The text
10.30 am Order. Pursuant to paragraph (7) of Standing Order 92, I have fixed the times for the conclusion of consideration of the heads of expenditure in the Estimates of Expenditure for FY2026/2027 in the Committee of Supply.
10.30 am In fixing these times, I have taken into account the reduction of Question Time to 30 minutes on the days allotted for the Committee of Supply debates and the extension of Sitting times of the Committee of Supply for each of the allotted days.
10.30 am Additionally, Members are notified that the Sittings on the allotted days of 27 February to 6 March will commence at 10.00 am.
10.30 am The "guillotine" times I have fixed have been notified to hon Members.
10.30 am I would also like to remind Members to use slides and videos sparingly to keep the spirit of our debating Chamber. Focusing on the delivery of speeches to be made will create a greater impact in a debate.
10.30 am Order. Questions for Oral Answer.
Differentiating between Wealth Held by Households in Public Versus in Private Housing, and Measures to Sustain or Improve Upward Mobility Rates 1 Assoc Prof Kenneth Goh asked the Prime Minister and Minister for Finance (a) whether the Ministry differentiates between wealth held in owner-occupied public housing and privately-owned housing in measuring household wealth inequality, given the differences in liquidity and ease of deployment arising from resale conditions and use-of-proceeds rules; and (b) if so, how this is taken into account in assessing households' economic resilience and in the computation of wealth Gini coefficient.
Differentiating between Wealth Held by Households in Public Versus in Private Housing, and Measures to Sustain or Improve Upward Mobility Rates 2 Ms Mariam Jaafar asked the Prime Minister and Minister for Finance in respect of the Ministry's Occasional Paper on income growth, inequality and social mobility trends which indicated that three in four children born into the bottom 20 percent of households in the late 1970s and 1980s moved to higher income tiers as adults, what measures are in place to sustain or improve these upward mobility rates for today's and future cohorts.
Differentiating between Wealth Held by Households in Public Versus in Private Housing, and Measures to Sustain or Improve Upward Mobility Rates Mr Speaker, may I have your permission to answer Question Nos 1 and 2 in today's Order Paper together?
Differentiating between Wealth Held by Households in Public Versus in Private Housing, and Measures to Sustain or Improve Upward Mobility Rates Please go ahead.
Differentiating between Wealth Held by Households in Public Versus in Private Housing, and Measures to Sustain or Improve Upward Mobility Rates My response will address related oral and written questions on wealth inequality and wealth data filed by Mr Yip Hon Weng, Mr Gerald Giam1,2,3 and Mr Louis Chua scheduled for subsequent Sittings. If Members are satisfied with the response, they may wish to withdraw their questions after this session.
Differentiating between Wealth Held by Households in Public Versus in Private Housing, and Measures to Sustain or Improve Upward Mobility Rates Mr Speaker, Sir, over the past decade, real wages have risen across all income levels, with wage growth highest for lower-income workers. Income inequality has decreased. Social mobility between generations remains strong. These outcomes reflect sustained policies to uplift lower-income workers and foster inclusive growth, supported by a progressive system of taxes and transfers.
Differentiating between Wealth Held by Households in Public Versus in Private Housing, and Measures to Sustain or Improve Upward Mobility Rates Most countries face challenges in measuring wealth inequality accurately. Certain assets such as unlisted businesses, private equity and overseas assets, are inherently difficult to track and value. Financial confidentiality provisions further constrain data collection.
Differentiating between Wealth Held by Households in Public Versus in Private Housing, and Measures to Sustain or Improve Upward Mobility Rates We have made our best effort by combining survey data from the Household Expenditure Survey with administrative records. The survey captures information on assets such as bank deposits and unlisted assets, including overseas assets, and liabilities such as household arrears and bank loans. We augment this with administrative data on properties, Central Provident Fund (CPF) accounts, Singapore Savings Bonds, shares and securities held in Central Depository accounts and the CPF Investment Scheme Special Account, life insurance policies, balances in the Post-Secondary Education Account and Edusave accounts, and Housing and Development Board (HDB)-administered loans. Property values are estimated based on their fair market value.
