Xie Yao Quan
Singapore
“Thank you, Sir. Sir, the Minister mentioned the incidence rate of bullying behaviour in our schools and I would like to stress that this is based on reported incidences.”
“Thank you, Chairman. I thank MSF for responding to our cuts and I seek leave to withdraw my amendment. [(proc text) Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. (proc text)] [(proc text) The sum of $5,822,529,800 for Head I ordered to stand part of the Main Estimates.”
“What would be a fair valuation of fairness to current, affected homeowners? The Government will need to use sound and consistent principles for such an exercise, to justify the higher public spending that this implies.”
“My idea of balance that I prompted you on was not so much about keeping versus sharing at the individual level, but about spending and saving at the societal level.”
“Thank you, Mr Speaker. I will just reiterate two points that I have made in my speech. First, I think it is more meaningful to look at how a term of government balances its collection against spending over its entire term in government.”
“Sir, I thank the Member for both clarifications. My basic response to both clarifications is yes. I accept that surpluses can be transferred into Past Reserves at the end of a term of government.”
The complete record
Every one of 336 lines we hold for Xie Yao Quan, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 4 of 7.
“But these core values, like meritocracy and multiculturalism, were what our founding generation got right from the beginning and these allowed them – the founding generations, who had much fewer reasons, and much less resources to be confident about their future back then – these core values allowed them to pull through nonetheless, to succeed spectacularly and hand over to us the Singapore that we have today. And these same core values, if we remind ourselves of them, stay alive to them, refresh them as it may require to meet needs of the hour and draw optimism from them. I believe these same core values, our "sisu" will drive us forward and help us forge ahead, confidently, as one Singapore. [Applause.]”
“Hence, I hope that we will be more prudent and exercise greater caution when we speak and act, to think carefully before we speak or react, in order to protect our precious multiculturalism. (In English): Mr Speaker, I have spoken about meritocracy and multiculturalism and the role each of us can play to keep these going. Meritocracy and multiculturalism are core values in Singapore. Let me conclude by making a broader point about our core values and about our confidence as a people. In this debate, we have heard polls being cited, polls indicating that Singaporeans lack confidence, lack optimism in our future. Actually, I have seen similar polls myself, polls that have not been cited in this debate, but polls that show confidence or optimism even in the single digits by percentage for certain metrics. But I think we got to be circumspect in drawing conclusions from these polls. For one, the design of survey questions itself is a notoriously difficult issue that can skew survey results. But the bottom line is I think, I believe that we can all be confident of our future, together. We have every reason to be confident. And chief amongst these reasons is our collective core values, like meritocracy and multiculturalism. We have imbibed these values so much that sometimes, they just operate in the background and we do not realise that they are with us, that they are us.”
“] In this debate, meritocracy in Singapore has been a topic of particular interest, and the Government has also laid out ways to improve the system. In actual fact, our meritocracy encompasses a very important and fundamental social principle – that there is no ceiling for meritocracy. This is our core consensus and commitment with regards to meritocracy, and it also implies that those who reach the top based on this consensus have a greater responsibility and obligation to help those at the bottom. In other words, the social consensus of not setting a ceiling for meritocracy means individuals need to have the awareness and sense of responsibility to help those at the bottom. In this way, meritocracy will no longer be based on competition and distribution. Instead, it will be based on mutual assistance and benefits, as well as a win-win mindset, with a vision to create a new meritocratic system as one united people. Therefore, I hope that as the Government works to improve the meritocratic system, every Singaporean will better understand their individual social responsibility, and take on this responsibility more proactively, by actively helping Singaporeans lagging behind in the system and lend a helping hand to those at the bottom. I think this is critical for all Singaporeans to move forward together. Meritocracy is one of our core values in nation-building and governance, while another core value is multiculturalism. In the social media era today, good things are seldom propagated, but bad things are particularly viral. Even without foreign intervention, if we are not careful, domestic views or behaviour may become the very weapon that weakens our multiculturalism.”
“First, we need to do more to celebrate our traditions, embrace our traditions, preserve and sustain them. I think it means, among other things, that ethnic, cultural and religious organisations all need to look at renewal, drawing in younger Singaporeans and being deliberate about succession. Second, for the majority race, I think it bears remembering always that it is harder to be a minority in Singapore. So let us be sensitive, reach out and strive for an ever deeper understanding of one another. And third, for all of us, we should take extra effort to make sure that the words we utter and the deeds we do, would not end up being misconstrued, misappropriated or even weaponised by others to cause hurt and division especially in this world of social media. Because things can be easily appropriated in this day and age, sensationalised, amplified and once the genie is out of the bottle, sometimes damage done cannot be undone. So let us all be extra conscious and extra deliberate. Perhaps only in Singapore do we have, just this month alone, folks observing the ancestral festival of Qing Ming, in fact, some groups observe this for up to 10 days beyond the actual day, and at the same time, we have Jewish friends this month celebrating Passover, friends celebrating Puthandu or the Tamil New Year and we have Christian friends concluding their observance of 40 days of Lent while Muslim friends were getting into the thick of their observance of Ramadan. And of course, in a couple of days, our Muslim friends will be celebrating Hari Raya Puasa. All in the same month, only in Singapore. It is a beautiful harmony and long may we, all of us, commit ourselves to keep this going. Mr Speaker, in Mandarin please. (In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.”
“It will take all of us to make it happen. Embracing our responsibility, active citizenry at its best. And in my mind, this will be a wonderful manifestation too of what Deputy Prime Minister Wong has described as our "renewed commitment to one another in the path ahead". I hope we can find application of this renewed commitment specifically in our meritocracy, make our meritocracy a key plank of this renewed commitment to one another and make our meritocracy a generative one that keeps going because of all of us, because of our collective efforts to one another. And one final point I will make on this, is that in our efforts, we have to focus especially on the next generation, the children of those with less and make sure that they, the young ones in our framework of meritocracy, they especially can keep up. We have got to double down on breaking the chain of transmission of disadvantages and stymied opportunities from one generation to the next. And it takes all of us. How so? Well, for one, I hope we can do much more to come forward as mentors to these children. Mentors, on a sustained basis, committed to the long haul. Mentors, who start by meeting the child where he or she is, mentors who accept before attempting to fix. I hope many of us can come forward to be such mentors, be role models and just be there for children born to lesser means. In this way, we can help them to keep up in a generative meritocracy, help them to get onto the multiple escalators, enable them to thrive and do well for themselves. Mr Speaker, besides meritocracy, there is another core value that I hope to affirm in my speech today and that is multiculturalism and multilingualism. This is a precious thing in Singapore and we have got to cherish it and keep growing it.”
