Nicholas Fang
Singapore
“I thank the Minister for the answers. I have three clarifications. In terms of the contingency plans for the preparation phase for Team Singapore athletes, is there any thought given to perhaps sending our athletes overseas to prepare in the run-up?”
“Mdm Speaker, one clarification for the Senior Minister of State. It is accepted that the targets that are to be met by end of 2015, would largely be 70% to 80%. I think that is a conventional wisdom of what would be achieved by the deadline of end of next year.”
“Apologies to the Minister for asking him to predict the weather. I think it has been proven historically that that is almost impossible to do. But given the unpredictability of the current situation, is there a need to reassess or change the way that Singaporeans are being advised to prepare for the haze in the months going forward?”
“Mdm Speaker, one supplementary question for the Deputy Prime Minister. I understand the latest news is that there was another attempt yesterday of another driver from Malaysia attempting to make an illegal entry at Woodlands.”
“Thank you, Madam. Apologies to the Minister to strain his voice for replies to two supplementary questions. In my cut yesterday on sporting culture, I mentioned that there seems to be a need for a greater appreciation of sports as an entertainment option comparable to movies, theatres and things like that.”
“Mdm Speaker, one supplementary question for the Acting Minister. Having travelled and trained in a variety of sports institutions around the world, this concept of trying to balance academics and sport is something that Singaporeans hold very dear. It seems to be ethos of the Sports School.”
The complete record
Every one of 78 lines we hold for Nicholas Fang, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 2 of 2.
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, in my debut speech in Parliament at last year's Budget debate, I mentioned that communication between the Government and the broader society would be important in rebuilding the social compact. In the current social climate, I believe this remains important when it comes to securing broader buy-in from Singaporeans in support for policies and plans that are needed to keep us moving forward. There have been a few examples in recent months where policies were unveiled at times and in ways that created unnecessary unhappiness and angst. While the perfect time and place and message is an elusive target, I feel strongly that more effort needs to be invested in ensuring that all aspects of policies and Page: 147 programmes are clearly communicated to all Singaporeans in ways that create a more informed society where intelligent debates and discourse become commonplace. If we are unable to do this, then much of the effort now and in the future may be destined to fail to achieve the whole potential impact. And that will be a shame if it affects good policies in that of improving lives and creating a better society for all of us. Sir, I support the Budget. 6.59 pm”
“The need for the Government to balance this shift against the imperative to maintain the country's competitiveness and economic growth is yet another challenge to be managed in the ongoing transition and transformation. Sir, another area I was heartened to hear in the Budget Speech was the recognition that meritocracy, a long-held core value of Singapore, may not be the key to achieving and sustaining social mobility and an inclusive society. Meritocracy holds that individuals should be recognised and rewarded based on merit. It perceives intellectual talent as well as ability as measured through examination or demonstrated achievement. It has been a cornerstone of Singapore's growth story and the driving force behind many of our achievements. But it also encourages a very self-centred approach to life with one's own interests, progress and achievements – the key concern. This could then lead to, at best, an indifference to the plight of our neighbours and fellow Singaporeans and, in the worst case, a beggar-thy-neighbour outlook. Building a more inclusive society has been an aim of this Government for a number of years now. If we are to succeed in this, then an alternative loss of the other than meritocracy, especially meritocracy taken to its extreme, might be needed. We can learn from other cultures, including some in the West, where progress and success is celebrated at a community level and not just individuals, and also where definitions of success are not restricted to just the attainment of top jobs or salaries but include those who excel at whatever their chosen path is. The creation of a new philosophy and culture will take time of course, but I believe now is a good time as any for us to think about it, given the broader transition that we are facing.”