Differentiating between Wealth Held by Households in Public Versus in Private Housing, and Measures to Sustain or Improve Upward Mobility Rates We have progressively improved the coverage and quality of wealth data captured in the Household Expenditure Survey. We will continue to study how data collection methods can be strengthened. Like many other advanced economies such as the United Kingdom (UK), Japan and Germany, we rely primarily on survey-based approaches. We have no plans at this point to seek additional legislative or administrative powers to require more granular asset disclosures solely for inequality measurement.
Differentiating between Wealth Held by Households in Public Versus in Private Housing, and Measures to Sustain or Improve Upward Mobility Rates This is our first compilation of the wealth Gini coefficient and we do not have a historical series. We intend to track this measure over time. The next cycle of the Household Expenditure Survey is planned for 2028. And we will consider whether additional indicators, which Members have suggested, can be provided.
Differentiating between Wealth Held by Households in Public Versus in Private Housing, and Measures to Sustain or Improve Upward Mobility Rates Members asked for further breakdowns of wealth inequality – such as by asset type, housing type or age cohort. The Gini coefficient is measured at the household and not individual level. Hence, we do not break it down by age cohorts. We do not compute Gini coefficients by asset type, as households can and do convert their wealth from one asset type to another. We also do not differentiate between public and private housing, or between owner-occupied and non-owner-occupied housing, in computing the wealth Gini, as this a stock measure of net worth and not a measure of liquidity. We do not have sufficiently granular data at the moment to provide the breakdown between local and overseas holdings.
Differentiating between Wealth Held by Households in Public Versus in Private Housing, and Measures to Sustain or Improve Upward Mobility Rates Mr Gerald Giam asked about wealth concentration at the top. The top 1% hold about 14% of total household wealth, while the top 5% holds about 33%. These levels are broadly comparable to advanced economies with similar wealth Gini coefficients. However, these estimates should be interpreted with caution, due to sample size limitations and potential under-reporting in survey responses at both ends of the distribution.
Differentiating between Wealth Held by Households in Public Versus in Private Housing, and Measures to Sustain or Improve Upward Mobility Rates Wealth inequality is higher than income inequality in all advanced economies, as wealth accumulates over the life-cycle. In Singapore, a significant part of household wealth, especially among lower- and middle-income households, is held in owner-occupied housing and CPF savings. Our housing and CPF policies have enabled many Singaporeans to build their assets over time. This broad-based asset ownership helps to moderate inequality while strengthening long-term security and social stability.
Differentiating between Wealth Held by Households in Public Versus in Private Housing, and Measures to Sustain or Improve Upward Mobility Rates Mr Yip and Mr Giam asked whether we have considered other forms of wealth taxes beyond property tax. Our approach is to tax wealth in ways that are less susceptible to cross-border movement and tax planning, while preserving competitiveness. This is why we focus on less mobile assets like property and motor vehicles. These taxes are progressive, with higher-value assets taxed at higher rates.
Differentiating between Wealth Held by Households in Public Versus in Private Housing, and Measures to Sustain or Improve Upward Mobility Rates We are mindful of inter-generational balance. Younger households who are still accumulating assets should not be unduly burdened. At the same time, higher-value property owners should contribute more. For asset-rich but income-poor seniors, we provide deferral mechanisms for property tax payments to ease cash-flow pressures.
Differentiating between Wealth Held by Households in Public Versus in Private Housing, and Measures to Sustain or Improve Upward Mobility Rates We fully agree with Ms Mariam Jaafar on the need to sustain upward social mobility for current and future cohorts. Our strategy is to intervene early, provide support through life and ensure wage progression.