“One that is not only broader and more inclusive but also emanating from each citizen's basic responsibility, a meritocracy that is ever more participatory, a meritocracy in which every citizen is an active part of the solution, actively reaching back, helping each other keep up, so that even as the best among us run ahead, the gap is never pulled too wide and the gap is never permanent because everyone is helping everyone else to keep up. In this third lap of our meritocracy, we can make sure that no one is left by the sidelines of the multiple escalators that we have, unable or unwilling to get onto one. It would take each of us to care, to step off the escalator from time to time to get those of us by the sidelines onto the multitude of escalators, onto some escalator, so that all of us can move up together. I call this third lap of our meritocracy a generative meritocracy, not just broader and more inclusive, but generative. Generative because I believe it will set forth a new wave of active citizenry in which all of us recognise and embrace our basic responsibility to keep meritocracy going and take action. This will be active citizenry at its best. And generative because the difference that we can make through this movement is not only to help others, but as Minister Chan Chun Sing has put it in his speech in this debate, we can enable others to thrive. We have an opportunity to apply ourselves to enable others to do well for themselves. That is the difference we can make. And finally, I believe it is generative because instead of a meritocracy in which some winners take all, together, we can create a meritocracy in which all are winners. And this is not just a hope that can be left to the state, the Government to make happen.”
“Decades ago, when we started out as an improbable nation, meritocracy defined Singapore. Regardless of race, language or religion. Instead, ability, industry, merit; these would make the measure of a man or woman in Singapore. And these would also make a society, our society based on justice and equality. And so, on this basis, our improbable nation got everyone onto an escalator, the escalator of progress and prosperity. And we not only survived, we succeeded. The escalator of meritocracy moved us from Third World to First. But as we continued being successful and our framework of meritocracy created some winners who could pass on more opportunities and other advantages to their children, it became clear that we need our meritocracy to be updated and rebooted. We need our meritocracy to be broader and more inclusive, if it were to remain fit for purpose for Singapore and Singaporeans. And so, work on the next lap of meritocracy began more than a decade ago. And in Senior Minister Tharman's words back then, moving our society from a hierarchy of grades to a meritocracy of skills. It also means opening up a whole range of pathways, a whole range of escalators, not one but multiple escalators that Singaporeans can get onto, all escalators going up, progressing in tandem. And this work continues today, as Deputy Prime Minister Wong has laid out in his speech on Monday. Much more remains to be done to make our meritocracy ever broader and more inclusive. But I see a third lap, a third chapter, in the evolution of our framework of meritocracy going forward.”
“But in order for this meritocracy to work, we must also allow meritocracy to operate fully and be fully expressed in our society. We cannot and should not put an artificial lid on meritocracy. We must allow it full expression. This means, in the simplest terms, allowing the best, the most "meritorious" amongst us to run as far and as fast and soar as high as they can. They will not be held back. Instead, they will be supported and cheered on by the system. This is the privilege that our framework of meritocracy in Singapore provides to Singaporeans; that every person can look forward to run and fly and chase rainbows and fulfil his or her full individual potential within the framework of meritocracy that we have. It is not a half-hearted meritocracy because we as a society have committed to allowing it full expression and it is one privilege of being Singaporean – to be able to operate and flourish within this framework. But with privilege comes responsibility. They are two sides of the same coin. A framework that allows each of us to run far and fast and chase rainbows will also lead inevitably to some amongst us who cannot keep up, who need a lot more help to keep up. And so, it becomes our responsibility, our personal responsibility, each citizen's responsibility, that while we enjoy the privilege accorded by our framework of meritocracy, we also each do our part to make sure that no one falls too far behind nor falls permanently behind. Each of us has a responsibility to reach back, pull others along and help everyone to keep up. It is in our collective interest to do so, but I think, more fundamentally, it is also our basic responsibility as Singaporeans, our basic responsibility to one another and to society at large to do so. Now, if I may put it another way.”
“Mr Speaker, I rise in support of the Motion. I would like to start by talking about our meritocracy. Meritocracy has been a central topic in the first two days of this debate, so, as one of the few speakers remaining, I thought it is perhaps fitting that I round back to this topic. But rather than talk about what more, or what else, the State can, or should, do with regard to our meritocracy – be it more intensive redistribution, wage restructuring or reforms to our education system – I would like to focus instead on what else each of us, citizens, can and should do for our meritocracy. And each of us – all of us – can and should do much more. Why? Because in Singapore, I believe that meritocracy represents both a privilege and a responsibility of being Singaporean. Meritocracy represents both a privilege and a responsibility of being Singaporean. Let me explain. First, meritocracy remains the best basic organising principle for our society. I think no one in this House will quibble with this point. There is broad agreement within this House but I think it is worthwhile to also highlight the point for society at large, for Singaporeans at large. And the point is that we do have a consensus in Singapore, that we will use "merit" as the basic principle to determine who is sorted to which station in life, at which stage in life, across our life courses. This consensus may have been more tacit than explicit but it exists. It is a robust consensus and it is also useful to bring this consensus to the fore from time to time and remind ourselves clearly of its existence – that meritocracy remains the best basic organising principle to keep the Singapore Story going.”
“Thank you, Chairman. Chairman, we must work at keeping our sports landscape ever more inclusive. Can the Ministry provide an update on its progress and plans for disability sports as part of the Enabling Master Plan 3.0, both in terms of the uptake and participation in community sports by Persons with Disabilities (PwDs) as well as the growth of and support for high-performance disability sports? Sports and Fitness Professionals Sir, sports and fitness professionals, including coaches, instructors and personal trainers, are a vital part of our community sports and fitness ecosystem in Singapore and will play an even more significant role under the Healthier SG movement. What are the Ministry's plans to help these professionals refresh and update their skills and build new capabilities?”
“Apologies, Chairman. Chairman, Outward Bound School (OBS) has been a significant and memorable experience for many Singaporeans growing up. It teaches great resilience and courage to step out of one's comfort zone and it brings students from different schools together. I am glad that OBS programmes have resumed, post-COVID-19. Can the Ministry share its plans for OBS programming, going forward, as well as plans for the new OBS campus on Coney Island? Harmony Circles Sir, MCCY has refreshed the Inter-racial and Religious Confidence Circles or IRCCs for short, into Racial and Religious Harmony Circles to strengthen racial and religious harmony in every community. Can the Ministry provide an update on its progress and share its plans for how many circles in the year ahead?”
