Hansard, Tuesday, 11 September 2012

1 Mr Ang Wei Neng asked the Acting Minister for Community Development, Youth and Sports if he can provide an update on the measures announced earlier this year to address the needs of the increasing number of frail elderly as well as the support given to care-givers of these elderly.

Page: 696

2 Mr Muhamad Faisal Bin Abdul Manap asked the Acting Minister for Community Development, Youth and Sports with regard to the plan to build up to 40 Integrated Day Facilities (IDFs) serving up to 6,000 elderly by 2016 (a) whether the plan to build new IDFs in Bishan-Toa Payoh and Tampines in 2012 will proceed; (b) whether the plan to upgrade six existing Day Care/Day Rehabilitation Centres to IDFs in 2012 will go ahead and where these Day Care/Day Rehabilitation Centres are; (c) what criteria are used to determine IDF sites and whether these include convertible old town centre facilities and areas having a higher than national average percentage of residents who are above 50 years old; and (d) whether the Ministry will release a masterplan showing where and when the 40 IDFs will be built.

Page: 697

Mr Speaker, Sir, may I have your permission to take Question Nos 1 and 2 together?

Yes, please.

Mr Speaker, Sir, in March this year, my Ministry announced a series of initiatives to build up community- and home-based eldercare services to better support ageing-in-place. We are on track to roll out the measures progressively over the next few months.

Last month, MCYS unveiled the "3-in-1" concept for Integrated Day Facilities or IDF for short. First, the IDFs will offer integrated care services for the frail elderly, combining social day care, centre-based nursing, community rehabilitation and dementia care. Second, IDFs will provide information, coordination and referral services to better support families and care-givers. Third, the larger IDFs will provide gym and social space for community use.

By second quarter of next year, we should complete the building of two new IDFs – one in Tampines and the other in Toa Payoh – and the upgrading of six existing day-care centres to IDFs. Another new IDF at Serangoon will be completed in the second half of 2013. By 2016, there will be about 40 IDFs serving up to 6,000 elderly. Details on the location of the remaining IDFs will be announced in the next two to three months.

My Ministry is also introducing social home-based care where the elderly at home can receive care services, such as personal hygiene, housekeeping and laundry from a single care worker. We are working closely with our partners to recruit and train these care workers so as to launch this service in the fourth quarter of this year. By 2016, we will scale this service to benefit up to 4,000 elderly.

I am also happy to share that the Foreign Domestic Worker (FDW) Grant of $120 per month will come into effect from October this year. Applications have opened since 6 August this year. Households which employ a Foreign Domestic Worker to look after an elderly or person with disabilities and meet the eligibility criteria can apply for the grant.

To provide greater support for the vulnerable elderly in the community, my Ministry will organise the existing Seniors Activity Centres (SACs) into a hub-and-spoke concept, where Anchor SACs will support clusters of SACs to strengthen and expand their reach. Anchor SACs will perform additional roles, such as closer monitoring through home visits, case management and counselling services, for vulnerable elderly in the community. We expect the first six Anchor SACs to start operations by December this year. By 2016, we will have 16 Anchor SACs supporting some 39,000 elderly Singaporeans.

Page: 698

Mr Speaker, Sir, these are some of the initiatives my Ministry is working on to better support our elderly in the community and their caregivers. In planning the number and distribution of eldercare facilities, we take into consideration the demographic profile of each region, the adequacy of existing services and the availability of suitable premises. I am confident that most Singaporeans support the vision of ageing-in-place and understand the need for eldercare services to be developed within our communities. We will continue to engage the local communities, refine the implementation strategies as well as review our services from time to time to ensure that they remain relevant and adequate.

Sir, I thank the Minister for the comprehensive reply. I have one supplementary question for the Minister. We observe that there is an increasing number of Singaporeans in their 50s to 60s who have to support their even more elderly parents in their 80s and 90s. We want to know how MCYS can help this group of Singaporeans better because some of these Singaporeans also have to support their children in their education.

Sir, let me thank the hon Member Mr Ang for his comment. And indeed, we share his concern that as the life expectancy of our Singaporeans go into the 80s and 90s, there will be people in their 50s and 60s who are required, not only to take care of their elderly parents in their 80s and 90s, but also at the same time, take care of their children who might be in their early 20s or some in their 30s. Indeed, this is one of the big challenges for our society as we face an ageing population.

MCYS will continue to look at how we can better support this group of people because some of them may be near retirement and they might need some other specific help. On top of the current schemes, we are also going to look at what other new schemes we may be required to implement to cater to this specific group of people that the Member has highlighted, who are in their 50s or 60s. They are near retirement or just past retirement but perhaps still with the need to take care of their elderly parents. In the next few months, as we re-organise ourselves and focus on the potential gaps in our social safety nets in the future, this will be one area that we will be looking at.

Page: 698

3 Mr R Dhinakaran asked the Acting Minister for Community Development, Youth and Sports what will be the priorities of the newly-announced Ministry of Social and Family Development since there are many social challenges that will fall under its purview.

Page: 699

Mr Speaker, Sir, given the emerging demographic, economic and societal challenges Singapore faces, the formation of the new Ministry of Social and Family Development (MSF) will bring a sharper focus to the Government's work in the development of families, social services and social safety nets. At this point, our immediate priority is to ensure continuity in our current areas of coverage from family and social services to community development, youth and sports, even as we work towards a successful transition to the new Ministry.

Looking forward, MSF will focus on three key areas following the transition. First, we will enhance social safety nets for low-income and needy individuals and families. Some amongst these groups have complex needs beyond financial assistance. They may need help in areas such as housing, education and employment, counselling, caring for an elderly or rehabilitation. We will develop more effective initiatives to reach out to them and render help and support to enable them to improve their circumstances.

Second, we will improve the delivery of social services by working closely with the people and private sectors. These include services for the elderly, families, persons with disabilities and caregivers. We will work on accessibility, affordability and standards, and ensuring more responsive and citizen-centric delivery of services.

Third, we will further strengthen families. The family unit is the bedrock of our society, but it is coming under increasing strain with our changing demographics. We will create a more conducive environment for family formation and the strengthening of family bonds and resilience. We will also review our policies to meet family needs, such as childcare and eldercare, more effectively.

Sir, a strong social service sector is critical to support each of these three focus areas. The Ministry will therefore invest more resources to develop the sector. We will do more in working with the sector to attract, develop and retain social service professionals, raise sector capability and productivity, and improve service co-ordination. Through these efforts, we hope to bring about more resilient individuals and families, and play a part in helping our citizens achieve their hopes and aspirations for themselves and their families.

Page: 699

4 Mr Christopher de Souza asked the Acting Minister for Community Development, Youth and Sports (a) whether the Ministry will consider implementing more financial and other practical measures to support disabled employees and their employers; (b) whether special employment credits under the Employment Credit Scheme can be extended beyond graduates from Special Education schools and tax rebates given to employers who hire disabled employees; and (c) if the Ministry will review the success of the Open Door Fund in financing workplace modification and job redesign as well as providing job-specific training for disabled employees.