Differentiating between Wealth Held by Households in Public Versus in Private Housing, and Measures to Sustain or Improve Upward Mobility Rates We have expanded access to affordable and quality preschool education to give children from all backgrounds a good start. Our schools provide a strong foundation with more support for those from disadvantaged households. SkillsFuture provides continuing learning opportunities for adults, including enhanced support for mid-career workers. The Progressive Wage Model and Workfare raise earnings and strengthen career pathways for lower-wage workers. For families facing complex challenges, ComLink+ provides more intensive, coordinated support in partnership with community organisations.
Differentiating between Wealth Held by Households in Public Versus in Private Housing, and Measures to Sustain or Improve Upward Mobility Rates Overall, Singapore remains in a stronger position than many advanced economies. But we do not take this for granted. Tackling inequality and improving mobility requires sustained investment across generations. We will continue to review and update our fiscal measures to ensure they remain effective and sustainable. We remain committed to ensuring every Singaporeans can start well, progress in life and share in our nation's success.
Differentiating between Wealth Held by Households in Public Versus in Private Housing, and Measures to Sustain or Improve Upward Mobility Rates Assoc Prof Goh.
Differentiating between Wealth Held by Households in Public Versus in Private Housing, and Measures to Sustain or Improve Upward Mobility Rates Thank you, Speaker. I thank the Minister for his response. I just have two questions. The first is whether there are more proximal indicators of inequality? I note that the Minister has said that the next survey will be conducted in 2028, but given the importance of wealth inequality and income inequality in our society, whether there are any attempts at capturing some of these more proximal indicators of inequality, both wealth and income?
Differentiating between Wealth Held by Households in Public Versus in Private Housing, and Measures to Sustain or Improve Upward Mobility Rates My second question relates back to the statistic. How is the Ministry looking at using this statistic? Are you looking at the trend or are you looking at the threshold and does that subsequently warrant the kinds of actions that you would take?
Differentiating between Wealth Held by Households in Public Versus in Private Housing, and Measures to Sustain or Improve Upward Mobility Rates Thank you, Mr Speaker. Wealth is notoriously hard to measure, particularly data on overseas assets and unlisted assets. This is not unique to Singapore. The current estimates, both wealth as well as income, are our best efforts, in line with best practices in other countries. We have done so to our best effort, combining both survey data with administrative data, as I have explained in my speech.
Differentiating between Wealth Held by Households in Public Versus in Private Housing, and Measures to Sustain or Improve Upward Mobility Rates This is the first time we are measuring the wealth Gini coefficient and we are open to improving it over time. We will take into account some of the suggestions that are made by Members on what we can do. In terms of household income trends, we already publish that data regularly, annually, in the Key Household Income Trends Report. But for the wealth Gini coefficient and wealth data, it is dependent on the main source, which is the household expenditure survey, which we do every five years. I think the next cycle is in 2028. And so, when that data is obtained, we will try our best to put out something regularly. We intend to track this data, as I have explained.
Differentiating between Wealth Held by Households in Public Versus in Private Housing, and Measures to Sustain or Improve Upward Mobility Rates In terms of what we would do with this data, I think the important part is to look at the trending. The absolute numbers are an indication of where we are, relative to other countries, but the trending is also important, whether or not wealth Gini is going up or going down, in the right direction. The enhanced data and methodology that we have used for both income inequality as well as wealth inequality will improve our understanding of the states of inequality in Singapore, which will better help us develop more evidence-based and targeted policies to improve Singaporeans lives.
Differentiating between Wealth Held by Households in Public Versus in Private Housing, and Measures to Sustain or Improve Upward Mobility Rates Ms Mariam Jaafar.
Differentiating between Wealth Held by Households in Public Versus in Private Housing, and Measures to Sustain or Improve Upward Mobility Rates Thank you, Speaker. I thank the Minister for his responses. This is an issue very close to my heart. I have three supplementary questions.