“I will speak more on this during the Committee of Supply. The Cultural Donation Matching Fund will also go a long way in terms of encouraging more donors to come forward to support arts and cultural activities here. Funding for activities such as sports and arts have typically been low compared to other sectors in Singapore. And this reflects the priority of the Government and, indeed, Singaporeans. So, it is welcome news to hear that the numbers are going up, but at the same time financial support is not the only thing that is needed. For pursuits, such as sports and the arts, much progress is made when true passion drives and motivates athletes and artists alike to commit and sacrifice for their craft. Having a secure financial pathway, of course, helps, in terms of motivation, but, in many cases, it is about being given the space to grow and develop that passion without conflicting pressures and demands on our time and energies. The Sports School and the School of the Arts are good initiatives which will hopefully create new generations of sportsmen and artists who have nurtured their talent and ability and passion from an early age. But it is also imperative for us to encourage the rest of society − individuals, schools and other institutions – to also support such individuals and activities by recognising the important role that sports and arts can play in creating a better quality of life and more fulfilling lives for Singaporeans. This will require a shift in our attitudes towards what is deemed as traditionally important – academic results, high salaries or soaring career trajectories – and other less tangible but no less Page: 146 important elements that feed the soul of a country.”
“While Singaporeans benefit indirectly from measures such as the increase in assistance in healthcare which will benefit those with aged parents, they also feel the squeeze from other policies like the new restrictions on car loans. I hope that future measures and policies will be able to offer more direct help to this large group of Singaporeans. Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, it is important to ask if the measures in this Budget and those of previous ones would be enough to build a better society that Deputy Prime Minister Tharman mentioned in his Budget speech. The issue of a better quality of life was raised during the recent debate over the Population White Paper, and Deputy Prime Minister Tharman alluded to this when he said that we should aim to shorten working hours over time and allow Singaporeans Page: 145 to enjoy a better worklife balance to improve productivity. At the moment, the strategy to achieve this better life quality is apparent to many Singaporeans. We are generally victims of our own success having been conditioned to aim for certain definitions of academic, financial and career successes, sometimes at the expense of other concerns. We are accustomed to social and economic policies that are effected through financial incentives and disincentives. But these are not necessarily suited towards creating the intangibles and make up a better-quality living. Deputy Prime Minister Tharman said that this year's Budget will make significant investments to nurture the sports and arts and acknowledge that this plays a growing role in enriching lives in Singapore. It is certainly heartening to hear that 30% more investment will be made into sports programmes while investment in regional and community level sports facilities will be doubled.”
“Minister Lim Swee Say has pointed out that if we restructure our economy too slowly, we risk losing our competitiveness amid an increasingly competitive global stage. If we move too quickly, companies in Singapore, especially SMEs, could be left high and dry and unable to adapt to the new requirements. This adds to the Government's already difficult challenge of managing all the various moving parts that make up a country's economic and social policies. In this year's Budget, it was heartening to see that the poor also receive help as part of the drive to narrow income inequality in the country, with $1.7 billion in financial aid to be dispersed through various means, such as GST Vouchers, conservancy rebates and MediSave top-ups. The provision of such financial assistance is important as it will have a direct impact on Singaporeans trying to cope with the current challenging environment and also on closing the income gap. This is especially critical for those working at the lower rungs of the income ladder, who have seen little or no rise in real income over the past five years. But it will be important to see if these measures will enable wages of all Singaporeans to keep pace with the rising consumer prices which have been rising significantly in recent years. Many Singaporeans I have spoken to have expressed scepticism that this can be achieved. There is also increasing concern that middle income Singaporeans, the so-called sandwiched class, will begin to feel increasingly disadvantaged as they face slow income growth on one hand and inflation on the other.”
“Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, for allowing me to join in this significant debate. This year's Budget is an important one and it seeks to achieve some essential objectives. Deputy Prime Minister Tharman has rightly pointed out that our economy and indeed the society are both undergoing a transition. We have yet to attain the levels of productivity and income that are representative of an advance economy but we can certainly no longer be classified as a developing one. At the same time, we are facing a social evolution and emerging trends such as widening income inequality, infrastructure strain, particularly in the housing and transport sectors, as well as a changing social compact between the Government and people. There are many reasons for these social developments and many different reactions from the ground. Some are unhappy, some are angry, some choose to express their emotions outwardly, some choose to leave and others stay and adapt. In addressing the need for a social and economic transition in Singapore, this year's Budget has a focus on creating quality growth, that which is to achieve through innovation and increased productivity which will benefit all Singaporeans. Indeed, the focus on creating more inclusive society, which was the theme of last year's Budget, continues in 2013 and has been bound together with the drive for quality growth. Page: 144 Sir, transition periods can be challenging and Budget 2013 is one of the most generous in recent years with a number of measures totalling $5.9 billion in helping businesses struggling to re-invent themselves to cope with the changing times. As we seek to manage this transition, we have to be mindful of one key factor – the pace of the changes we are trying to implement.”