Page: 700

Sir, Mr Christopher de Souza has made a number of suggestions to facilitate the employment of persons with disabilities. This was one key area covered under the Enabling Masterplan (EM) 2012-2016 announced earlier this year. In terms of financial incentives, the Government decided to extend the Workfare Income Supplement and Special Employment Credit to persons with disabilities and their employers. Our current priority is on implementing these initiatives, and evaluating their efficacy before considering new ones.

Mr de Souza is concerned that the Special Employment Credit is for those from Special Education (SPED) schools. The SPED school criterion was included to help us better target the relevant group who is likely to face greater difficulties seeking employment. I would like to assure Members that we will allow equally deserving applicants to come onto the scheme, even if they have not attended SPED schools. We will exercise flexibility in the administration of the scheme.

Besides providing financial incentives, we need to work on other areas to help persons with disabilities find employment. For example, it is important to help them raise their skills so that they are more employable. As part of our EM efforts over the next five years, more persons with disabilities will receive pre-vocational and vocational education in SPED schools. We are also reviewing the Open Door Fund. One aspect we hope to improve is the apprenticeship element to help the disabled gain better access to job-specific training, something which is also suggested by the Member.

I would like to assure Members that we will continue to work with the disability sector and employers to help more persons with disabilities in their training and employment.

Sir, I thank the Minister for the supportive response. I am very glad that MCYS and Government are open to include non-SPED graduates in the Employment Credit Scheme. I would just like to know – instead of leaving it as an open request – is it possible for Government to formally include non-SPED graduates, as long as they have diagnosis and all the support of disability organisations to prove that they do need that support, can we formally include them in the Employment Credit Scheme? And, if so, when can that be done?

Sir, let me first thank Ms Denise Phua for the comment and suggestion. Yes, this is an area that we will certainly look at but let us look at the numbers for a start. I must stress that the most important thing beyond the numbers is really to get employers who are understanding and who are willing to partner the sector to re-design some of the jobs in order for the people to be placed in meaningful jobs. As to how we can better help them, having this scheme that the Member has suggested is one way. Beyond this scheme, we are also looking at other ways that we can encourage more employers to be more forthcoming in the re-design of jobs, to enable people with disabilities to join their sector.

Page: 701

At the same time, I must also stress that we need a conducive work environment where supportive colleagues can also play a part to help induct these people into the workplace. So, we will certainly look at that.

Mr Speaker, Sir, may I ask the Minister whether he would consider improving the transport facilities for the disabled in terms of transport availability to help them to get to their jobs or to their doctors; and also, in terms of financial assistance, for the needy who require such transport?

Mr Speaker, Sir, I thank Member Dr Lily Neo for her comment. Indeed, we share her concerns about the transportation for the disabled people, from home to work, and also for them to access other services. We are working on two prongs to help the access for the people with disabilities.

One prong is what we call the specialised vehicles. These are vehicles run by VWOs that provide specialised services to the disabled community to get them from point A to point B. They can book such services, for example, with the Handicapped Welfare Association (HWA), which runs some of these services.

The other prong that we are working on which we have just recently completed a Request for Proposal (RFP), is to allow some of the people in the disabled community to actually access public transport. We know that the London cab issue has come up. Licences will expire next year. We have just completed our Request for Proposal and I am happy to note that some operators have come forward to help us run a new fleet of vehicles that can take some high-back wheelchairs and motorised wheelchairs to enable our disabled community to have wider access to public transport. We will continue to look at it and closely monitor the demand to see whether there is a demand for us to expand such services to allow our disabled community to have access to the day-to-day living functions.

Page: 702

5 Mr Teo Siong Seng asked the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Finance whether the Ministry will consider implementing extraordinary financing measures like the Special Risk-Sharing Initiative (SRI) introduced as part of the resilience package launched during the financial crisis in 2008/2009 when the Government took up 80% of the risk share for the bridging loan programme, to help SMEs in the event that our economy goes into a tailspin; and (b) whether any plan has been drawn up.

Page: 702

Mr Speaker, Sir, Mr Teo Siong Seng had asked if the Government will consider implementing extraordinary financing measures, such as the Special Risk-Sharing Initiative, in the event that our economy goes into a tailspin.

While macroeconomic conditions remain sluggish, our economy continues to grow. Our credit market is stable, and unemployment rate remains low. Barring unforeseen shocks, the Ministry of Trade and Industry expects the Singapore economy to grow by 1.5% to 2.5% for the whole of 2012.

Nevertheless, I can assure Members that we are monitoring the downside risks to Singapore's economic and financial stability very closely. The Government stands ready to provide assistance to businesses and workers should there be a more significant economic downturn. The specific measures and the level of the Government's risk-sharing with businesses and with banks will be decided based on the nature and severity of any such downturn.

Page: 702

6 Ms Denise Phua Lay Peng asked the Minister for the Environment and Water Resources (a) if there is currently a general shortage of cleaners working in food centres; (b) if the Ministry will consider implementing a plan to ensure that new and old food centres are fitted with the appropriate facilities for the return of used utensils by customers; and (c) if so, whether education and enforcement measures can be put in place to ensure customers do so when the facilities are available.

Page: 702

Mr Speaker, Sir, the cleaning industry is at an inflexion point. Cleaning used to be characterised by very tough working conditions and low pay. Consequently, few Singaporeans, especially younger Singaporeans, were or are willing to enter this industry. With our recent moves to tighten the supply on foreign labour, this industry is going to have to restructure, and restructure significantly. Our vision is for our cleaners to have a fairer and higher wage and to have better working conditions. NEA is working with the Hawker Associations as well as Town Councils to engage better and more reliable cleaning companies that are willing to pay fair wages and to train their personnel and provide the necessary equipment.

Page: 703

The ultimate goal is for all hawker centres to only engage accredited cleaning companies. Efforts are currently on-going on multiple fronts to improve the standards and professionalism of the cleaning industry. We launched the NEA Clean Mark Accreditation Scheme back in July 2010. There have also been other incentive schemes to support job re-design and better equipment in order to raise productivity and professionalism so that these jobs can pay better and be more attractive.

Besides increasing cleaning standards through accreditation, we also need to encourage patrons of hawker centres to reduce the reliance on cleaners by returning their used crockery and utensils in order to speed up the cleaning process.

To be honest with you, there have been several campaigns in the past but these have been of limited success. We are reviewing the lessons learnt from these past efforts to see how we can better re-launch a tray-return initiative that is sustainable for the long term. Together with like-minded partners, such as the Singapore Kindness Movement, we aim to launch this refreshed initiative at a few hawker centres in the latter half of this year. This initiative will require both customer involvement as well as the provision of tray-return facilities to improve accessibility and the convenience of doing this. Existing centres will need to be retrofitted with tray-return facilities and, certainly, new hawker centres will be designed with these facilities in mind.