“Sir, the need for a stronger framework to manage community disputes and frictions in neighbourly relationships has grown over the years. We need clear principles to resolve disputes in a fair and balanced way, resolve these as early as possible, and yet preserve the agency and central role of residents themselves to manage the affairs within the community, while also supporting them with processes, resources and rules of the road that are more fit for purpose today. Under the Ministry of Law (MinLaw) Committee of Supply (COS), announcements have been made about updates to the framework for Community Disputes Resolution Tribunals (CDRT) and the Community Mediation Centre (CMC). Can MCCY update on its work on the Community Dispute Management Framework? Culture of Care and Active Citizenry Sir, we are a democracy of deeds and must continue to be so. Our social compact going forward must be anchored on active citizenry, volunteerism and ever broader and deeper actions to help lift up one another. Can the Ministry update on its progress and plans to rally both individuals and corporates to care and to give through the SG Cares Movement and National Volunteer & Philanthropy Centre (NVPC) and other platforms. Expand Capacity of SG Cares Volunteer Centres”
“Sir, the Government has completed its takeover of the Sports Hub. What are the Ministry's plans for the Sports Hub this year, in the year ahead, in terms of both programming and infrastructural development as part of its roadmap to unlock the Sports Hub's full potential for Singapore and Singaporeans? Community Sports Facilities Sir, Minister had previously laid out the Government's significant efforts over the years in building up and maintaining community sports facilities and infrastructure. Minister has also affirmed the Government's commitment to continue doing so. Can the Ministry share what are its plans to build new community sports facilities and to refurbish, upgrade and maintain existing ones so that Singaporeans can look forward to enjoying sports in the community even more conveniently?”
“Sir, as the Arts and Heritage Sector emerges from a very tough three years due to COVID-19, it is an opportune time for the Ministry to work with the sector and looks ahead to the next three to five years and envisage exciting new possibilities for the sector. Is the Ministry co-creating a vision in the medium term with the sector? A Thriving Arts and Heritage Sector Sir, there are exciting plans such as the University of the Arts to strengthen the talent development ecosystem in Singapore for the Arts and Heritage Sector in the years ahead. It is, therefore, critical that the sector also grows and develops new capabilities in order to provide and create exciting new opportunities for our future talent. Can the Ministry share its plans in this regard to support the sector? SG Arts and Heritage”
“Sir, HPB's plans to expand the capacity of its physical activity programmes in the community by 50% as part of Healthier SG is heartening. However, with the move to online and mobile enrolment into these programmes, can the Ministry share how it plans to ensure continued, easy access to these programmes for seniors who may not be digitally-savvy. Also, how does the Ministry plan to ensure that these programmes remain well-distributed across various locations, so that residents in every neighbourhood continue to have easy access to this physical activity programmes?”
“Sir, I would like to acknowledge the important work of the Interagency Task Force on Mental Health and Well-being in the past year. Could the Ministry update on its plans for the Interagency Task Force on Mental Health and Well-being in the year ahead? Anti-vaping”
“Sir, I have many residents – Singapore Citizens with non-citizen spouses – expecting a child, who will, in all likelihood, be born as a Singapore Citizen, but the expecting mothers are burdened with high costs of pre-partum care services. I also have residents – citizens – with parents who are permanent residents (PRs) – worried about the healthcare costs for their parents because the difference in subsidies for PRs is around 30% for C2 and B2 Class wards, around the same for day surgeries, and usually even higher for outpatient clinic visits and standard drugs. I know we have finite resources to meet various needs, but I hope that the Ministry could do more to make healthcare affordable for non-Singaporeans with a clear and immediate Singaporean nexus because, ultimately, we are helping their Singaporean loved ones, too. Regulate Complementary Health Services”
“Sir, manpower shortage in the sector is a perennial concern. For nurses, how does the Ministry plan to enhance its foreign manpower pipeline, amidst intensifying competition, to complement our local workforce? For allied health professionals, does the Ministry plan to increase the capacity of local degree programmes in physiotherapy, radiology, pharmacy and so on? For the ILTC sector, how might the Ministry help to ensure that they continue to attract a fair share of healthcare talent? For all job groups, how does the Ministry plan to help them practise at the top of their licenses, especially in the community, as part of the Healthier SG strategy? I repeat my call to the Ministry to shape more equal roles and more room for co-leadership for healthcare professionals alongside doctors, to prevent and manage chronic diseases across our population. I think this requires a mindset shift in our population from a doctor-centric view, to one that equally respects all healthcare professionals, including nurses, allied health professionals and pharmacists.”
“Sir, the Ministry has rolled out the Active Ageing Centre (AAC) model and envisages these centres as key community notes to improve social support and care for seniors. It plans to grow the number of AACs significantly. I note that core services to be provided by the AACs, include (a) for active ageing; (b) for befriending; and (c) for referral to care services. These are core services that the Silver Generation Office (SGO) and Silver Generation (SG) Ambassadors across the island have been providing for some years now. Could the Ministry share how it plans for AACs to build on and complement the (a), (b), (c) services that SGO has been providing over the years? 1.45 pm Live Well, Leave Well Sir, many Singaporeans wish to eventually pass on at home but not many actually do. Does the Ministry have plans to scale up our palliative care capabilities and capacities, especially for home-based palliative care, and what might be the challenges? Finally, how might we help Singaporeans to break down the stigma of talking about end-of-life issues and wishes?”
“Sir, we know that the lower-income segment has poorer health outcomes and a lower propensity for health-seeking behaviours, for various reasons. So, I would like to repeat the call that I have made during the debate on Healthier SG for the Ministry to pay attention to removing the particular barriers to health-seeking behaviours facing this segment and ensure that our Healthier SG strategy is inclusive socioeconomically. We need to pay attention to improving seemingly basic things like nutrition, sleep, smoking cessation and exercise, through targeted interventions for this segment because these things may not be basic for them. And we need to better bring social service officers and agencies into the framework of healthcare clusters and the primary care network (PCN), so as to tighten the nexus between social service and health for the lower income. Could the Ministry share more about its plans in this regard? Vaccine-related Injuries”
“Thank you, Madam. I just have two questions for Senior Minister of State Tan, and I promise they are not on chickens and cats. First, on the construction industry, I am glad to hear Senior Minister of State Tan's update that HDB is playing a leading role in driving the demand for productive construction practices to help the industry transform, but the rest of the public sector is also a major developer of buildings and infrastructure, and there are very significant construction budgets. So, I would just like to ask: how might MND help to corral the whole-of-public service and galvanise the whole-of-public sector to drive the demand for productive construction practices in the industry. The second question on the Built Environment (BE), in terms of the sustainable solutions that the BE sector is going to generate in the years ahead, be it in construction development or maintenance, what might be MND's plans to help our companies to export these capabilities and generate economic value in the years to come for Singaporeans.”