Differentiating between Wealth Held by Households in Public Versus in Private Housing, and Measures to Sustain or Improve Upward Mobility Rates First, are there any early indicators for cohorts in the 1990s and the 2000s of the data on where they stand today in terms of upward mobility? And does the Government have any targets; you talked about trends, but do you have targets for what you would like it to be at, in the next time we run this cycle?
Differentiating between Wealth Held by Households in Public Versus in Private Housing, and Measures to Sustain or Improve Upward Mobility Rates Secondly, the in the bottom quartile, which has not actually moved in terms of upward mobility, what are the barriers, what are the persistent barriers that keep them there? And how are we evolving our policies for this?
Differentiating between Wealth Held by Households in Public Versus in Private Housing, and Measures to Sustain or Improve Upward Mobility Rates And then, thirdly, as we think about artificial intelligence (AI) and technological shifts that are reshaping jobs, how are we ensuring that children from lower-income households are not disproportionately affected? I think I raised this point in my Budget speech yesterday and I am very keen to hear what the Ministry is thinking about that.
Differentiating between Wealth Held by Households in Public Versus in Private Housing, and Measures to Sustain or Improve Upward Mobility Rates Thank you, Mr Speaker. The findings of the Occasional Paper indicate that the social outcomes in the past decade have been positive. I think it suggests that our strategy of combining inclusive economic growth with targeted and progressive support has had tangible impact. But we do not take these outcomes for granted. As our society ages and new generations come onboard and the economy matures, structural pressures on inequality will naturally emerge and sustaining mobility will become more challenging.
Differentiating between Wealth Held by Households in Public Versus in Private Housing, and Measures to Sustain or Improve Upward Mobility Rates So, to Ms Mariam's question on younger cohorts, we do not yet have good data on younger Singaporeans because they are still in the early stages of their careers and their earnings have not stabilised. But we are encouraged that the increasing proportion of younger Singaporeans have attained higher levels of education and skills, and that will put them in good stead to be able to do well in life.
Differentiating between Wealth Held by Households in Public Versus in Private Housing, and Measures to Sustain or Improve Upward Mobility Rates On her second question on the bottom quintile, the issues are more complex. The families, in particular in the bottom quintile, have multiple needs and need multiple support. And that is why we have been working on a package of various measures, including the enhancement of ComLink+ which the Prime Minister spoke about in his Budget Speech. We are also working very hard to make sure that children in those households have a good start in life through preschool and that is part of the KidSTART programme, which we have initiated many years ago.
Differentiating between Wealth Held by Households in Public Versus in Private Housing, and Measures to Sustain or Improve Upward Mobility Rates Sustaining social mobility will indeed be a challenge. We will have to work extensively on families in the bottom quintile, knowing that the challenges to overcome are more complex and more difficult.
Differentiating between Wealth Held by Households in Public Versus in Private Housing, and Measures to Sustain or Improve Upward Mobility Rates As for AI, the current crop of Singaporeans and the concerns about how they will need to adapt, I think the key is really through ensuring our Singaporeans are skilled, are able to adapt quickly, take on the new jobs that will be created in this new economy. This will generate wage growth and hopefully then, in that way, they will be able to maintain a strong standard of living and continue to progress in life.
Differentiating between Wealth Held by Households in Public Versus in Private Housing, and Measures to Sustain or Improve Upward Mobility Rates It is a basket of pressures. I think we have to work hard to lean against the structural pressures that will happen as our economy matures and develops, so that Singaporeans can succeed regardless of background. We have to remain vigilant and to refine our policies when needed so that we can remain socially mobile over the long term.
Differentiating between Wealth Held by Households in Public Versus in Private Housing, and Measures to Sustain or Improve Upward Mobility Rates Mr Yip Hon Weng.
Differentiating between Wealth Held by Households in Public Versus in Private Housing, and Measures to Sustain or Improve Upward Mobility Rates I thank the Minister for his reply. The focus of my supplementary question is on seniors. For older Singaporeans who may own valuable property but have limited or no income, how does the Ministry assess the impact of the higher property taxes on the cost-of-living pressures? I note the Minister had earlier mentioned that there are current initiatives. But will there be additional safeguards to ensure that the measures aimed at reducing wealth inequality do not unintentionally strain retirees?