The cleanliness of our hawker centres is important not just for public health but also for the viability of our stall-holders' businesses, for the dining and quality of the experience of the patrons. All of us who operate either a business or patronise hawker centres need to do our part.

The future for the cleaning industry as a whole is that all of us are going to have to learn to cope with fewer cleaners. This means the different stakeholders will each have to play their respective roles. For instance, as patrons, as customers, we will all have to be more gracious and more considerate, not only for the burden of the cleaners but also for the patrons to join us at the table or eat subsequently at the same table as us. I would point out that it is very wrong to take the attitude that this is a paid-for service, therefore, I do not need to return the tray or I do not need to clean up the mess that I leave behind. I think we should flag this out as simply ungracious and inconsiderate behaviour.

Secondly, the owners of such facilities – certainly, in the case of hawker centres, NEA will play a role – will have to pay more attention to better design and to improving the workflow so that it is easier to maintain a place and keep it clean.

Page: 704

Thirdly, we need enlightened employers who will pay people a fair wage, improve working conditions, invest in the necessary training and automation.

Sir, I thank the Minister. I fully support his direction. I appreciate that. The food centre cleaner jobs are, like the Minister said, often shunned by locals and, in fact, often staffed by the elderly who are mostly unskilled and who have no other options for work. Therefore, installing facilities for the patrons to return their used utensils would, indeed, be very important. I have seen it happened successfully in organisations like IKEA and some more progressive companies at their staff canteens. I do strongly believe that it needs to be done. Since it reduces the hardship of, especially, the elderly cleaners and it does encourage co-ownership of maintaining a clean and pleasant environment for both the patrons and the public, I would like to ask if Minister could accelerate and be more aggressive in the installation of these facilities, especially for the current upgrading of existing food centres/hawker centres and, for the new ones as well.

As usual, I totally agree with you.

When?

We are re-launching tray-return in the last quarter of this year. So, within the next few months, you should see some work in some of the centres. All the new centres will certainly have this, and then we will have to retrofit. We have altogether 107 hawker centres, so it is not something I can do overnight.

But the more important message is to flag out behaviour and social norms for Singaporeans. Singapore may be a clean place but it is often due to the hard work of the cleaners rather than the consideration and behaviour of us, Singaporeans. We need better role models and I can think of countries like Japan, Korea, and I have heard, nowadays, even Taiwan, are cleaner, not because they have more cleaners but because people are more considerate and more gracious. That is a harder message but it is one which I hope I will have support from Members of this House, both from the Opposition and the Government to push through. We need that and I think the Opposition, now that you are running Town Councils and hawker centres and cleanliness in your own areas, I think you will agree with me this is an issue which we all need to work together on.

Sir, I thank the Minister for that assurance. In the Ministry's process of retrofitting the hawker centres, whether the new ones or those undergoing HIP, some contractors I spoke with have given the feedback that the design of the tables and chairs, and the spacing between them do not allow for mechanised cleaning equipment to go in and clean under the table. So, that simple retrofitting will need to take into consideration cleaning equipment. Secondly, the location of the cable power points. They are located too far apart so you have the long cables to bring the equipment in. So, in the process of retrofitting the hawker centres, I hope the Ministry can take those factors into consideration as well.

Page: 705

Again, I totally, agree with you.

Mr Alex Yam, last question.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. I thank the Minister for his reply. I agree with the views of my two fellow hon Members. As Minister has said, cleaning up after ourselves is an act of consideration. However, I have personally come across a number of cleaners and seen other patrons who have been told not to clear our trays because the cleaners were fearful that they might be rebuked by their supervisors, or worse off, lose their jobs because of that. So, while promoting kindness through this process, I would like to ask if the Ministry would also have guidelines in place to ensure that our low-wage workers who, perhaps, depend on this as their sole livelihood, would have their livelihood protected, as well as ensure that operators do not use this simply as an effective cost-cutting measure by getting consumers to clean up for them.

I would like to reassure the House that no cleaner is going to lose the job because we all are more gracious and more considerate, and clean up after ourselves. In fact, there is going to be a structural and chronic shortage of cleaners in the future. This is not a problem which we are going to solve simply by opening the floodgates or even trying to pay people more. Let me assure the House this will not result in unemployment amongst cleaners. In fact, the opposite is going to be the situation in the future.

Page: 705

7 Mr Baey Yam Keng asked the Minister for Education (a) what controls does the Ministry have in place to ensure that institutions of education manage their resources, teaching staff and facilities such that they are sufficient to support their student populations; (b) what are the guidelines on enrolment numbers and student population growth to ensure that the students' learning experience is not compromised; and (c) whether the Ministry or Council for Private Education is aware of and approves of lessons being conducted in temporary tents in the case of LASALLE College of the Arts.

Page: 705

Mr Speaker, Sir, our publicly-funded Institutes of Higher Learning (IHLs) have the responsibility and autonomy to manage their own resources to meet the educational needs of their students. They are held accountable through Annual Performance Reviews and five-yearly Quality Assurance Reviews carried out by external panels appointed by the MOE. MOE also works with the IHLs to plan their annual student intake and enrolment, taking into account the manpower needs of the economy and the capacity of the institutions.

Page: 706

All Private Education Institutions (PEIs) have to comply with requirements in the Private Education (PE) Act, which include ensuring the adequacy and relevance of facilities for students' learning needs.

In the case of LASALLE, we understand that it had embarked on plans in early 2012 to expand its teaching and learning spaces to create a conducive environment for its students. However, there was a slight delay to the works, and the tentage was a temporary measure to accommodate the students while renovations were being completed. The tentage has been removed since 3 September 2012.

Page: 706

8 Ms Ellen Lee asked the Minister for Education whether the Ministry accepts the university ranking tables produced by agencies such as Quacquarelli Symonds and Times Higher Education, even if these agencies rank our Autonomous Universities unfavourably.

Page: 706

Mr Speaker, Sir, the international university ranking tables compare how our Autonomous Universities fare with respect to other universities overseas. However, each table uses different methods and ranking criteria to reflect the emphasis it places on the different aspects of a university. For example, the Shanghai Jiao Tong University ranking places 90% weighting on research-related indicators, whereas another very commonly cited ranking, the Quacquarelli Symonds (QS) ranking is highly dependent on the academic reputation of a university based on the survey responses of other peer institutions. It is important to interpret the results of such international rankings carefully.

On our part – MOE – we assess the performance of our Autonomous Universities on multiple dimensions, covering both education and research. For example, indicators on student quality, graduate outcomes and resource utilisation are used. The Ministry also takes into account the findings from the Quality Assurance External Review Panel which we commissioned and which is made up of independent local and international industry leaders, professionals and eminent academics.