“Sir, NParks has made considerable efforts to engage and involve Singaporeans in the community at large in its efforts to transform Singapore into a city in nature, including allotment gardens in parks, tree planting under the One Million Trees movement and so on. What more can be done to bring even more of the community on board these efforts? Green Buildings Sir, Singapore aims to achieve net-zero emissions by 2050. Since buildings account for over 20% of our carbon emissions, I had asked in last year Committee of Supply about the Government's plans to accelerate our transition to a low-carbon built environment. Can MND provide further updates in this regard? Specifically, what more can be done to green our existing stock of older and less energy efficient buildings and what exciting job opportunities can Singaporeans look forward to as we continue to push for greener buildings? R&D in Urban Sustainability Sir, Singapore has unusual challenges in urban sustainability, as it is a small city-state with many competing demands. How is MND driving research and development in urban sustainability in our context and, at the same time, generating economic opportunities to export our knowledge and capabilities in urban sustainability to the world? Enhancing Our Global City”
“Sir, I welcome the Government's move to give first-timer couples below 40 years old and first-timers with children and additional ballot so that they have a better chance to secure a BTO flat quickly. MND has shared that, as it stands now, 90% of all first-timers succeed within two tries for a BTO in the non-mature estate and virtually all succeed within three tries. Could the Ministry share concretely how much it expects the chance of securing a flat quickly to improve for the sub-category of first-timers that it is targeting with its latest move? Holistic Support for Rental Flat Tenants Sir, the Government announced the Comlink Rental Scheme last year, so that a public rental flat is not just housing going forward, but part of a broader and comprehensive suite of social support and Government schemes, brought to bear, centered around the families to help families with children achieve stability, self-sufficiency and eventually social mobility. Could the Ministry update on its progress in and plans for the Comlink Rental Scheme? Fresh Start for Rental Flat Tenants Sir, the Fresh Start housing grant helps public rental tenants who are second timers with children to own a home again. In last year's Committee of Supply (COS), MND announced enhancements to the grant amount as well as an expansion of the scheme to offer the option of 3-room flats. MND said it is working on the on the implementation for the offer of a 3-room flat under Fresh Start and will announce the details when ready. I note that in the latest BTO exercise just launched, MND has clarified that now Fresh Start applicants can have the 3-room flat option available. Could the Ministry provide an update on the plans —”
“Sir, I have met many seniors who are looking to right-size not to monetise their existing flats in the first instance, but because they are empty-nesters, their children had married and moved out and they no longer need or are able to upkeep their existing flats as they age. In other words, seniors look to right-size primarily because of life stage. But the opportunity to unlock equity in their existing flats and enhance retirement adequacy makes right-sizing an even more attractive proposition. Could MND update on the number of seniors who have chosen to right-size and successfully got the Silver Housing Bonus? What are the Ministry's plans to further support seniors looking to right-size? Lift Access for all HDB Flats”
“Sir, coffee shops in our heartlands changing hands at record prices have attracted considerable public attention. Residents are understandably concerned about ever-rising prices of cooked food and price inflation in ingredients, electricity and gas have further pushed up prices of cook food. How might MND ensure that cooked meals at eating houses in our heartlands remain affordable for Singaporeans? Affordability of Meal Options”
“Indeed, if we could be even bolder, why not 2-room and 3-room BTOs for singles in mature estates, too, especially after the supply crunch abates? This would likely increase the overall demand for 3-room BTOs, but it is part of evolving our balance and, to strike a balance, we could preserve the supply currently set aside for first‐timer families. Improving Current BTO Model”
“Sir, heartland shops with brands that tend to be lower than at private commercial locales could provide a conducive environment for new businesses to start up and test ideas. Could MND do more to attract startups to set up shops in our heartland commercial precincts? Heartland Shops for Social Good Also, under the current Social Enterprise Scheme, HDB offers commercial spaces at subsidised rent to raise registered social enterprises. Could MND update on the uptake and does it have plans to further enhance the initiative? Sir, I imagine that many youths would be interested to work in these startups and social enterprises in our heartlands. And I can imagine, too, a broader youth‐driven microeconomy in each of our HDB neighbourhoods, if we can couple these heartland enterprises with co‐living facilities in the heartlands and allow youths working in the heartlands to also play and live together. And HDB does not have to do this by itself. As Senior Minister of State Tan Kiat How had noted, there is, today, a vibrant market with multiple commercial players. So, HDB can partner private operators, but set standards, including in pricing and affordability, and take the lead in developing the market for essentially short-term flexible rental for youths by way of co‐living arrangements in heartland locations. More Housing Options for Singles Sir, I have another suggestion to better help singles own their homes. To be clear, I think the current eligible age for singles for both BTO and resale flats is appropriate and should remain. Nonetheless, we can do more to help singles 35 and above to own their BTO flats. Today, singles can by two-room flexi flats in non‐mature estates. I hope the Government will also allow singles to buy 3-room BTOs in non‐mature estates.”