Differentiating between Wealth Held by Households in Public Versus in Private Housing, and Measures to Sustain or Improve Upward Mobility Rates We recognise the concerns of the group that Mr Yip spoke about – the asset rich and cash poor retirees.
Differentiating between Wealth Held by Households in Public Versus in Private Housing, and Measures to Sustain or Improve Upward Mobility Rates Our property tax system currently is progressive. Investment properties and higher-value properties are taxed higher and homeowners with only one property are taxed lower and they receive property tax rebates when necessary.
Differentiating between Wealth Held by Households in Public Versus in Private Housing, and Measures to Sustain or Improve Upward Mobility Rates But we nevertheless understand the concerns that individual property owners may face different financial circumstances, particularly on cash flow. So, for asset rich but income poor seniors, we have deferral mechanisms for property tax payments to ease their cash flow pressures. For instance, eligible seniors and retirees can apply to pay via extended interest-free instalments.
Differentiating between Wealth Held by Households in Public Versus in Private Housing, and Measures to Sustain or Improve Upward Mobility Rates Last supplementary question, Mr Gerald Giam.
Differentiating between Wealth Held by Households in Public Versus in Private Housing, and Measures to Sustain or Improve Upward Mobility Rates Thank you, Mr Speaker. Sir, I appreciate that the Ministry of Finance has published the wealth Gini coefficient. I hope that more data on wealth inequality will be published as this could help us to craft policy solutions to reduce inequality in our country. I have two supplementary questions.
Differentiating between Wealth Held by Households in Public Versus in Private Housing, and Measures to Sustain or Improve Upward Mobility Rates Has the Ministry conducted a simulation on how much wealth Gini coefficient would be reduced if investment property equity were excluded, to isolate the impact of this type of equity on inequality?
Differentiating between Wealth Held by Households in Public Versus in Private Housing, and Measures to Sustain or Improve Upward Mobility Rates Secondly, given that wealth inequality is significantly higher than income inequality, is the Government looking into ways to shift the tax burden away from work and income towards wealth, to better support social mobility? I understand the Senior Minister of State's point just now that this can be tax planned away, but I would like to know the Government is trying and it sees this as a priority.
Differentiating between Wealth Held by Households in Public Versus in Private Housing, and Measures to Sustain or Improve Upward Mobility Rates Mr Speaker, for property, in terms of methodology, we have treated them the same, through property values. Because property value captures a broad range of different property characteristics, whether owner-occupied or not, as a store of value. The wealth Gini coefficient is not a measure of liquidity. It is a measure of the stock of wealth. So, that is the first point I would like to make.
Differentiating between Wealth Held by Households in Public Versus in Private Housing, and Measures to Sustain or Improve Upward Mobility Rates Second is that for property, the way we have implemented it in Singapore is that we have taken a broad-based approach to ensure that Singaporeans have broad asset ownership, through HDB flats. And as a result, we should not necessarily compare what we do in Singapore, in terms of including housing, with other countries. So, it is a different metric.
Differentiating between Wealth Held by Households in Public Versus in Private Housing, and Measures to Sustain or Improve Upward Mobility Rates On whether or not we have done simulations on separating investment of property from owner-occupied property, we have not done so. As I have explained, it is because we treat property as a store of wealth. There is no real need for us to do so and that is something at the moment that we will not do.
Differentiating between Wealth Held by Households in Public Versus in Private Housing, and Measures to Sustain or Improve Upward Mobility Rates On tax burden, whether or not we will shift from work to wealth taxation, I think, we remain open. Today, we have an approach that works on the whole. The outcomes of the past decade, in terms of our policies, have been positive. We have been able to achieve real income growth. We have been able to achieve a decline in inequality and we have been able to achieve a balance using both wealth taxation, as we explained, as well as income taxation.