Page: 707

9 Mr Zainudin Nordin asked the Acting Minister for Manpower in light of efforts to uplift productivity so as to improve the salary of our workers (a) whether there has been a significant improvement in productivity; (b) what are the challenges faced; and (c) whether the goals set on improvement of workers' salaries will be met.

Page: 707

Mr Speaker, Sir, we need good quality economic growth to provide well for our people. As our labour force growth slows, we will need to ensure that good productivity growth continues, so that our lives can continue to improve. Hence, in 2010, we set an average productivity target of 2% to 3% per annum. These are stretch targets, but they are necessary. In 2010, we saw exceptional productivity growth of 11.1%, but this is one-off as it was due to the strong recovery from the economic downturn in 2008 and 2009. Inevitably, coming off a high base in 2010, our productivity growth in 2011 was 1%. In fact, productivity this year has not been very positive either. This is because employment has grown much faster than GDP over the period.

While productivity growth measured in terms of value added per worker is really quite sensitive to economic cycles and can swing substantially over the short term, the low productivity growth rates over the past one-and-a-half years is a matter of concern and it is something that we are watching quite carefully. It shows really how urgently we need to step up our productivity efforts. We do need to press on with efforts to restructure our economy, meaning to move up the productivity chain. Companies need to reduce their reliance on manpower, and workers need to continue upgrading themselves so that they can take on the higher value-added jobs created as we restructure the economy. If we are to succeed, we must persist in the gradual tightening of our foreign worker policy.

The Government is fully committed to helping businesses and workers to manage these challenges, and will continue to provide support through the many programmes and schemes. The National Productivity and Continuing Education Council (NPCEC) has taken a sectoral approach to engage industries and develop productivity roadmaps tailored for each priority sector. A considerable amount of time and effort has been spent in ensuring that the strategies and schemes can support progressive companies and help them cope in our tight labour market through productivity improvements. Much of these come about from discussing with the industry themselves.

Over the long term, we also want to restructure our economy into one that provides higher value-added and higher skilled jobs, so that Singaporeans will have improved opportunities and be able to earn higher incomes. While many of these programmes and schemes are in their initial implementation phase, take-up rates have been encouraging, and we expect this to increase further. I have said this quite often, it is very important for industries, businesses to provide feedback so that we can continue to tailor the programmes so that it is right on target and that it is effective for the sectors concerned.

Page: 708

Now, let me just share an example. There is this programme, the iSPRINT scheme, or the Increase SME Productivity with Infocomm Adoption & Transformation, which is administered by IDA. It helps SMEs defray the costs of implementing info-comm solutions. The scheme has seen strong take-up since it was started in April 2011. More than 1,800 SMEs have benefited from the scheme. Companies can claim up to 70% of the qualifying costs for the purchase of info-comm technology (ICT) solutions, such as an accounting and payroll system, or enterprise resource planning solutions. The payoffs for such investments will come through over time. This is just one example amongst many schemes available. We are committed to developing more schemes as the need arises.

We have committed significant resources to this productivity drive. There are many schemes available for companies to tap on. In fact, one of the common feedback from companies is that because of the large number of productivity schemes available, it is not easy for them to navigate through all of them and to determine which scheme suits them best. This is a challenge we do need to continue to address. The best designed schemes with the best intentions are not very helpful if no one makes use of them. Therefore, we need to continue to work to improve them, to improve the accessibility of these schemes so that companies can really tap on them, and like I said before, it is very important that we receive the feedback so that we can continue to refine the process.

While we focus on implementing the various sectoral productivity strategies well, we must importantly not lose sight of why we are doing this in the first place. Productivity is not an end in itself. What we are trying to do is to achieve better outcomes, better incomes, better living standards for all Singaporeans in a sustainable way. We believe that increasing productivity is the right way to do so, without jeopardising, at the same time, our competitiveness, which is important, to make sure that companies remain viable because when companies remain viable, jobs are created for our people. At the same time, our workers' livelihood depends on this.

Data has shown, by and large, that this is the right strategy. Real wages of our workers have risen broadly in line with productivity improvements over the long term. In parallel with our productivity drive, we also need to press on with efforts to help workers upgrade their skills and move up to higher value jobs, while keeping the labour market tight.

Our target of 2% to 3% productivity growth per annum is, like I said, a stretch target. It is not easy because most developed economies tend to achieve an average of 1% to 2% productivity growth per annum. But we believe that there is an upside. When we compare ourselves to many of these developed countries, we think that there is quite a lot of room for us to grow in that area. If we are able to hit the upper end of this range over the long term, we believe that we should be in a good position to provide opportunities for higher wages for all Singaporeans and, at the same time, to remain competitive.

Page: 709

A supplementary question, Sir. I agree that productivity is a good strategy to enhance the salary of our workers in the long run, but the real challenge is that it is a stretch target. How then can we make people understand – employers and employees – that productivity is the way to go, and are we seeing results in real wages of our workers? And are we expecting some of these to kick in within the next few years before the 10-year target that we have set for ourselves?

Mr Speaker, Sir, I would like to thank Mr Zainudin for his follow-on questions. What we have seen in the last 10 years is that productivity growth has moved in tandem with real wage increase. Productivity growth was about 1.7% in the course of the last decade, and real total wages grew at about 1.6% per annum during the same period. Our sense is that with wage productivity growth, as a whole, there would be a possibility for wages to rise at the same time.

But as the Member mentioned, it is also important at the same time to have a tight labour market. This is where it is important for us to continue to grow the economy so that it remains competitive. That will also create pressures, which is why the effort of productivity does not exist on its own. The effort in terms of raising productivity is very much tied to our policies in terms of tightening the workforce, especially the foreign workforce. Something that we have embarked on – it largely peaked in the 2008 period and has gradually come down. We continue to step up. There is a range of measures that we take, whether it is a DRC, whether it is a levy and so on. That is very much an effort that we need to continue to focus on.

As we tighten the labour market, especially access to foreign labour, companies are feeling the squeeze. We know that. We speak to the companies regularly. But at the same time, we have to begin to restructure. They need to think about how they can operate with fewer workers. We look at developed economies elsewhere. Companies in the same sectors, in the service sector, in the retail sector and so on, their productivity levels are significantly higher. They also operate with a much more restricted access to foreign labour.

It is a combination of these measures which we need to unfold in the course of the next few years. This is part of the whole restructuring of the economy, where we can move towards lesser reliance on foreign workers. The workforce still needs to be diverse. That is something we need to accept. Most Singaporeans understand that. But we need to manage that growth and manage that dependency. In the process, companies must adjust.

Page: 710

Forced by circumstances, companies, in order to survive, in order to thrive, they will have to find measures to adjust. Secondly, we can also help in the process, which is why the whole range of incentives and programme schemes are available to incentivise the companies. SPRING works actively with companies as well. We have a lot of dialogues and a lot of sessions with the federations and associations. The best practices are also shared.

