already given to this House. But we are prepared to experiment on pay-as-you-bid, or variations thereof, after we have gone through the exercise on double transfers. So I would urge the Member to be patient.”
“I have asked the GPC for Communications to help my Ministry set up an experiment in order to conduct a trial on a basis whereby everybody will agree it is a fair trial. My Ministry is not convinced although there is a perception that it will make a difference. Let us discuss how we can conduct such an experiment, the result of which will convince either party whether he is right or wrong. In this respect, the views of Mr Chiam and other Members of this House will be most welcomed in drawing up this particular experiment. As far as the timing is concerned, it depends on how fast we can get these rules and regulations put into place.”
“The Member is asking why we cannot implement a system and put rules and regulations into place in order to make sure that there is no windfall profit. For every rule and regulation that is in place, we will need people to go and enforce it. We are not dealing with a commodity, like HDB flats, where you can go around and ask people questions as to who is living there and who is not. We will have to set up a system whereby we would have to check every single car that goes on the road, who is driving it, and whether he is the rightful owner, etc. The more rules and regulations you put into place, the greater the bureaucracy that we would have to create, and the more money we would have to spend on people to enforce these rules and regulations. For what purpose? In order to benefit a few people who would otherwise have to buy a COE from the open market.”
“Sir, in the first place, the moment we say that we are going to ballot, I think we are indirectly implying that we are going to make COEs available to the lucky applicants at a price which is lower than the market price. The moment that happens, then my point comes in. That you are actually giving a windfall profit to that lucky applicant. Is that better? Or is it better for us to collect the total amount accruing from COE revenue, put it into consolidated revenue, and use it for the public good? Which is better? Do we give it to a few lucky people? Or do we redistribute it to Singaporeans in general?”
“As I said, we are not convinced that the two systems will work. I think the only way to conduct an experiment of this nature is really to do it one at a time. Does he not think so? Because, otherwise, you will not be sure what is the actual effect of each of the two systems. We will try the first system first, and take our time with all the various inputs to see how we can conduct such an experiment. And if it does not work, then we can go on to the next one.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, if I can take the second point first. As the Member is well aware, there is a subsidy on the infrastructure cost of providing for public transport services, whether it be MRT or buses. In the case of the MRT, we build the whole system. We provide the rolling stock. In the case of buses, we build interchanges, bus stations, bus stops, etc. This is already an investment in the public transport services without which the cost of providing those services would have been very much higher. The question of whether we should subsidise the direct operating cost, which I think is the thrust of his question, is an entirely different matter because the moment you start doing that, the whole question of whether services are provided where there is a need or not becomes very hazy, because there will always be demand for such services. If the Government is willing to provide subsidies for these services, where do we draw the line? Sir, on the question of subsidies, yes, the Government will look into further feasibility studies in areas where a transport service, whether it be MRT, LRT, or bus service, is possible. If it is possible, and if it can cover the direct operating cost, then the Government is prepared to build that particular infrastructure. And I believe that is the way to make sure that transport services are provided and made affordable without at the same time creating a big black hole whereby we have to pour money in every year in order to make sure that those services keep on running.”
“For new towns presently under construction, HDB is already reserving land for the right of way for possible light rail systems. My Ministry, together with the Ministry of National Development, has also formed a committee to look into ways to improve accessibility to MRT, and to provide more convenient transfers between MRT and other modes of transport. On buses, the Public Transport Council recently approved a new set of comprehensive bus service standards which will ensure that basic bus services are accessible, reliable, affordable and user-friendly. More Bus-Plus-type services will be introduced to cater to those willing to pay more for a higher level of service. To-date, a Tibs/SMRT joint venture is operating four routes. There are other interested operators. We have recently approved one who will run two more new routes. Another operator has indicated interest to run another 10 new routes. Sir, there is much we have done but we can do more. My Ministry will work towards a comprehensive public transport system which will offer commuters a range of services at various fares, commensurate with the different levels of service they provide so that, while not every Singaporean can own a car, all Singaporeans can enjoy a comfortable, convenient and comprehensive public transport service.”