“We have heard views from both the PAP and the Workers' Party and other Members, and we seem to be heading in roughly the same direction, with some differences in numerical targets. Regardless of 5.9 million or 6 million or 6.9 million, I think the important thing is for us to keep moving forward. As we do so, I would like to ask the Government to be responsive and flexible and to consider a yearly review of the trends, and the effects of the measures laid out in the White Paper, so that we can know if we are on track, or we need to adjust. As interest shifts from the White Paper to red packets this weekend, I am sure the broader debate on this White Paper will continue long after our debate in this House ends. I hope the Government will also continue to listen to that discussion, as closely as we have this past week. The answer to the questions in the White Paper lie not just with this House or anyone party, it lies with all of us, all Singaporeans. Looking back on our history and what we have overcome, I am hopeful for the future. Perhaps, I am optimist but while many of my fellow Members have supported the Motion with heavy hearts, I choose to support the Motion and its amendments with a hopeful one [Applause].”
“The White Paper states that Singaporeans share certain key values and aspirations, including meritocracy, a fair and just society, and respect for one another's culture. But it does not spell out how we will ensure these values continue to be transmitted to younger generations who are born and grow up in an environment where such things could be taken for granted, much less to foreigners who are new to our shores. If the White Paper is anything to go by, it looks like financial incentives will again be the main levers that will be used to hopefully achieve the population growth deemed necessary for our long-term success. This does not address some key issues, among which is the point of reproduction in the first place. Minister Grace Fu touched on this earlier this week when she explored the reasons for having children. Besides for the sake of carrying on our bloodline, Page: 72 or the security for parents that offspring can provide later in life, many people actually have children to enjoy being in a family unit and to create a relationship with their young ones. One would assume that most of us would hope to give a good life to our children, one that is stable, secure and safe. From a policy perspective, financial levers are probably preferred given that they are easier to design, plan and implement, compared to the less tangible elements that go into the shaping of multi-faceted environments, replete with values and value systems. But, perhaps, the greater value of the White Paper is that it has inspired us to look at those intangibles and, hopefully, to find solutions that address them. Mdm Speaker, we have not had much time to debate this White Paper – five days to consider measures which reach 18 years into our future, and beyond.”
“When I talk with my friends who are single like me, or married without children, the conversations of late have tended to focus on quality of life, work-life balance, the need for a healthy, clean environment to raise children, a society that exhibits and champions values that we all believe in. At the same time, we also wonder if the Singapore of our children will be a place that we recognise, with distinct features and characteristics that are unique to us, somewhere that we feel is home. Or will it be a place that resembles the office of a multinational corporation – clean, efficient, with people from all over the world here to live and work, but not necessarily to lay down roots, like Dubai, as one hon Member mentioned, a city with no soul but lots of spending money. Will we be pushed to find ways to continue working past the current retirement age to shore up the dwindling workforce in a bid to ensure a strong Singaporean Core? Or will we eventually be able to aspire to early retirement so that we can enjoy time with our families, to travel a little bit and experience the broader world? Will the Singapore of the future be a clean and healthy environment, with an emphasis on green sustainability, fresh air, places of nature to be enjoyed by both young and old, that is uncongested and beautiful? Will it offer options for leisure and entertainment, with art, culture, sports and music lending greater texture to the social fabric, something that the White Paper does not address at length? Or will our drive for continued progress see these aspects being swamped by an overwhelming focus on productivity and efficiency gains?”