We are confident that companies will adjust. We have begun to see companies adjusting. My message to the companies, whenever I meet them, is we are not U-turning on this policy. This is a path that we need to embark on and we cannot turn back in terms of loosening the tightened-up measures. It is really a combination of these measures that will unfold over the course of the next few years, which I think will put us in a very good position to compete on a very competitive basis but at the same time, generating good jobs for people, and with that, good wages as well.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I would like to ask the Acting Minister this: Minister mentioned that overseas, in similar sectors, they are more productive. But a lot of SMEs have given the feedback that they do not know what to do. I just want to ask, does MOM have any expertise or consultancies that can guide SMEs along, so that they can further improve on their productivity?

I would like to thank the Member for her question. It is an important feedback and something that we are aware of. The industry is very large. Especially with SMEs, we do recognise, in particular for the smaller enterprises, they may not always have the capacity and resources to really scour the market to find out what is happening elsewhere. We do know that when we look at other industries, for example in F&B industry – if you look at, say, Japan, the way they construct, it is almost like a production line. The way you operate your shop, your restaurant, it is really geared towards maximising the productivity, maximising the output, in terms of the fewer workers that they have. So, the same person could be the cashier, he could be serving, he could be also running from the kitchen and so on; because they operate in a much tighter labour market.

Similarly so in the construction industry which the Member would be familiar with. I just came back from Australia and I have seen how the industry has transformed. They have a limited workforce. They also have a very highly skilled workforce. The difference, of course, is theirs is a domestic workforce. But, as a result of that, the construction industry has also transformed into a lot more pre-fabricated work. Something that we are encouraging our industries to go into and a lot of other new innovations which I am quite keen to see how they can be best explored, and a combination of these various events.

Page: 711

We are looking at how study visits have taken place. Companies have participated. SMEs have participated in study visits led sometimes by industries, sometimes by Government. It is important to see how it is done. It is one thing to read about it, hear about it but when you go there and you see that, "Oh! It is quite straightforward, I could actually, potentially do it." The key is how we share these best practices. I have mentioned it before that it is always challenging because they are all competitors as well. Some companies might have taken on board some of these changes. What we really need and I do urge the business federations and associations is to come together and help the industry as a whole, because the ability to do things differently and to do it better is out there. Some companies have embraced it.

What we need is to make sure this information is shared and transmitted across-the-board. This is an effort that we continue to work on and we will be quite happy to consider options – even putting materials online, pamphlets, whatever means available – to provide companies with ideas. That is something that we do want to explore. We do see the upside. It is a very fair point. We do get that feedback but we are actively trying to promote this effort in terms of gathering lessons learnt from overseas. That is the continual effort that we need to press on with.

Ms Jessica Tan, a last supplementary question.

I would like to ask the Minister about the real wage increase and also better quality jobs. Can Minister share on whether there have been Singaporeans taking up these better jobs that have been created, and also what has been the real wage increase in terms of the jobs that have seen real wage increase?

I would like to thank the Member for the question. We have talked about how real wages have grown, especially in the last five to six years. As we have mentioned, when we look at the decade as a whole, in the first half of the decade we did not really see particularly strong income growth. If anything, in real terms, there was a slight decrease. But for the second half, we were grappling with how the economy was going, how do we then anchor ourselves in a competitive world to find the right opportunities. That was also the period when we began to look at new opportunities. We did also, as we acknowledged, open up access to foreign workers coming in, in terms of the foreign labour workforce, which we know has also caused some strain on our infrastructure.

But what that period also produced was a growth in terms of jobs created, and very good quality jobs. That was also the same period where we saw real income growth. And it is not just at the middle class and the upper end but even at the low-income level, that was where we actually saw the growth, which helped to improve the overall data for the decade.

Page: 712

What is quite clear to us is that economic growth remains important. Not growth at all cost, but good quality economic growth. When we look at how we have evolved over the last decade, it has put us in a decent position. We need to calibrate because there are obviously disamenities that come and the labour force has grown a bit faster than perhaps we could have adapted to. But we are in a strong position to adjust.

We do see jobs continue to be created. Foreign multi-national companies and good Singapore companies remain anchored here, even though we know that Singapore is not a low-cost operating base. But companies find it worthwhile because there is stability, there is certainty. Over time, we have also developed as a hub in many different areas. Much as the world is wired up, a lot of businesses still need to be done on a face-to-face basis. People need to meet. There is a legal infrastructure. There is a financial infrastructure in place. And this hub is created over time, and you create a dependency that exists here. That is why companies remain here. When good companies remain here, good jobs are created.

We all know that, increasingly, there are more young people entering the workforce as graduates − one in three; in fact, one in two if we include all the Polytechnic graduates who, after working a few years, will then go on to acquire more degrees. With that, come aspirations, and aspirations for good dynamic competitive jobs. Singapore, by and large, has become that way. But to do that, we need to maintain a decent level of economic growth while at the same time making sure that Singaporeans are at the core of it, so that these good quality jobs can be created to meet the aspirations of young Singaporeans.

That is something that we will continue to work at. In terms of take-up rates, in terms of employment for young graduates and so on, we have seen that the employment rates are good. We do see that real wages continue to grow. But that is not something we want to take for granted. This competition is quite acute, it is something that we need to try to calibrate, and at the same time, maintaining it at a sustainable level.

Page: 712

10 Mr Teo Siong Seng asked the Acting Minister for Manpower (a) whether the Ministry has monitored the number of Work Permits and S Passes that have not been renewed and the number of new Work Permits and S Passes issued for the last six months; and (b) what is the net increase/decrease in Work Permits and S Passes issued.

Page: 713

There are three things we are juggling. Firstly, we need to calibrate our foreign manpower growth via a range of adjustments to our framework and measures. Secondly, we are mindful that companies need to do well, because they create jobs and they create good jobs for Singaporeans. I do not just mean local companies; I mean foreign companies that decide to base themselves here, when they do have decent options elsewhere. Thirdly, we need companies to be more productive and not just depend on easy access to foreign labour.

My Ministry is tracking the impact of our policies closely, including the number of Work Permits, S Passes and Employment Passes (EPs) and how they are being renewed and issued. We will release the numbers when the 2012 annual foreign workforce data is published early next year.

What I can share now is that there has been a higher number of EPs and S Passes that have not been renewed. From 1 January 2012 to 31 July 2012, 30% of EP and S Pass applications were rejected, an increase from 26% for the whole of 2011. Twenty-nine per cent out of the total number of rejected applications were for renewals, an increase compared to 21% for the whole of 2011.

The higher rejection rates were due to the following reasons. One, the increase in EP and S Pass qualifying salaries from 1 July 2011. To give companies time to adjust, existing EP and S Pass holders who were due for renewal before 1 January 2012 were given at least an additional year to meet the prevailing more stringent criteria. This is to allow companies time to adjust.