“The surveys will give us a basis to adjust the whole day ALS scheme. We are also studying extending road pricing to other congested roads and highways, such as the CTE, PIE and ECP. My Ministry will have specific proposals by next year. If and when these additional measures are successful, we will release more COEs. Finally, let me bring the debate on this issue back to where I feel it rightfully belongs. The real issue is not whether COE prices are high but whether transportation in Singapore is efficient and affordable. The only practical long-term solution for Singapore, which is so short of land, is not more cars but better public transport. The Government has invested heavily in public transport infrastructure. We will do more, as the public has urged us to. The MRT extension to Woodlands will be ready early 1996. I have asked MRTC to re-study the viability of the North-East Sector line, cutting through Serangoon and Punggol. Their report will be ready by February 1995. We should be able to take a decision on this soon after. We are also looking into extending the MRT to Changi Airport, and building an LRT (light rail transit) system for the Marina Centre area. Next year, MRTC will commence feasibility studies on a possible Kallang line, as well as extending the existing system from Boon Lay either to Tuas or Nanyang. Many MPs and members of the public have suggested introducing light rail systems as an additional form of public transport. I have instructed MRTC to study the potential of light rail, especially as an internal feeder service for new towns. For a start, they will focus on two new towns - Bukit Panjang and Kangkar. If these are viable, we can build light rails in the other existing new towns to supplement or replace the bus feeder services.”
“However, we must then find a way to cater for legitimate car buyers, many of whom prefer to obtain their cars with the COEs speedily through car dealers without going through the hassle of bidding for COEs themselves, because this is the root cause of the double transfer phenomenon. I have spoken to the GPC Chairman for Communications, Mr Heng Chiang Meng, to ask his GPC to help my Ministry conduct this experiment, and he has kindly agreed. The views and suggestions from other Members are of course most welcome. The only sure way to moderate COE prices and to enable more Singaporeans to own cars is to increase the supply of COEs. But our dilemma is this: how do we increase the supply without at the same time causing congestion? Regulating usage will help. We can increase COEs if we can discourage motorists from using their vehicles at peak periods or along congested roads. For example, the whole-day Area Licensing Scheme (ALS) has evened out traffic flow into the CBD and brought about better utilisation of the roads there. The success of the whole-day ALS allowed us to increase the number of COEs this year without adding to congestion. More recently, we introduced the Off-Peak Car (OPC) scheme which offers a substantial discount on the upfront cost of buying a car as well as a rebate on the annual road tax. An OPC owner enjoys the full benefits of the scheme if he uses his car sparingly. If the scheme is popular, we can increase the supply of COEs to allow more people to own cars without causing congestion. The Government will continue to pursue further measures to restrain usage. Electronic Road Pricing will not be ready until the end of 1997, at the earliest. In the meantime, we will carry out further studies of traffic flow in and around the city.”
“I have explained on many occasions why these changes will not lower COE prices and why they will instead cause inconvenience to genuine car buyers. Another category of suggestions seeks to restrict the eligibility for COEs to specific groups of people, eg, the disabled, to those who pay tax, to those who do not own any car, and so on. These suggestions are also unworkable. The Government can only control the total number of cars on the roads, which it does through the VQS system. It cannot decide who should be allowed to own a car and who should not. Nor can it set up enforcement systems to make sure that people who do not deserve to own a car do not somehow make separate private arrangements. The free market, not Government rules, must decide who owns cars, according to people's ability and their willingness to pay. Nevertheless, although my Ministry is convinced that all these suggestions will not succeed in lowering COE prices, I sense a strong public perception and hope that they will make a difference. I am therefore prepared to consider implementing some of these suggestions on a trial basis. The most popular suggestions so far are to introduce Pay-As-You-Bid and to discourage double transfers. My Ministry will look into the mechanics of conducting an experiment to determine whether each of these proposals will make a difference. I intend to deal with double transfers first. This is being practised by dealers in order to work around the rules on non-transferable COEs which we introduced some time ago. They now transfer brand new cars instead of COEs. The cars come with the COEs.”
“It only means that the lucky ones who are successful in the ballot, or who are first in the queue, will get the windfall profit, while others who are not so lucky or not so quick, will buy the COEs, or the COEs plus cars, off them at market prices. The Government decided on the tender system because it is the fairest and most efficient way to allocate a scarce resource. COEs will go to the persons who value them most and who are able and willing to pay. This is fair not only to those who bid for COEs, but also to all Singaporeans. COEs as well as the revenue from COEs belong to all Singaporeans. It is the Government's responsibility to collect the market price for the COEs and to use the substantial revenues so collected for public projects which can benefit everyone, such as bus and MRT infrastructure, and also to fund education, health and housing programmes. Without COE revenues, there would be a big gap in the budget which would have to be filled by other means, such as raising taxes. Mr Heng Chiang Meng asked how much was collected from tender of COEs. In the first five months of this year, April to August 1994, total COE revenue collected was $730.8 million, or an average monthly collection of $146.2 million. My Ministry is not in a position to estimate the collections for the rest of this financial year as COE prices, as I have explained before, are determined by market forces, in particular by the demand for motor vehicles, because the supply is limited. There has been no shortage of suggestions on how to change the COE system so as to bring prices down. My Ministry has examined each and every suggestion conscientiously. These include Pay-as-You-Bid, preventing double transfers and proxy bidding, extending the validity of COEs, banning COE loans, and so on.”