“Chairman, I welcome, the Government's move to increase it the housing grant for first-timers buying a resale flat. However, could the Ministry share its assessment of whether or how this might drive up resale prices even more. And I know the Ministry has put out the statement and Deputy Prime Minister Wong has also touched on this in his round-up speech in the Budget debate. But could the Ministry share a fuller assessment? Could the Ministry also share further details about why the increase in grants is sized at $30,000 for a 4-room or smaller flat or $10,000 for a 5-room flat? What is the estimated fiscal impact of this increase in grants? HDB Commercial Rules and Outdoor Display Areas Management”
“Chairman, Sir, multiple residents have given me feedback about the Republic of Singapore Air Force (RSAF) flying activities in Western Singapore, for example, "They fly so low we can even read the numbers and logos on the planes." "Makes it impossible to work from home or have conference calls." "They blast their engines at 6.20 am and 9 pm." "My young kids get startled by the noise and cry." "We have stayed in the area for over 20 years and have never experienced this intense frequency of noise." One, we all understand that the RSAF must stay operationally ready, so it must train. Two, airspace in Singapore is tight and the RSAF must fly over residential areas en route to international air space. And three, some of the flying is, in fact, not training in nature, but operational responses to situations. But can the RSAF review its flying parameters on timing, flying altitude, frequency, and most importantly, its flight path, say if there is a possibility to fly more over the lesser populated Lim Chu Kang area, to ensure a more sustainable balance, in the longer term, between operational readiness and a tolerable level of noise for residents in the West? Harnessing Technology for Training”
“Then-Deputy Prime Minister Lee introduced an offset package while announcing the increase in GST from 3% to 5% and he said this, in 2002, "the offset package will cover at least five years' worth of additional tax payable for all flat sizes. In fact, those living in one- or two-room HDB flats will be covered for the next 10 years". Sounds very familiar. In 2007, then-Minister Tharman rolled out an offset package along essentially, similar lines. Twenty years on, today, the Government carries on the tradition and remains consistent in its commitment to take care of Singaporeans. It is remarkable. Sir, the 2002 Budget was billed "A Budget for A Different World". Singapore was coming out of its worst recession at that time, since Independence. Then-Deputy Prime Minister Lee said, "we are entering a very different world. Conditions are uncertain and volatile, competition is intense, change is faster than ever… we cannot prevent the changes from happening. Instead, we must act decisively…" Today, we are debating a Budget that is titled "Moving Forward in a New Era", indeed another different world and the words uttered in 2002 ring as true today. But I am confident that if we stay open as a country and embrace the world, stay nimble as a tribe and seize opportunities to make hay when the sun shines, and stay united as a people and take care of each another, we will have another brilliant 20 years ahead of us, towards SG75 and towards SG100. Sir, I support the Budget. 2.25 pm”
“Yet, with our unique system of permanent offsets, we make sure the bulk of higher GST is net-net raised from foreigners, tourists and higher-income Singaporeans, but channelled towards benefiting all Singaporeans. In our revenue base today, taxes and fees are already at 15% of GDP, how much lower do we want to go? NIR, on the other hand, is already at 4%, how much higher do we want to go? How much more do we want to leverage on our reserves? As a society, we will have to make our own judgement based on our shared values. Higher GST, in a high-inflation era, creates anxieties for Singaporeans. But it is the right thing for all of us to do, for ourselves and for future generations. While raising GST, this Government has rolled out decisive moves to put cash in Singaporeans' hands, to uplift real wages, especially at the bottom and to provide immediate assurance. It shows a remarkable political will to do right by Singaporeans in the long-term and to take care of Singaporeans' needs in the short-term. In management studies, there is a concept by Jim Collins about eschewing the "Tyranny of the Or" and exercising the "Genius of the And". In the context of governing a country, I would refrain from using the word "Genius", but "Gumption", perhaps, or "Steel". The Government has, over the decades, steadfastly eschewed false choices, avoided the "Tyranny of the Or", and held on to a "Gumption and Steel of the And", and it shows in how it has raised GST responsibly while taking care of cost-of-living concerns compassionately. There is something else to be gleaned from the 2002 Budget Statement.”
“Sir, let me conclude. I started with a reference to the 2002 Budget, the first by then-Deputy Prime Minister Lee. It actually makes for a fascinating read. Back then, total operating and developmental expenditure was $28 billion or 17% of Gross Domestic Product (GDP). Fast forward two decades, in this year's Budget, it is $104 billion – four times – but we have managed to keep this at 16% of GDP. In other words, the Government has been spending more and more, and doing better and better for Singaporeans, year after year, and it has been doing so sustainably and responsibly. How has the Government done this? First, and most obviously, by ensuring our economy grows. So, between 2002 and 2023, our economy has grown by four times in nominal terms too, keeping pace with spending. The Government has grown the pie, so that it can do more for Singaporeans, sustainably. That is the first order of business. But second, in these years, the Government has also found new, important ways to maintain our fiscal sustainability. It transited from a Net Investment Income (NII) framework to a Net Investment Return (NIR) framework, to leverage more on the strength of our reserves to fund current needs. NII contribution in 2002 was $2.4 billion, 1% of GDP. Today, NIR contribution is $24 billion or 4% of GDP. On the other hand, in 2002, taxes and fees amounted to 17% of GDP. Today, it is 15%, lower than in 2002, although our spending needs have gone up – shot up dramatically. And the Government has done this while keeping personal and corporate income tax regimes highly competitive. That is why we need GST, which taxes consumption rather than income, as another part of our fiscal base, and that is why GST has gone up.”
“But if we look at the Household Expenditure Survey in 2018, a household spends $112 per month on average, on private tuition and other educational courses. This is the average across all households. But if we suppose that in fact, private tuition expenditure is concentrated within this sub-segment of "sandwiched" young parents, then the average amount that each of these households spends on tuition is probably closer to $600 per month. And they spend on this because they want the best for their children. My point is this: we have been analysing household expenditure primarily by income bands, I think it would be useful to also study household expenditure by household archetypes and for an archetype such as this "sandwiched" sub-segment, we may uncover or confirm particular spending needs on tuition, for example. And in turn, we can form a better, more nuanced understanding, of drivers of cost-of-living pressures for this particular sub-segment and work towards addressing these where possible. Now I think this "sandwiched" group should get more support from the Government. First, beyond the Edusave account and Government top-ups thereto, I think parents should get a "Child Development Bonus", in cash, for each child seven to 16, each year. Think of this as an extension of Government support, in the child's life, beyond the Baby Bonus Cash Gift which has been enhanced and beyond contributions to the Child Development Account for preschool years, which has also been enhanced. Second, especially for the elderly parents of this "sandwiched" sub-segment and for seniors across the board, we should have more healthcare subsidies, especially in intermediate and long-term care such as nursing homes and in increasingly prevalent services in the hospitals such as MRI scans.”