Two, the tightening of the educational qualifications for EP, and with older applicants having to command a higher salary commensurate with their working experience and the quality expected of them, which will kick in from 1 January 2012. This is quite a fundamental and important reframing of EP criteria. It is beginning to take effect, and it is probably important in terms of levelling the playing field for all Singaporeans.

Three, the tightening of the S Pass sub-Dependency Ratio Ceiling (DRC) from 25% to 20% of the total workforce from 1 July 2012, has taken effect for all new foreign workers. However, we have also given companies some time to adjust their strategies. Their existing foreign workers will have up to 30 June 2014 to comply with the new DRCs.

Essentially, that is the data as of now. We will tabulate and track the figures. At the end of it, there will be a more complete picture when we look at how we tabulate the figures as a whole. What I will say is that we need to calibrate. It is not about turning off the tap. As I said, we all recognise that we do need access to foreign workers in our workforce at the different levels. Because what they provide is a diverse workforce which remains important in keeping our companies competitive. At the same time, we need to balance the different things that we need to juggle. How do we keep companies viable? For them to be viable, they do need access to a diverse workforce but, at the same time, being able to generate good jobs for Singaporeans and to make sure that Singaporeans remain the core of the workforce.

Page: 714

You can see the tensions pulling in the different directions. Unfortunately, it is not a precise science where we can calibrate all the different dials to exactly the right kind of outcomes we want, because we do not operate on a quota basis like COEs, where I cap the number of COEs we release every month. That is not the direction we want to go because I do not think it will be right to allocate manpower on that basis. But we use the market, we use some of these measures that we put in place, whether DRC or levies, so that there is a cost to companies employing them.

As I said earlier, a combination with other measures will incentivise companies to transform. We hope that we can calibrate downwards in a much more significant way, the dependency on foreign workers or foreign talent, so that the numbers can come down, and it is much more manageable but, at the same time, not affecting competitiveness so that new jobs can continue to be created for Singaporeans.

I thank the Minister for the answer. I do not think he answered the part about Work Permit. He mentioned about Employment Pass and S Pass. In fact, the reason I raised this question is that many of my Members in the Chambers have a common comment about the old Work Permit. When they went to renew their permits, they did not get the permits renewed, and the new ones did not get approved. The impression is that the total number of Work Permits, since the policy kicked in, has, in fact, been reduced.

We were given the impression that there will be no increase in the number of Work Permits and S Passes, and the pricing mechanism will come in. That means the total number of Work Permits will not be reduced, or will grow very slowly. The impression of many businesses is that the new applications do not get approved and the old ones do not get renewed. The impression on the ground is that the total number of Work Permits is reducing.

Mr Speaker, Sir, in some sense, it is a happy problem. Not so happy for the individual companies. Let me explain. From an individual company's perspective, I agree. I get a lot of emails from companies and we meet many of them on a regular basis. There will be individual companies that will find difficulties in renewing Work Permits, S Pass and even EP. They may not even get new ones.

At the same time, from the market perspective, from the overall economic perspective, the demand is continuing to increase. Companies are growing across the board. Some companies may not get it; other companies do. There are new companies coming online as well, and they are all competing for the workforce that is available. Overall, even as we are calibrating downwards, it is not that the growth has become negative. We have basically slowed down the growth, but it is still growing. We need to watch that growth to make sure that from a macro perspective, it is at the rate that we can sustain; it is a rate that we can be comfortable with. We are still looking at, from a broad basis, about one-third of our overall workforce to comprise of foreign workforce.

Page: 715

That is a target from the ESC and which is something that we want to keep to. It will hover at about that level, but the way we calibrate it is through these different measures. Individual companies may find difficulties but other companies manage to get them. And a lot of it will depend on the different criteria put in place.

What I would like to assure companies is that we are fully aware that companies do need to draw on foreign workers, foreign talent in various forms but, at the same time, we also need to wean companies off easy access to them. In order for that to take place, they need to change the way they do business. Like I mentioned earlier, we do think there is upside certainly in a number of industries and a certain number of businesses where they can transform. Many have begun to do that. Anecdotally, a lot of them are looking at us to make a change and re-calibrate back to the old levels. The point is we are not. Going forward, this is something that we have to do, and companies are taking that on board. And we would like to support the companies in that process.

Sir, I would like to ask a clarification with regard to the calibration of EPs and S Passes. Rightly so, companies are recognising the need to adjust, and in the process of adjusting and calibrating – as these are higher-skilled workers that many of their businesses are dependent on – will the Ministry also look at flexibility in allowing for extra time, in terms of short extensions, to allow them as they look for new workers to also do skills transfer, especially for EPs?

There is indeed space for us to look at individual appeals on a case-by-case basis. For new applicants, I think the rules will kick in quite firmly and quite decisively. I do not think there is any room for manoeuvre with regard to new applicants. But for older applicants, that means those who have been with the companies, and this is where we do understand because someone has been with the company for some time, whether on EP or S Pass, I think there is also, over time, productivity that has been built in because they are fully familiar with the system. So, that is where I think we can look at on a case-to-case basis, how do we then accede to requests and appeals.

There is also a challenge because we get appeals from all over. Every company will swear that theirs is a special circumstance, they need exceptions, and if we go down that path, it actually becomes difficult because the whole framework will start to unravel. So, there is space, but it does mean that we need to scrutinise the various appeals and, in some cases, we have to accede but not all cases. A lot depends on the circumstances of these companies.

Page: 716

Ms Mary Liew, last question.

I would like to thank the Minister for assuring us of the happy problem. I have a supplementary question for the Minister. Would the Minister consider a tripartite framework where available vacancies in specific industries are made known to the unions to enable us to alert our members of such employment opportunities, before approving these Employment Passes for foreigners? This is also to assure Mr Teo Siong Seng here that we are social partners and we are going all the way out to help him.

If I may complete the tripartite conversation between the Member and Mr Teo, to provide the Government perspective. There have been calls, and they are not unreasonable, to look at whether we want to tie the approval of Employment Passes with this step in between. I am open to considering that as a possibility. That is something that we can do without hot-wiring that process in a formal way for now.

Again, it is a balance. We do feel that having a fairly flexible adept workforce is important in keeping the companies competitive. I just want to return to this key point – that at the end of it, it must make sense for Singaporeans and Singaporean workers, because that is at the core of our interest. How do you then construct a framework that allows that to happen? Having a flexible adept workforce remains important because it allows the whole economy to remain that way, and to remain competitive.

We do see that there are gaps, so there are matching issues. This is where we think that we could do more to plug the gaps where the needs are. We have begun to do that, and we can extend that effort. For example, I get emails from companies appealing and saying, "Look, I have been trying very hard, but I cannot find Singaporeans who want to do this particular job." Then, what we try to do is link them up with WDA, with e2i, where they know who are the Singaporeans who are also looking for openings, and then try to match them. Sometimes, there is actually a match in terms of people with certain expertise and with those needs. But we also find that it does not always work out that way because sometimes the companies say, "Notwithstanding they are skilled in a way, but I do not want to take them".