Differentiating between Wealth Held by Households in Public Versus in Private Housing, and Measures to Sustain or Improve Upward Mobility Rates As our society ages and we move towards an older society where there is more asset owning, that is something we can consider, whether or not we need a shift. But we have to do this carefully so that we know that the outcomes that we want to achieve can be done so without too much social perturbation.
Differentiating between Wealth Held by Households in Public Versus in Private Housing, and Measures to Sustain or Improve Upward Mobility Rates Let me just go back to the issue on investment property, so that I can explain that a little bit more clearly because I have not done so very well. What we do is that for household wealth, we do include both liquid and illiquid assets, because this is in line with international guidelines. All property owners, including those who own HDB flats, can rent out their property for income, and to sell it and keep the proceeds. So, it is a store of wealth.
Differentiating between Wealth Held by Households in Public Versus in Private Housing, and Measures to Sustain or Improve Upward Mobility Rates And so, it is up to how people manage it, how they activate this store of wealth that they can use. And so, there is no real need for us, and it is not in international best practice for us to separate out investment versus non-investment properties or owner-occupied versus non-owner-occupied properties. This is in line with international best practices and we will try to continue to do that, particularly since in Singapore, our approach is to encourage owner-occupation, and to encourage and make sure that Singapore has broad-based ownership, particularly through the ownership of their HDB flats.
Redesigning Shelter Models to Better Meet Needs of Rough Sleepers 3 Mr Gabriel Lam asked the Minister for Social and Family Development (a) whether the Ministry is concerned that 75% of surveyed rough sleepers in its 2025 survey on rough sleepers reported being unreceptive to staying in a shelter; and (b) how is the Ministry redesigning shelter models to better meet the needs of rough sleepers who avoid existing options.
Redesigning Shelter Models to Better Meet Needs of Rough Sleepers 4 Mr Gabriel Lam asked the Minister for Social and Family Development (a) how does the Ministry interpret the finding that 95% of respondents in the 2025 survey on rough sleepers sleep rough consistently in the same location; (b) whether this reflects unmet place-based needs; and (c) how does this finding inform the Ministry's outreach strategies to be better tailored for individuals reluctant to relocate to shelters.
Redesigning Shelter Models to Better Meet Needs of Rough Sleepers Social and Family Development): Mr Speaker, may I have your permission to address Question Nos 3 and 4 in today's Order Paper together?
Redesigning Shelter Models to Better Meet Needs of Rough Sleepers Yes, you do. Please proceed.
Redesigning Shelter Models to Better Meet Needs of Rough Sleepers Thank you, Sir. The 2025 Street Count of Rough Sleepers Survey by the Ministry of Social and Family Development (MSF) found that most rough sleepers choose to sleep in locations that are sheltered from the elements and are generally well-lit. These locations also tend to be places they are familiar with, near to friends and family, and some rough sleepers also choose locations that are close to their workplace for convenience. Based on our interactions with rough sleepers, these considerations apply across all geographical locations.
Redesigning Shelter Models to Better Meet Needs of Rough Sleepers Rough sleeping is a complex issue. Many rough sleepers have homes to return to but rough sleep due to disagreements with family, friends or co-tenants. MSF staff and volunteers from the Partners Engaging and Empowering Rough Sleepers (PEERS) Network journey with rough sleepers to address the underlying needs and often, a process of trust and rapport building is needed before meaningful support and interventions could be rendered. Over time, we hope more rough sleepers would be prepared to consider shelter and social services support, though the pathway for each rough sleeper would likely be different, just as their individual circumstances differ.
Redesigning Shelter Models to Better Meet Needs of Rough Sleepers Overall, MSF works to ensure that shelter support remains accessible to rough sleepers. For example, to address the survey finding that lack of privacy and personal space were key barriers to rough sleepers moving into shelters, MSF has partnered our shelter operators and re-designed the units with partitioned bed spaces, shelves and wardrobes. The Member may also wish to refer to MSF’s 2025 Street Count Report for more details.