“Employers, service providers and buyers of outsourced services must do all they can to keep to the spirit of Progressive Wages, preserve the ladder, keep the ladder intact and preserve an appropriate mix of junior and senior job grades in their workforce and keep alive for low-wage workers the hope and prospects of promotion and career advancement up the ladder. Service providers and service buyers must do their part to prevent the collapse of the ladder and the regression of the mix of job grades in their workforce towards the starting rung, whereby the starting rung in the ladder effectively becomes the final rung. We must avoid this. And I would urge relevant regulatory agencies in the Progressive Wage Model to also regularly review if there is a need to possibly update their strategies from time to time to enhance alignment of the market with licensing frameworks. As for growing real wages and spending power in the broad middle, much has been said about productivity, upskilling and economic transformation to keep creating good jobs. I wish to focus today on a sub-segment within the broad middle, a particular "sandwiched" group, comprising working adults in the 30s to 50s, with a school-going child or children between seven and 16 on one hand, and parents in their 60s and above on the other. This is not a big sub-segment, probably around 200,000 households or 20% of total households, but they face particular, "sandwiching" pressures in cost-of-living. Now I believe as parents, all of them will want to do their best for their children and what is "best" can be very personal and varies from individual to individual.”
“So, significant wage moves. And paradoxically, these wage moves under the Progressive Wage Model would likely push prices up. We may all have to pay more for meals, for Town Council conservancy, and so on. But the important points are these. One, the Progressive Wage Model should grow wages at the bottom faster than prices rise, so that our low-wage workers will get higher real wages eventually. And as importantly, all of us will be sharing in the burden of these higher prices brought about by progressive wages. It is spread out across all of us, in order to support higher wages for a segment at the bottom. So, we can, and should all do our part, and pay a little bit more, in order to help those who are impacted the most, more than the rest of us, by higher costs of living. This must be a key part of our social compact. And the Government is doing its part too. In this Budget, topping up $2.4 billion to the Progressive Wage Credit Scheme Fund after a top up of $2.8 billion last year. More than $5 billion in total over two years to share the heavier labour cost burden with employers in the next few years. And on top of this, the Government is also giving directly to low-wage workers another $150 to $350 every month to further top up their wages through enhanced Workfare, announced last year and kicking in this year. But ultimately, besides Government and consumers, employers of low-wage workers and buyers of their services – if these services are outsourced – must also play their part to uplift our low-wage workers. Because the Progressive Wage Model provides for a whole ladder of job grades and sets wage levels not only at the starting grade but at higher, more senior grades.”
“And so, on this note, I strongly support the Government's fiscal measures in the GST Voucher Scheme and Assurance Package. But third, beyond fiscal measures, I believe we can do more to keep in check the rental rates of Government-owned and managed commercial properties, especially for coffeeshops in our heartlands. To be fair, rental is not the largest cost component of cooked food and served meals in the heartlands, nor should we expect that lower or steady rental would bring down the overall prices of meals, as there are other cost drivers at play. But I do believe that lower or steady rental would at least help to keep everyday meal prices steady and relieve the pressure on businesses to keep increasing prices to cover their costs. Fourth and most importantly, to sustainably mitigate cost-of-living concerns, real wages and spending power of Singaporeans must go up. Wages and spending power must grow faster than inflation. Certainly, for the broad middle, but also, and especially for the lowest-wage workers amongst us, because consumption takes out a disproportionate part of income for low-wage workers, and so higher prices hit low-wage workers disproportionately hard. To help low-wage workers, the Government has announced decisive moves, especially in the Progressive Wage Model. Many of these moves will start taking effect this year, to give wages at the bottom a sharp uplift over the next few years. For a cook in a full-service F&B outlet, monthly gross wage will be at least $2,050 starting from this March, going up to at least $2,380 in March 2025. For a conservancy cleaner, at least $1,795 from this July, going up to $2,835 by July 2028. For a cashier, at least $1,850 already from last September, going up to at least $2,175 by next September.”
“Based on last year's Budget, $200 in cash last year, and on plan, to go up to $250 this year. But in this year's Budget, the payout for the year is raised from $250 to $350, and for next year, to $450. In other words, within the space of two Budgets, two fiscal years, GST Voucher – Cash has been essentially doubled, permanently, for every one in two adult Singaporeans. This will permanently deal with the effects of higher GST on overall cost-of-living pressures. Indeed, this year's Budget tops up the GST Voucher Fund by $2.4 billion, after a similar top up of $2.4 billion last year. Very decisive and a real commitment to keep this going permanently. And separately, under the Assurance Package, a 65-year-old retiree who owns no more than one property will receive – on top of the $700 cash under the GST Voucher Scheme, this retiree will receive another $1,300, in cash, this year alone, under the Assurance Package. And his or her child, who may be an upper-middle-income working adult owning one property, will also receive $550 in cash alone. And so, the Budget last year provided for $1.1 billion in such cost-of-living special payments and this year, another $1.3 billion has been set aside. Taken together, these fiscal measures will go quite some way towards relieving cost-of-living pressures brought about by both higher GST and more saliently, larger inflationary drivers. In fact, when speaking to residents about the Budget, some have turned around and asked me, is the Government giving too much? How is the Government going to sustain this, because we need to stay prudent? I certainly agree, but I think the Government must also do what it can to address a clear and present concern of Singaporeans.”
“Oil prices have come down too. Natural gas prices as well. And we see this in the petrol stations. The unit price is once again starting with the digit "2", rather than "3". But fertiliser prices are still up. And so, grain prices are up. Rice is up. Corn feed, up 50% versus 2019. And consequently, across the chain, price of chicken meat, for example, has stayed up. Eggs have stayed up too, 25 cents at least per egg. Overall, core inflation in Singapore is expected to ease off in the later half of this year, but only slightly. High inflation appears here to stay. So, what can we do, what must we do, to help Singaporeans with cost-of-living pressures? First, our exchange rate policy has really helped. Without a decisively stronger Singapore Dollar, we would be feeling the impact of imported inflation much more sharply. Yet, the central bank would need to be very cautious with any further move, as a stronger Singapore Dollar makes our exports more expensive and the outlook for exports this year is already challenging. Second, we need decisive fiscal measures to mitigate cost-of-living pressures. And on this, I am cheered by the moves in this Budget. And I wish to highlight, in particular, the permanent GST Voucher – Cash component. In last year's Budget, Deputy Prime Minister Wong announced that this GSTV – Cash would be raised to $400 in 2022 and $500 in 2023, for eligible Singaporeans living in smaller flats. But this year, the Budget has outdone itself, because before the increase to $500 in cash can be implemented this year, this Budget provides for another increase, to $700, and then, to $850 in 2024, versus just $400 in 2022. For eligible Singaporeans in larger flats, it is a similar story.”