Is it due to inappropriateness or the inappropriate quality of the candidates, or is it because they are still looking at perhaps cheaper options elsewhere? Those are the dilemmas that we need to manage. But I do agree that we can carry out that matching process a lot better. It is really about information − how do we match our awareness of the people, even though our unemployment rate is low – about 3%. But it does represent 50,000-60,000 Singaporeans. How do I make sure that the awareness of who they are, where they are, which sectors they are in, so that we can help to upgrade them and so on, through courses, but at the same time where are the needs in industries, and see how best we can match them. So, working with the unions and companies would be an important step to see how we can move ahead. But to formalise it, that is something that we are open to, but I do not think we need to do that at the moment. It is something that we can consider.

Page: 717

11 Mr Ang Hin Kee asked the Minister for National Development (a) whether the Ministry has completed its review of the Design, Build and Sell Scheme (DBSS) for HDB flats following the suspension of land sales for the scheme a year ago; (b) whether the review has looked into how it will impact owners of DBSS flats; (c) whether HDB has taken efforts to engage the developers in the design and layout of DBSS flats, keeping in mind the needs of public housing residents; and (d) what is the role of HDB and the authority it has to resolve disputes between the developers of DBSS and the residents.

Page: 717

The Design, Build and Sell Scheme (DBSS) was introduced in 2005 to give flat buyers more choice by allowing private developers to design and build some public flats. While HDB would provide broad planning parameters, such as the mix of flat sizes and the range of social and community facilities to be provided, the developer is responsible for the design, construction quality and the pricing of the flat. Nonetheless, HDB would actively engage the developers by sharing good practices and relevant experiences in public housing development. HDB would also provide useful feedback to the developers and their consultants during the design and construction phases, with particular attention on safety, security and maintenance issues.

As DBSS projects are designed and built by the private sector, HDB's primary role is to ensure that only those who are eligible for public housing can buy such housing, and to disburse housing grants and provide concessionary loans to the eligible buyers. As DBSS flats are sold directly by private developers to flat buyers, resolution of any contractual disputes, including defects, rests with the buyer and the developer.

Given the current priority to ramp up the supply of Build-To-Order flats and Executive Condominium units, my Ministry has suspended the DBSS land sales, and is not rushing to complete the review of this scheme.

Sir, I thank the Minister for his reply. I have two supplementary questions. First, some of the residents in an Ang Mo Kio DBSS project claim that HDB had previously publicly committed that there will not be any building of BTOs in mature estates. I hope that Minister can clarify whether there has been such a policy, or if there were other factors that could have led to such perception. Secondly, notwithstanding that there is a contractual relationship between the buyer and the developer, I wish the Minister would reconsider if the HDB could take a more active stance in mediating the differences and disputes that arise between the residents and the developer.

Page: 718

Sir, there has been no such public or private commitment that there would be no more BTOs in mature estates. How could it be? How would you satisfy the many needs and demands from residents in mature estates who want their children to buy flats near to where they are staying? In fact, when we launched the particular DBSS project in the Member's constituency, there were several BTO projects in other mature estates as well.

As for the disputes between the Member's residents and the developer, I think HDB is playing a very active part to help them, counsel them, advise them, to resolve their conflicts. Whether we can play a mediating role depends on the specific issues involved. At the end of the day, we must be mindful that it is a contractual obligation between the buyer and the seller. We can advise the residents, perhaps with the local Member of Parliament to see what is the problem, and whether there is a way to resolve some of those issues.

Page: 718

12 Mr Liang Eng Hwa asked the Minister for National Development (a) whether HDB has taken extra efforts and measures to minimise noise, dust and other disamenities in areas where housing construction has been significantly ramped up; and (b) whether HDB and the other agencies have planned and developed adequate infrastructural enhancements and amenities ahead of demand.

Page: 718

Sir, HDB is mindful of the temporary inconveniences that are inevitable during construction. However, HDB endeavours to undertake all possible measures to, firstly, safeguard public safety and, secondly, keep the noise and dust levels within limits set by NEA.

Beyond NEA's regulations, where possible, HDB also works closely with its contractors to adopt additional measures to minimise various disamenities. These include the greater use of precast components produced off-site so as to minimise on-site noise generation, as well as using high hoarding with screen nets to contain the dust and abate noise. To minimise mosquito breeding, HDB also requires contractors to carry out weekly site checks and maintain good housekeeping on site. In addition, HDB officers are also stationed at the construction site to address any feedback and suggestions residents might have.

In the introduction of new HDB developments, HDB plans and implements the necessary infrastructure to serve them ahead of demand, in line with our long-term development plans. To do this, HDB coordinates with the respective agencies, such as LTA, for the construction of rail lines, expressways and major roads and, PUB, for the construction of sewers. HDB also plans for amenities and works with the agencies to provide more schools, hawker centres, health facilities and commercial facilities in tandem with the growth of our estates.

Page: 719

Sir, I thank the Senior Minister of State for his assurance. I would like to follow up with practical questions. In a mature town like Bukit Panjang where we have something like eight BTOs announced, the concern among residents, understandably, is whether all the infrastructure like roads, public transport and facilities and amenities like hawker centres and so on, would be able to cope with the increase in population. The problem on the ground is always this: there are so many agencies to deal with, and each time when the construction starts, there is no co-ordinating agency to work through. So, I am glad that the Senior Minister of State has said that HDB should be the agency. I want to ask the Senior Minister of State this: should there be a situation where, for example, LTA says that "We cannot build any wider roads here now; we cannot have more road links or more public transport", is HDB still going to proceed with some of these constructions, knowing that there is going to be congestion on the ground?

My second question is whether in the ramp-up to this housing programme, is it reasonable to build eight BTOs at about the same time, all at one go, in a mature estate? Should HDB not phase out some of these at different locations so that we do not have a complete tsunami of housing construction going on at the same time?

Well, I thank the Member for his questions. I see that there are immediate worries but also longer term happiness because his town would be transformed in three to four years' time. When HDB plans for any major expansion, they would do so by taking advantage of existing infrastructure that are being laid out well ahead of time in that particular estate. So, in Bukit Panjang, I would assume that the entire town is planned in such a way that it is to house a certain density or population and the resulting vehicular density and so on. On that basis, while residents may see empty land parcels in their neighbourhood in the last few years, they should expect the parcels to be filled up in a way that will be supported by a certain housing density when built up. On that premise, HDB will go forward to launch new projects onsite. As Minister has said, some of these sites are built so that they can take advantage of the existing amenities.

I would like to assure the Member that in his particular location of Bukit Panjang, where eight BTOs have been announced and are under construction, HDB keeps a close eye on what is happening on the ground to make sure that as and when the project is executed, mitigating measures on pollution will be taken to ensure that inconvenience to the residents is minimised.