“Should they choose to return to their countries where they were born or grew up in in subsequent years, would this have a significant impact on the force of operationally ready NSmen which plays a major role in Singapore's defence? Mdm Speaker, I would like to turn now specifically to the issue of marriage and parenthood. As a single 30-something, I am part of the demographic that the White Paper addresses when it exhorts Singaporeans to settle down and have children. Not that I am welcoming even more difficult questions in the Lunar New Year festivities this weekend. While the hard facts and data certainly struck a chord with me, I must say I felt something was missing, a sentiment that many of my peers have echoed. Judging by views expressed in the media, both online and traditional, it would appear that others share it as well, and that is that facts and figures can only take us so far. Singaporeans are becoming more concerned with the quality of our growth, not just the quantity. The White Paper acknowledges this when it echoes the Prime Minister's National Day Rally last year in listing Hope, Heart and Home as the three key pillars for a sustainable population. But I cannot help but wonder if this would have resonated more effectively with more people if the transition from this to hard GDP targets and economic estimates was made more gradually. Page: 71 While critical to a nation's growth, an overly obsessive focus on economics can obscure the importance of other less tangible values and factors that can play a key role in the decision to settle down or to start families.”
“There has been talk that such scenarios are part of fear mongering. It is easy to say that when there still is growth. How the calculations from which the estimates for population size in 2020 and 2030 are derived are not spelt out in great detail in the White Paper. These are understandably complex and complicated, but if there were attempts to better explain the formulae involved, it might make for more informed public debate. Instead, the figure that has caught the most attention is the 6.9 million that lies at the far end of the range of estimates for population size in 2030. The clarification that this number is the worst-case scenario is juxtaposed against the fact that it includes estimates of foreigners in Singapore – something that the White Paper emphasises can actually be controlled by policies. Page: 70 The strains on the current infrastructure have made many questions whether we can, in fact, accommodate an up to 30% increase in the number of people living here. But we have to bear in mind that much of this perspective is based on our current understanding and impressions of the existing infrastructure. This will surely change and, hopefully, improve by 2030. A question that has also been raised is the impact a larger population, which potentially includes a larger proportion of permanent residents, will have on the concept of National Service (NS). With second-generation PRs having to serve NS, and many of them not necessarily growing up in Singapore during their young and formative years, what is the likely effect of having these individuals serving in NS in defence of a land which they may feel not a significant tie or connection with?”
“In a recent editorial by Bloomberg published in the TODAY newspaper, the use of GDP as a measure of progress was questioned, given that it measures output, without any insight into the quality of that output. It can obscure growing inequality and depletion of resources while focusing on a very narrow band of factors. But I think it is not a bad place Page: 69 to start. History has shown that, as countries move along the path to becoming more developed, slower and slowing growth becomes increasingly inevitable. We have no natural resources to speak of. Our people are our true assets. If that engine fizzles, we will face the very real possibility of slow or no growth in a few short decades. Much of our debate so far has centered around the trade-off between growth and quality of life, and whether we can stave off a crowded, congested future while maintaining a defined rate of economic growth. Worryingly, some Members have suggested that we can turn off economic growth or slow it down while population issues are dealt with, and then turn it back on once society is ready. But economic growth, foreign investment and confidence from companies and investors from abroad do not work that way. If we slip in terms of our international competitiveness, we have many rivals ready and waiting in the wings to take our place. Slow or no economic growth may sound acceptable when contrasted with overcrowding, an over-taxed infrastructure or a greater number of foreign strangers living amongst us. But would we be acceptable it if it means less jobs for our future generations, lower salaries and a bleak economic outlook for decades ahead? Is this what we want for our future and for our future generations? I think most of us would say, no.”