“Sir, today, I would like to discuss cost-of-living. When the GST was first introduced at 3% in 1994, it had minimal impact on prices. Our inflation rate rose marginally from 2% to 3% but fell below 2% after 1994 and stayed there. And we were in a decade of robust economic growth. So, low inflation, high growth – when the GST was first introduced. Then, in 2002, in then-Deputy Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong's first Budget as Finance Minister, he announced the increase in GST from 3% to 5%. At that time, our economy was at a different stage. It was facing a series of shocks and setbacks, and the growth outlook was troubled. But inflation was projected to be zero or even negative. And in this benign price environment, then-Deputy Prime Minister Lee said that, "I am confident that the 2-percentage point increase in GST will not significantly raise prices." Subsequently, when the GST went up from 5% to 7%, the economy was again back to a period of strong growth. So, this time, it is different. GST is going up when our growth outlook is once again troubled, and concurrently, our inflation is high, and expected to be higher for longer. To be clear, GST is not the main factor driving prices up. Indeed, as I said in my Budget Debate speech last year, we should "refrain from making GST a strawman, or a convenient scapegoat", for high prices. There are many other factors, external factors, driving prices up. But when GST goes up in this environment, it adds to the overall pressures facing Singaporeans and it exacerbates Singaporeans' overall anxieties on cost-of-living. It is a clear and present concern. Looking at the external factors driving prices up, take shipping, for example, thankfully, freight rates have come back down, quite significantly, from 2022 highs.”
“Sir, I think this has been useful and I think it is what is clear from the Workers' Party's position is that they are proposing to peg the price of a 5-room flat that is not our median flat type to the median income and to then peg subsequently a 4-room flat, a 3-room flat – a 4-room flat being a median flat type at something that is lower than median income. This is something that is useful that has come up and I think we can debate on that. But to Mr Perera's question, I agree with the Minister that our housing prices for non-mature estate BTOs are affordable. I would like to ask Mr Perera what his benchmark for affordability for a median non-mature 4-room BTO flat is.”
“Well, Sir, I think the point is this that according to Mr Perera's clarification, the Workers' Party's proposition of pegging the highest flat type – a 5-room – to median income, basically must mean that the cost of a 5-room flat for higher-income Singaporeans must come down. That must be funded in some way. I think it is reasonable to assume that a proposal to peg housing price to median income must be based on a median flat type. If Mr Perera is proposing that the highest flat type must also be pegged to median income, then I would like to ask Mr Perera just how exactly does he suggest funding this – because it must mean that the price of a 5-room flat must come down to a median income level.”
“Sir, I thank Mr Perera. So, if I hear him correctly, the Workers' Party was suggesting in its manifesto, offering a definition of affordability. That definition is based on median household income applied to all flat types, including 5-room flats, when we know that HDB flats cater to the whole range of Singaporeans up to the 80th income percentile. So, the Workers' Party's position is basically to peg the definition of affordability to median household income, even for higher-income earners in Singapore.”
“Mr Speaker, I thank Mr Leon Perera for responding to my question yesterday. Just to recap, the Workers' Party's manifesto in 2020 said, and I quote, "HDB BTO selling prices in non-mature estates should be based on a 20-year mortgage, 10% downpayment and monthly repayment of a maximum of 25% of the median monthly household income." So, it is pegged to the median household income. If I heard Mr Leon Perera correctly just now, the Workers' Party's position is that they should apply to all flats, including 5-room flats. Is that correct?”
“We must continue to evolve our public housing system and evolve our social compact with Singaporeans on housing. But as it is, we have had in Singapore a heck of a public housing system and a heck of a social compact with Singaporeans on housing, that have produced a heck of a set of outcomes to date. It started with an audacious goal to move citizens of a new nation into flats, and since then, the system has added new pillars. Every evolution henceforth will only become more complex, to an already complex system. There is no easy solution. But we have today a great system as a strong basis for further action. Minister Desmond Lee has said, that public housing in Singapore is social policy. I fully agree. It is not just about buildings. A flat is a home, an anchor in our lives, a stake in Singapore. And so, beyond the ballot, I believe still, that a BTO home remains a promise by Singapore, to Singaporeans, a bedrock in our social compact. So, HDB – the Housing and Development Board – might as well also be the "Hopes and Dreams Board" – HDB. Because HDB's purpose is to build Homes, build Dreams, build a Nation, not just brick-and-mortar flats. Have we lost our way in this regard? Have we lost the plot? I do not think so. And so, I stand in full support of the Motion, standing in the name of the Minister for National Development and affirm the long-standing and continued commitment of the Government to our public housing objectives.”
“The point is, if HDB does not pay for the land cost, according to their proposal and put back this land cost into the reserves, then what is really happening is that future generations are paying for our current generation's flats. It is as simple as that. And as Ms Hazel Poa, herself said, "羊毛毕竟出在羊身上". Sir, in Mandarin, please. (In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] Over the past two years, many residents have shared with me their concerns about housing and buying an HDB flat. Not only young residents but also their parents have worries. Rising resale prices and tight supply of BTOs are the personal experience of many residents. I can understand their concerns. Are the BTO flats still affordable and accessible? Looking at the figures for first-timers in 2022, 60% or 9,000 units of the 4-room and 5-room flats launched last year did not exceed the application rate of three, which means that first-timers stand a good chance of success in applying for a 4-room or 5-room flat. However, many first-timers still choose popular projects, adding to the crunch. But objectively speaking, BTO flats have not become out of reach. They are still accessible. Of course, the accessibility of HDB flats also involves waiting time. In this respect, due to the delay caused by the pandemic, waiting time is indeed quite long with the current median of 4.3 years. The Government has introduced a shorter waiting time of 2.5 to 3.8 years in November 2021. I think we can do better. I would like to suggest that the Government provide more BTO flats with a shorter waiting time to prevent the history of tight supplies from repeating itself. (In English): Sir, let me conclude. No system is perfect and no system should stay static.”