Redesigning Shelter Models to Better Meet Needs of Rough Sleepers MSF has also recently announced a $450,000 Partnership to Tackle Homelessness (PATH) fund and invites organisations to trial innovative solutions to address underlying causes of rough sleeping and help rough sleepers work towards housing stability.
Redesigning Shelter Models to Better Meet Needs of Rough Sleepers Mr Lam.
Redesigning Shelter Models to Better Meet Needs of Rough Sleepers I thank the Senior Parliamentary Secretary for his response. In my interactions with rough sleepers, they have cited a few reasons, including a lack of privacy and personal space, as the Senior Parliamentary Secretary has mentioned. They have also cited instances of shelter rules and safety concerns. Would MSF have the proportion of rough sleepers who decline shelters due to rules, safety concerns or loss of autonomy?
Redesigning Shelter Models to Better Meet Needs of Rough Sleepers And my second supplementary question would be, will MSF publish utilisation rates of shelters alongside the rough sleepers count?
Redesigning Shelter Models to Better Meet Needs of Rough Sleepers Sir, I thank the Member, Mr Gabriel Lam, for his two supplementary questions. We do understand that there are rough sleepers who, for reasons of rules at the shelters, not quite want to do that. The prevalence rate is about 75% based on the last street count. About three-quarters of rough sleepers on the streets today, they do not wish to check into the shelter because of rules, privacy, as I have mentioned, storage space and so on. But the primary reason is still one of privacy as well as personal spaces, which is why we have worked with community partners, like New Hope Community Services, to start redesigning our shelter spaces.
Redesigning Shelter Models to Better Meet Needs of Rough Sleepers On his second supplementary question, about utilisation rates, yes, we do publish that. In the Street Count Report, we mentioned 730 transitional shelter bed spaces. As of September last year, utilisation rate was about two thirds or 66%.
11.04 am 5 Ms Jessica Tan Soon Neo asked the Minister for National Development (a) whether URA has assessed the fire safety and evacuation risks arising from the temporary relaxation of the occupancy cap for private residences; and (b) what safeguards are in place to address higher turnover and foot traffic arising from the increased occupancy cap.
11.04 am Minister for National Development): All residential premises in Singapore are subject to fire safety requirements regulated by the Singapore Civil Defence Force (SCDF). For example, fire escape routes, such as common corridors and staircases, need to be well-ventilated to aid smoke dispersal during a fire. Exit staircases are also located to provide residents with safe escape routes. Each residential unit is designed as a fire compartment to delay the spread of fire. This facilitates firefighting while enhancing the safety of residents.
11.04 am These standards remain sufficient with the temporary higher occupancy cap for larger private residential properties.
11.04 am Ms Tan.
11.04 am Thank you, Mr Speaker, I have two supplementary questions for the Senior Parliamentary Secretary.
11.04 am First of all, how does the Building and Construction Authority monitor that the tenancy of private residence aligns with the building occupancy load requirements to ensure safety and accessibility? Fire safety and building code risks are hard to detect in terms of safety risk breaches. Because the overload of electrical points and all that are within the households, so, it is very difficult, even for the Management Corporations Strata Title (MCSTs) let alone the authorities to monitor and check. That can cause a big fire risk.
11.04 am The other supplementary question that I have is, what measures are in place to maintain residents' liveability? Beyond safety, higher density also affects day-to-day liveability, because if there are multiple units within a block that have these eight occupants, common corridors, lifts and all the other facilities will be overloaded. Even access, in terms of evacuation, within a block could be strained because a building load is of a certain capacity. But if there are multiple units, then we will have a problem and that is also difficult to monitor.