“Thank you. Sir, the Certificate of Entitlement (COE) or Vehicle Quota System (VQS) was implemented in May 1990. The objective was to control congestion by restricting the number of vehicles which use our roads. Prior to the VQS, vehicles were increasing at the rate of about 6% per annum. Since then, we have effectively kept the increase to about 3% and our roads have remained relatively congestion-free. The VQS has successfully achieved its objective. It is here to stay. The public accepts the need to curb the vehicle population. But their major unhappiness today is that COE prices have risen sharply over the last few years, which they have attributed to various flaws in the COE system. In other words, if we remove these perceived flaws, COE prices will come down. Unfortunately, this is not so. My Ministry has studied many proposals to fine-tune and modify the system to discover better and fairer ways to allocate the limited number of COEs, and therefore bring down COE prices. But we reluctantly concluded that all these cannot change the fundamental laws of supply and demand. COE prices have risen sharply because the economy has grown strongly over the last few years, incomes have risen and people are confident of the future. In a situation where supply of COEs is limited, and more and more people are able and willing to pay more, prices must go up. We can change the current bidding system to a balloting system, as suggested by Dr Lau Teik Soon, or to a queuing system, as suggested by others. Contrary to popular belief, this will not lower COE prices for the general public.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, may I have your permission to take Questions 1 to 4 on the Order Paper together as they are inter-related?”
“A post-office box number by itself cannot be used as an address on the label of a prepacked food product. This is specifically stated in the Food Regulations. The full address needs to be given as this would allow officers of the Ministry of the Environment to go straight to the premises of the manufacturer, packer, importer, vendor, etc, without loss of time, to carry out any investigations. A post-office box number would not enable this to be done expeditiously. PARKING PROBLEM OUTSIDE EMBASSY OF PEOPLE'S REPUBLIC OF CHINA 4. Mr Cheo Chai Chen asked the Acting Minister for National Development whether he is aware of the parking problem outside the Embassy of the People's Republic of China at Dalvey Road and, if so, whether any remedial measures will be taken. Mr Lim Hng Kiang: At present, there are 8 kerbside parking lots outside the Embassy and 12 parking lots within its compound. It is not possible to provide additional lots along the narrow road outside the Embassy. As the Embassy is in the midst of a residential estate, it has been advised to relocate its Embassy early, especially its Visa Issuing Office. In view of complaints received from residents and other road users on obstruction to traffic and amenity problems, the URA has regularly taken action against motorists parking illegally outside the Embassy. COST OF AND REVENUE FROM CAR PARKS 5. Mr Cheo Chai Chen asked the Acting Minister for National Development, since the establishment of the Housing and Development Board and the Urban Redevelopment Authority till June 1994, what is (i) the total cost of building and maintaining open car parks and multi-storey car parks and (ii) the total revenue collected from these car parks.”
“This would deprive applicants for new flats of the choice they now have to select a flat that best meets their needs and affordability, within the overall income ceilings of $7,000 for a nuclear family and $11,000 for an extended family.”
“Sir, it is not a question of money. If the measures to prevent the fires can be successful, I do not see any reason why not, and if they are implemented on a sustained basis, then the question of money does not come in at all. PURCHASE OF HDB FLATS (Scheme for applicants with varying income eligibility levels) 12. Mr Leong Horn Kee asked the Acting Minister for National Development whether he will consider implementing a scheme with varying income eligibility levels for applicants who wish to purchase Housing and Development Board flats, so that applicants with higher income ceilings can be eligible to purchase the non-subsidised HDB flats such as the 5-room and executive flats, and applicants with lower income ceilings can be eligible to purchase 3-room and 4-room flats which are subsidised. The Acting Minister for National Development (Mr Lim Hng Kiang): Mr Speaker, Sir, let me first clarify that the HDB 5-room and Executive flats are subsidised. They are priced lower than market price. Most of them are, in fact, priced below total development cost. HDB has varying income eligibility levels for applicants who apply for different types of HDB flats. Under the Buy-Back of 3-Room Flats scheme, through which HDB buys back 3-room flats from the open market for subsidised resale to the lower-income group, only first-time applicants with household incomes not exceeding $1,000 are eligible for such flats. To go further than this, and set varying income ceilings for different flat-types, as the hon. Member has proposed, would impair the current flexibility of the allocation system.”