“Thank you, Mdm Speaker, for allowing me to join in this debate at a slightly late juncture. There are many tough acts to follow, and I was a bit concerned about not having enough to cover that would be new. But the opportunity has also been presented for me to follow the debate with great interest over this White Paper, both in the House and in the broader public domain. It has been a heated debate, high on emotion, with diverse voices being heard and difficult questions being asked. This in itself has been heartening because, as we have seen from the issues raised, this White Paper is really not just about population, but about the future of Singapore and our way of life. Many of us feel deeply about the questions raised in the Paper, and I have many passionate discussions with both Members of this House as well as of the public. I think this reflects the fact that, while the premise of much of the Paper stems from hard facts and numbers and involves complicated formulae and policies, at heart, we are talking about the soul of our country. Children, ageing families, foreign neighbours, quality of life – these are things which touch an emotional chord with all of us, and go far beyond political rhetoric and grandstanding. I, for one, am glad that we are addressing these things at this time, because there are clear signs that we have reached an inflexion point in our growth as a nation, with evolving social norms, economic challenges and shifting political trends becoming more commonplace. There have been disagreements about the need to place a hard economic growth target like gross domestic product (GDP) as the basis for projections about our population's future.”
“Thank you, Mdm Speaker. One last supplementary question. As we move forward in terms of fund-raising efforts by the different sports and sports associations, would the Ministry consider highlighting sports administration excellence as one of the key factors that supporters of sports corporations would want to consider when they look at giving financial support, and not just dedicating only to having their logos on athletes' jackets and uniforms and things like that. It is in helping everybody understand, as Mr Christopher de Souza also mentioned, that good administration would contribute to the results as a whole; it is not purely just the training or the equipment anymore.”
“Thank you, Mdm Speaker, and thank you to the Acting Minister for the reply. It is heartening to hear that SSC does focus on administrative excellence when it comes to the NSAs' management. I declare my interest as President of two NSAs. I would like to point out, though, that through my own experience helming two associations, and also from feedback from other similar federations, that the financial support given to the associations to hire staff is not significant. In a lot of cases, they are not matched to market and, in some cases, they do not even keep pace with inflation on a year-to-year basis. So, it is very hard for a lot of us to attract good talent. As we move forward to professionalise sports in Singapore, and as we expect more from our athletes in terms of dedication and sacrifice, it only Page: 35 benefits to have good administrative support to make sure that organisations are well-run, and athletes can benefit from that. In terms of a broader basis to develop administrative excellence, would the Ministry consider implementing more dedicated educational options for sports administrators, specifically, maybe a university course or even to having a dedicated university for sports administration as we move forward, with the development of the Sports Hub and other similar initiatives?”
“Thank you, Mdm Speaker, and I thank the Acting Minister for the answer. I declare my interest as the President of two sports associations, and a member of the National Olympic Council. The issue we tend to face with the SEA Games is that the sports list tends to be decided from country to country, with the inclusion of some interesting choices that may not feature in the Olympic list of sports. This has resulted in the problem where athletes are preparing year by year, or two years by two years. As Singapore moves towards a more professional pathway of sports development, what can we do as a country, as a member of Southeast Asia and a member of the Games, to create greater visibility for athletes preparing for such competitions in the future? And also, as a future host of the Games in 2015, Page: 11 in terms of preparing to host these Games, are there measures that we can put in place or views that we can push to ensure greater visibility for all parties concerned?”
“I would like to thank the Acting Minister for the response. I appreciate the fact that he had pointed out that certain values, while not in direct contradiction with economic growth and development, do pose challenges to the issues and directions we still try to champion. One of them is meritocracy, and is something that is mentioned quite often in this House. I believe that at the last National Day Rally, there was reference to extreme meritocracy and its potential dangers and pitfalls. How are we going to ensure that while we keep the positive elements of these values, going forward, we are able to differentiate between the negative elements of that, take out the positives, and then, through the work of your Ministry, to keep encouraging that and growing at the same time? Page: 42”
“Thank you, Mdm Speaker, one supplementary question for the Minister. Does this compensation scheme extend equally to both serving full-time NSmen as well as regulars? And has there been feedback from families or the servicemen themselves as to the extent of the compensation?”
“Thank you, Mdm Speaker. Thank you to the Minister for Foreign Affairs for the insights into the changes in both the US and China. I would like to ask a bit more explicitly, does this mean that the relationship that Singapore has maintained with both those powers will continue to be maintained in the way of balance and emphasis, or does the Minister expect the changes or the relationships to be evolved going forward, shifting the balance between how we engage both the US and China?”