11.04 am I thank the Member for her supplementary questions. First of all, I would reiterate what I answered earlier: in terms of the standards as far as fire safety is concerned, they remain sufficient even with the temporary higher occupancy cap for larger private residential estates.
11.04 am Just a few points with regard to the allowability of higher occupancy rates. They are only applicable for larger private residential properties, at least 90 square kilometres. [Please refer to "Clarification by Senior Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for National Development", Official Report, 25 February 2026, Vol 96, Issue 19, Correction By Written Statement section.] And that is the equivalent size of a typical four-room Housing and Development Board flat.
11.04 am I wish to assure the Member that for the owners of eligible properties, if they do wish to increase their occupancy cap, they must first register with the Urban Redevelopment Authority (URA) with a registration fee of $20 to qualify for the higher occupancy cap. Therefore, any allowability for the increase in occupancy cap is registered with the URA and that becomes a point of monitoring of sorts.
11.04 am With regard to dealing with the residents' liveability within the estates, the monitoring of that will come within the MCST of the condominiums to make sure that common spaces and corridors do adhere to the liveability standards or the fire safety standards as provided by SCDF.
11.04 am On top of that, while we are looking at the common spaces, I want to reassure the Member that it also comes with a strong sense of prevention as well as public education efforts by the SCDF even in private condominium estates. So, for example, in terms of the ongoing public education efforts, to equip the community with good awareness as well as essential fire safety knowledge, it is done with the ground Community Emergency and Engagement Committees as well as the Community Emergency Response Teams. So, there are regular engagements even with the private estates. Specific to condominiums, there are also safety and security days as well as the block evacuation drills.
11.04 am While the Member has mentioned with regard to the loading as well as the liveability as a result of the higher occupancy cap, it is the case that we are looking at it holistically – from prevention to the regulation, and subsequent to that, as part of the community engagement, increasing the emergency preparedness of all who stay within the condominiums.
11.04 am One would expect that if any resident were to be able to see that there are some fire safety hazards, that these will be highlighted. And where they are highlighted to the authorities, inspections will ensue.
11.04 am Order. End of Question Time. The Clerk will now proceed to read the Order of the day.
11.04 am [Pursuant to Standing Order No 22(3), provided that Members had not asked for questions standing in their names to be postponed to a later Sitting day or withdrawn, written answers to questions not reached by the end of Question Time are reproduced in the Appendix.]
6.32 pm [(proc text) Order read for Resumption of Debate on Question [12 February 2026] [2nd Allotted Day] (proc text)]
6.32 pm [(proc text) "That Parliament approves the financial policy of the Government for the financial year 1 April 2025 to 31 March 2026." – [Prime Minister and Minister for Finance]. (proc text)]
6.32 pm [(proc text) Question again proposed. (proc text)]
6.32 pm Mr Ng Chee Meng.
6.32 pm Mr Speaker, I rise in support of the Budget. We are living in a disrupted age, marked by greater geopolitical and economic fragmentation and uncertainty; technological disruption; and a rapidly ageing population.
6.32 pm As the Secretary-General of the National Trades Union Congress (NTUC), I am keenly aware that for many of our workers and families, these disruptive forces are not distant issues but daily lived experiences. This is reflected in NTUC's Survey on Economic Sentiments, which was conducted in 2025 polling 2,000 workers.
6.32 pm Cost of living remains a key concern – 37%. Job security was the top concern for nearly 20% of them too, due to factors, such as economic uncertainties and technological changes. Close to 20% were anxious about artificial intelligence (AI)-related job displacement or had already experienced some negative impact due to AI. Professionals, managers and executives (PMEs) and younger workers were the most concerned about the impact of technological disruption on their job security.
6.32 pm This Budget is, therefore, critical to lay a strong foundation for this disrupted age. The choices we make today will shape the course of our future and the lives of our workers and families.
6.32 pm I thank fellow Members of Parliament (MPs) from both sides of the Chamber, who have spoken up for our workers. NTUC and the Labour Movement will study your suggestions carefully.