“But in between, we could have a subsidy tier, with six-year MOP and 2% recovery, another higher subsidy tier, seven-year MOP, 3% recovery and so on. This tiered system would allow the Government to flex the amount of additional subsidies to apply to various projects. We need that flexibility in our system of public housing subsidies, going forward. It is a bit like we now have S-size and XL-size subsidies. It is time to add the M- and L-sizes in between so that, ultimately, we keep all BTO projects within reach of target segments and, at the same time, effectively mitigate the windfall effects for different projects to varying degrees. Sir, on affordability. Just two points. I note that in the Workers' Party manifesto in 2020, they said, and I quote, "HDB BTO selling prices in non-mature estates should be pegged to household incomes and prices should be based on a 20-year mortgage, 10% downpayment and monthly repayments of a maximum of 25% of the median monthly household income." I did a back-of-the-envelope calculation. If my calculations are right, it comes up to about $380,000 at current income levels. And the Minister has already given statistics just now, showing that our non-mature estate BTO average price currently at $340,000. So, it seems like our non-mature estate BTOs are affordable by the Workers' Party's own definition of affordability. And yet, I think in one of the Workers' Party Member's speech just now, it was premised entirely on the notion that HDB prices are high. So, can I ask for some clarifications? Are HDB prices high or are they affordable, going by what the Workers' Party themselves have said? And to Ms Hazel Poa, she mentioned that everybody is paying for their HDB flats in some way. I absolutely agree and the Minister himself has said so.”
“A 4-room unit at Ang Mo Kio Central Weave, in my view, should have been capped at $500,000, and not starting from $530,000. Similarly, I believe we should keep any 5-room BTO flat within reach of the 60th income percentile. Again, at a home price to income ratio of five, this works out to $650,000. And so, my suggestion is to cap the price of a 5-room BTO to $650,000, before grants. The Government’s approach has been to supply the same flat type in different locations at different price points for different budgets. This is a sound approach, but what I am suggesting is to further calibrate this and to cap the upper end, based on five times current income benchmarks. This would serve as a strong psychological marker, but there is also a very important philosophical point here. A price cap would ensure that any project, in any location, will still be within reach of a broad segment of Singaporeans and ensure that any project, in any location, will have an inclusive mix of Singaporeans living there. How might we do this? In the first instance, I suggest we expand the PLH model. Apply higher subsidies to more projects like Ang Mo Kio Central Weave, push down the BTO launch prices to be within reach of most Singaporeans, but attach the longer Minimum Occupation Period (MOP) of 10 years, and the subsidy recovery of 6% at point of resale. So, one option, expand the PLH model to more projects. But we should go even further. I say, let us extend the PLH model into a more flexible, more finely tiered system of MOPs and subsidy recovery rates. Let me explain. Basically, the "basic" level of subsidies, five-year MOP, zero subsidy recovery on one end; and PLH-level subsidies, 10-year MOP, 6% subsidy recovery on the other end.”
“Sir, let me move on to affordability. And I will start with this premise. Over the last two years, the Workers' Party has put forth in this House the proposition that Singaporeans' housing needs are becoming more diverse and hence, we should have more diverse housing options. For instance, more rental, less ownership – more options for more diverse housing needs. I have a somewhat different outlook. I say that home ownership remains the dominant housing need of Singaporeans, an aspiration of Singaporeans. However, I think our needs, other than housing, have become more diverse. And so, our housing strategy should keep up with that. Housing affordability must keep up with that. How do we keep flats affordable, such that Singaporeans, while owning their homes, also have enough to build and live the good life in other diverse areas and fulfil increasingly diverse needs? This is the nub of the affordability issue, in my view. What is an affordable home in this context? And I think it starts with a cap on BTO prices. In the August 2022 BTO exercise, there was much public interest in Ang Mo Kio Central Weave, where 4-room units started at $535,000 and 5-room units at $720,000, before grants. Compare these with prices under the Prime Location Public Housing (PLH) model. In the same BTO exercise, the PLH project in Kallang Whampoa has 4-room units starting at $509,000. So, the PLH model lowered prices with higher subsidies to the extent that these prices were lower than the prices at the non-PLH Ang Mo Kio Central Weave. I believe we should keep any 4-room BTO flat within reach of a Singaporean family at median income. In my mind, this means keeping the price of a 4-room BTO to five times of median income, or just under $500,000, before grants.”
“And the Motion standing in the names of Mr Leong Mun Wai and Ms Hazel Poa clearly states that "This House calls upon the Government to review its public housing policies in order to deliver affordable and accessible HDB flats to all Singaporeans" – affordable and accessible flats to all Singaporeans. I heard Mr Leong Mun Wai's suggestion about the Affordable Homes Scheme. Never mind the mechanism. Basically, deferring of a major cost component, vastly cheaper flats. And going by the language in his Motion, I assume that he means for these affordable homes to be accessible to all Singaporeans. I would like to ask Mr Leong if this is indeed the case – supply of these vastly cheaper flats to all Singaporeans. What does he think will happen to the resale market? And does he not agree that he seriously risks crashing the resale market instead of keeping it buoyant, as he has claimed? How can he expect to keep the resale market buoyant with such a shock? On the other hand, for those first-timers who, for whatever reason, have to buy a resale flat, they will have to pay full market value by his proposal because the seller has to pay back the deferred price component to HDB. And so, what happens to equitable access for all first-timers? Can Mr Leong Mun Wai shed some light on this? To the Workers’ Party, I think in their Facebook post, they had highlighted anxieties over one's chances in BTO applications, especially for mature estates. I think we can recognise these anxieties. But what would be the Workers' Party's position on addressing this issue of one's chances for a mature estate BTO? Because the reality is that there is no easy solution. And so, would the Workers' Party be prepared or be minded to acknowledge this reality to Singaporeans?”
“In 2022, more than 9,000, or almost 60% of all 4- and 5-room BTO units launched had first-timer application rates of three times or lower across nine different projects. The average first-timer application rate across these units was 1.85, under two. So, very good chances really for first-timers to secure one of these 4- or 5-room BTO units. Yet, these units drew only 28% of all first-timer applications for 4- or 5-room units. Where did the rest of the applications go? Let us look at the most popular flat types in 2022 – 4-room in Geylang, first-timer application rate of 20.5%; 5-room in Tampines, in August, 18.5%; and 4-room in Tampines, the same project, 17.2%. Together, these account for only 3% of 4- and 5-room BTO units launched, but they attracted 16% of all first-timer applications for the whole of 2022. So, 3% of units drawing 16% of applications on one hand versus 60% of units, drawing only 28% of applications. And so, the perception of low chances in BTO exercises is really driven by the concentration of applications in a small number of projects. Whereas for the many other projects available, applicants do stand good chances, on average. Indeed, as the Minister and HDB have said, virtually, all first-timer families who apply for BTO flats in non-mature estates succeed within three tries. So, on the count of balloting for BTO flats, our overall system is, in fact, doing well, producing outcomes and we should give recognition when it is due. Sir, I have spoken at length about BTO accessibility.”