“Sir, in so far as actual putting out of the fire is concerned, there is very little that we can do. We did agree that the best solution is to prevent the fire from starting in the first place. And it is in this area that Singapore feels that it can make a meaningful contribution, ie, in the area of providing information, in the area of setting up, together with our ASEAN partners, an early warning system and we will contribute our expertise in the meteorological services, in the satellite information technology.”
“I did not say that at all, Sir. I simply said that the forest fires are a complex issue. Whether they were started accidentally or not is a separate matter entirely. But having said that, I can tell the House that the Indonesian authorities have informed us about the various causes of the fire, including fires caused by land clearance, the practice of shifting cultivation, the so-called slash and burn method of cultivation, as well as by spontaneous ignition of coal and peat fields in those areas, and these are fires which have been smouldering for years in some cases. It is a combination, or a confluence, of all these various causes that have created the current haze problem plus the fact that the wind directions have resulted in a concentration of the haze in this area. But it is a complex issue and I do not wish to give a wrong impression that the fires can be prevented in the short term. And this is the reason why I caution Singaporeans not to expect that there will be a reprieve in the short term. Why do I say that it is complex? Based on the figures that the Indonesians have given us, some of the fires are burning over an area as large as 500,000 hectares of land. That is a lot of forest. As a matter of comparison, it is roughly about eight to 10 times the size of Singapore and this is why we have asked for further information and whether we could be allowed to give assistance in satellite photography and other means to help them to detect the fires. Dr Lau Teik Soon: Sir, I would like to ask the Minister the extent of assistance which the Government will provide the Indonesian Government to tackle the problem.”
“Yes, the answer is that we have equipment now located in various places around Singapore to detect pollution in our air. The air quality index, or the Pollutants Standard Index that I mentioned earlier, is a result of such monitoring equipment. It monitors not only the particulates in the air which are the current cause of the haze but also other pollutants in the air, including sulphur dioxide, NOX emission, etc. So the PSI is actually a conglomerate of all these various other pollutants that are sensed by the equipment.”
“The equipment that the Member mentioned is currently available. But the Meteorological Service is currently sourcing for additional equipment which will enhance their capability to have a clearer idea of the specific location of the fires.”
“The scale and nature of their forests is such that these fires, if they are allowed to start, will spread quickly, especially during the dry season, and will be very difficult to put out. The Indonesian Authority for Pollution Control (BAPEDAL) has been tasked with the prevention and control of forest fires and will coordinate implementation of control measures through the various agencies, including the Indonesian Ministries of Agriculture, Forestry and Transmigration. Singapore will work with Indonesia by providing information from weather satellites on the location of forest fires. Such information will be useful in early detection of fires and in the deployment of resources to fight the fires and prevent their spread. The problem of the forest fires is both complex and massive. While it is not possible to totally prevent forest fires in the short term, the measures described above, when implemented on a sustained basis, will help to minimise forest fires and their impact. Singapore will cooperate closely with Indonesia on the haze as well as other environmental issues of common concern. In this regard, I will be meeting the Indonesian Minister for the Environment annually to review progress on these issues. The next meeting will be held in Indonesia early next year. At the multilateral level, the ASEAN Ministers for the Environment had, at a recent meeting in Kuching, agreed on setting up a Regional Early Warning and Response System to enhance capabilities of member countries to cope with forest fires and the haze that is caused by such fires.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, the current haze problem is caused by smoke from massive forest fires in Sumatra and Kalimantan. Most of the time, the effect on our air quality has been moderate. In other words, the Pollutants Standard Index (PSI) readings have been between 50 and 100, which is considered acceptable. However, our air quality deteriorated to PSI levels of between 100 and 200 on several days. This level is considered "unhealthful". It is a term which is coined by the experts who have set up the PSI index as being "unhealthful" as opposed to "unhealthy". Medical experts advise that normal activities can continue at this level of air quality although persons with heart and respiratory ailments need to observe some precautions such as reducing physical exertion and outdoor activity. In case the PSI levels deteriorate further beyond the 200 level and go into a hazardous level, a Haze Task Force was set up to coordinate measures to help the public cope with such an eventuality. So far, there has been no indication that this situation will develop. The haze situation has improved. We can expect the haze conditions to vary, thinning on some days and returning on other days until the onset of the north-east monsoon which comes normally in early November. The north-east monsoon will blow the haze away from Singapore. Plans to control future occurrences of haze were discussed between Singapore and Indonesia in the last few weeks. Indonesia has identified the causes of the haze and has mapped out a series of preventive measures that they will take. The focus will be on implementing measures to prevent future forest fires in Kalimantan and Sumatra.”