“Mr Speaker, I join the Minister and other Members in expressing my condolences to the two families. I have two supplementary questions. The first: especially in the case of the smoke grenade, it does appear that an error in human judgement was exercised on the part of the commanders. Do we have an indication of the timeline as to when a decision on whether further proceedings, General Court Martial will be carried out on the responsible personnel, given that deaths occurred? There is a need to re-assure the public, other servicemen and their families that SAF does take this very seriously. The fact that they were re-deployed to non-command positions is a good step forward, but I think families and parents would appreciate knowing that the people who are responsible are held to task. My second question pertains to the fact that a huge raft of measures are put in place to ensure that TSRs and the safety culture are improved and maintained. How is the Ministry going to ensure that this then balances against training realism, and the need to ensure that training is kept up to certain standards to maintain the effectiveness of the SAF?”
“Mr Speaker, one supplementary question for the Acting Minister. I think the sports scene has changed since the MAP was first introduced to where we are now with more Singaporeans being asked to dedicate themselves to sports excellence. My question pertains to whether or not the Ministry would consider encouraging SNOC to look at, perhaps, scrapping the MAP completely and moving away from a transactional nature when it comes to encouraging our athletes to dedicate themselves to sports. I think a lot of young athletes these days still view the fact that representing the country and winning for Singapore is an honour and a reward in and of itself. Front-loading the support from the MAP to the training and preparation process will be a more practical way of supporting a sportsman and Sports Associations and also give greater assurances to athletes, coaches, Sports Associations and the families, that the support will be coming in a very structured way from the start, more akin to giving somebody the petrol to drive from A to B, rather than saying, "When you reach there, I will give you the petrol then". This will signal to more stakeholders and sponsors that holistic kind of support framework is needed, and is more beneficial to the sports community.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, one supplementary question for the Minister. It is heartening to note that investments in technology and training will continue to keep our force relevant and effective. Given the changing global security and military environments, is the Ministry reviewing the type of technology and type of training being employed to address counter insurgency, terrorism, humanitarian assistance and disaster relief (HADR) requirements that are being placed more and more on militaries all throughout the world, to make sure that the SAF can continue playing a role in that area?”
“Mr Speaker, I thank the Acting Minister for the reply. I have one supplementary question. I appreciate the fact that the high performance and high participation aspects of sports can be complementary. Given limited amount of resources, to create committees, for example, the Sports Pathway Committees, which seem to share both those aims – national team development as well as community building – I cannot help but wonder what would be the impact in terms of the division of resources if the amount of resources is not going to be increased. How will these twin aims then be developed? Would it not be better if organisations, such as People's Association (PA), took a more active role in terms of the community aspects of sports development?”
“Sir, I thank the Deputy Prime Minister for the reply. I share the heartening response from the general public's calm and measured response to the incident raised in the Question. My supplementary question relates to the fact that, given that we are seeing now an increasing number of new citizens and residents in Singapore who may not have grown up in our environment of tolerance and be accustomed to the approach that we take to such issues, is the Ministry concerned that this phenomenon might lead to further incidents of issues that were raised, for example, in the trailer of the video? And, if so, how is the Ministry planning to address this, moving forward?”
“Thank you, Mr Speaker. Just one clarification, as to my first question: so, would the Ministry ever consider advocating cycling as an alternative form of transport, not just intra-town but from town to CBD, and actually encouraging that? That would change a lot of the way other road users view cyclists. People look at cyclists now as people who are doing it for recreation or only for short distances and, hence, they are not used to the idea of more cyclists on the road in the CBD and, hence, adjusting their behaviour accordingly. Assoc Prof Dr Muhammad Faishal Ibrahim: Sir, we could look at it as a natural phenomenon, such as when I shared with you how my resident cycled from Yishun all the way to Loyang. We recognise that there are not many people doing this, possibly due to our weather and because we have an efficient public transport system whereby the MRT and the buses provide a better transport mode for our people, for the majority of us. Nevertheless, we will provide the infrastructure for cyclists who may want to travel from one town to another town. It is important for us to give this choice to Singaporeans. We do not want Singaporeans to be forced to take a certain mode of transport. Most importantly, we want to encourage people to use our public transport system. Page: 598”
“With new estates coming on board, it will be an integrated one, and we would certainly like to see how we can make it a more sustainable transport system in Singapore. We want to encourage that and, in fact, cycling is something that allows families to bond. The essence of cycling is that it has multiple purposes. Some use it for leisure, others use it for travelling within their town – to go marketing, to go to the MRT station, to work – and also there are those who do it for sports. Page: 598 With regard to the rules and requirements for cyclists, we are reviewing that, as what I mentioned earlier. We understand your point and it is important for us to understand that, if you look at cyclists, they range from the small kids to senior citizens, foreign workers and those who use it for sports. We are very mindful of that and we want to make sure that we reach out to the relevant segments, and different segments would have a different kind of educational process. To do so, it will require us to continuously work with the community and see how we can further improve the safety as well as the infrastructure for the cycling community. The safety requirements that the Member mentioned – the helmet and the reflective bands – we have deliberated this time and time again, even during Minister of State Teo Ser Luck's time, and the CFC is aware about this. As in my reply to the hon Member Lim Wee Kiak, we will take on this suggestion. We will relook at it to see how we can make cycling a safer mode of transport in Singapore.”
“Somebody in the car who, if involved in an accident is protected by the car, has to go through much more stringent requirements than somebody who is exposed on a bicycle. And, thirdly, safety requirements, such as mandatory helmets or, perhaps, reflective vests or bands, could be put in place as mandatory for all cyclists. I understand they are not at the moment. Would the Ministry consider such a measure? Assoc Prof Dr Muhammad Faishal Ibrahim: Sir, I would like to thank the Member for his supplementary questions. He asked if we view cycling as an alternative mode of transport. Indeed, it is an alternative mode of transport, especially for the first and the last mile travel. We are encouraging intra-town travelling. And, in fact, if you look at the trend, there is a development that cycling has increased in terms of intensity in the last few years. If you go to the interchanges, MRT stations, and you look at the bicycle racks that have been provided, they are full, especially when you come to Yishun. I can see that they are highly utilised. We are also looking at how cyclists can travel from one town to another town – inter-town. In fact, yesterday, I just met a grassroots leader who shared with me that he cycles to work from Yishun to Loyang, even though he takes one hour. But he is a different type of cyclist in the sense that he said he uses all the intra-town connections – the park connectors to Lorong Halus and all the way to the Punggol Waterway, all the way to Loyang. We recognise such a phenomenon and, as I have mentioned earlier, in time to come, we will develop more cycling paths in the whole of Singapore.”
“I thank the Parliamentary Secretary for the answers. I would like to raise three supplementary questions. One of the first issues that we should look at that is affecting the discussion between cyclists and other road users today is the view of what cycling is meant to be. So far, in all your answers, you make it quite clear that cycling is viewed as a way for either recreation or very short intra-town journeys. I would like to ask if the Ministry would ever consider pushing for cycling to be adopted as an alternative way of transport, especially in the CBD area. For example, I personally know a lot of people who would be happy to cycle from their homes to work if they do not live prohibitively far away. This will actually help to alleviate congestion and pollution within the CBD area. Singapore, as an environment, is very well suited. We do not have winter. We have heavy rains sometimes but, by and large, we have an environment that is suitable for cycling as a mode of transport. Page: 597 I would also like to thank the Parliamentary Secretary for the answers on the regulatory measures that can be implemented. I understand that the varied groups of cyclists mean that trying to put in place a cycling licence, for example, may not be ideal. But if you look at the amount of regulation that is put in place for road users in cars and the kind of strict testing that we have, it seems to me at odds with the fact somebody exposed on a bicycle, sharing those same roads with vehicles that could cause much greater damage, are not required to undergo any form of certification or systemised education. I hope that the Ministry would consider looking at that a bit more in-depth because it seems out of place.”