On the Member's second question: HDB will remain the co-ordinating agency on the ground. If there are local bottlenecks that he observes, even at this stage of construction, we will be quite happy to call for inter-agency meetings to see how we can "de-bottleneck" some of these choke points.

Page: 720

Mr Speaker, Sir, I would like to ask Minister how often does he has these inter-ministry meetings. Certainly, I do not agree that there is good co-ordination. For example, in Yishun South, I have six BTOs, but the road network that you are going to provide to serve the residents in that area will be completed only in 2015, whereas I will have five BTOs completed by 2014. So, there will be a big jam along Lentor Avenue. The other aspect is the bus services. Definitely, bus services are grossly inadequate. Is this being discussed, when was it discussed, and how will it be resolved?

Mr Speaker, Sir, I thank the Member for her questions as well. The co-ordination meetings are on-going. In the recent ramp-up of BTO flat construction, we have learnt a lesson internally that we also need to plan on a longer time horizon. In other words, some of the major infrastructures, such as vehicular network and rail access, will take a much longer time than construction of HDB flat precincts. That co-ordination for short-term construction projects and longer term planning are on-going, and we would intensify them as and when necessary. In the Member's particular area, we would suggest that we continue to stay closely co-ordinated, in terms of bringing the various pieces of infrastructure to take place at about the same time, so that the inconvenience on the ground can be minimised and shortened. We will convey the Member's concerns to MOT and LTA.

Mr Ang Hin Kee, last question.

Thank you, Sir. A follow-up question for the Senior Minister of State: when I liaised with HDB about the BTO projects, they made reference to the fact that a lot of the plans are reflected in the URA Masterplan for 2008, and indicated to residents that they could refer to the URA website, or the publicly available information concerning the URA project plans, housing plans and plot ratios and the likes of it. It is not co-ordinated within the HDB domain, or within the HDB website to describe to people what is going to happen. You have multiple agency information that requires individuals to navigate in order to understand the development on the ground. I hope that in the co-ordination effort with HDB, they could synthesise some of the information so that residents have a better idea as to what is going to happen to their town, what kinds of developments are going to take place over the next few years, and how the masterplan will affect their living environment as a whole. Then, they are better informed and know what choice they have to make, what neighbourhood they are going to stay in.

Well, on an on-going basis, HDB does conduct briefings to the local MPs, and the entire GRC sometimes, to update them on key projects that will take place or are scheduled over the next few years. I personally attended a number of such briefings. I find them very useful. What may be useful, going forward, is to make available some of this information publicly, to the residents. We have to do so carefully, because as soon as we make it public, we also lose some flexibility on subsequent fine-tuning or adjustments or acceleration or push-backs on some of the plans. We will discuss with the local Member of Parliament and see how best to have meaningful communications with the residents.

Page: 721

13 Mr R Dhinakaran asked the Minister for Trade and Industry (a) if he will provide an update on the status of (i) Singapore's FTA negotiations with EU; and (ii) the second review of the Comprehensive Economic Cooperation Agreement with India; and (b) whether there are any specific considerations that are holding back the conclusion of these processes.

Page: 721

Mr Speaker, Sir, our economic relations with the EU and India are well-established, and both countries are important markets for our companies. The launch of the EU-Singapore Free Trade Agreement (EUSFTA) and the on-going second review of the Comprehensive Economic Co-operation Agreement (CECA) with India reflect the interest of Singapore-based companies in these markets, and vice-versa.

The EU-Singapore FTA negotiations were launched in December 2009, and 11 rounds of negotiations have been held so far. The negotiations cover the full range of issues typically covered in a high-quality and comprehensive FTA. These include trade in goods and services, investment, competition policy, intellectual property rights, non-tariff barriers to trade, government procurement and sustainable development.

Negotiations have gone well and are now in an advanced stage. There are a few outstanding issues which both sides are working hard to resolve. Both the EU and Singapore remain hopeful that the negotiations can be concluded later this year.

The Comprehensive Economic Co-operation Agreement (CECA) was concluded between Singapore and India in 2005. The agreement provides for a review mechanism that allows both sides to update and improve the agreement to maintain its relevance to businesses. The key outcomes of the first review concluded in 2007 resulted in improvements in the ability for Singapore-based companies to gain access into the Indian market, and a "Special Scheme for Registration of Generic Medicinal Products" for India.

The second CECA Review is on-going. It was launched in June 2010 and six rounds of inter-sessional meetings have been held so far. Singapore and India are seeking improvements in the goods, services and investment chapters of the agreement. Unfortunately, the review is taking longer than expected to conclude, but both sides are committed to concluding the Review by the end of this year.

Page: 722

Thank you, Minister, for updating on these FTAs. I have two supplementary questions. What is the status of the free trade negotiations between India and ASEAN in terms of the services and investment chapter? My second question: eventually, if it is implemented, what would be the impact on the bilateral FTA, that is the CECA, that we have with India?

As Members are aware, India and ASEAN concluded the Trade in Goods Agreement a couple of years ago and we are in the process of negotiating the services and investment chapters of the agreement. We are making good progress. There have been some hold-ups bilaterally between India and some ASEAN member countries, but, more recently, some of these are being resolved. So, again, we are hopeful that we can conclude this at the end of this year.

On the bilateral implications of the CECA, I think this has been generally positive. If you track the growth of trade, it has been very robust between India and Singapore since we concluded the CECA. Similarly, investment flows have been very good bilaterally between our two countries.

Page: 722

14 Asst Prof Tan Kheng Boon Eugene asked the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Home Affairs (a) whether there were breaches of rules and regulations governing outdoor rallies by political parties at the 2001, 2006, 2011 general elections and the 2012 by-election; (b) if so, (i) how many breach(es) were there and what is the nature of the breach(es); (ii) whether any action was taken against the political parties concerned; and (c) what can and will be done to ensure political parties and electoral candidates' strict observance of rules and regulations on outdoor rallies, especially in complying with the end times of the rallies, in the interest of public order and safety.

Page: 722

Mr Speaker, there were 31 breaches of the rules and regulations governing outdoor rallies by contesting parties during the various elections held between 2001 and 2012.

The breaches involved failure to comply with the rally permit conditions. Examples of breaches include not meeting the specifications of barricades, not providing sufficient lighting at rally sites, poor crowd management and exceeding the ending time of the rally. Police has generally issued warnings to the permit holders for these breaches.

The primary concerns for the Police are public order and safety, in view of the crowd size at outdoor rallies. The rules and regulations governing the conduct of outdoor rallies are clearly stated in the Elections Department's Handbook for Candidates and reiterated where possible to candidates, election agents and permit holders.

Page: 723

Police will continue to refine its rules, regulations and penalties to ensure that candidates, agents and/or their permit holders take the permit conditions seriously and adhere strictly with all permit conditions.

For parties or candidates who persist in flouting the permit conditions despite numerous reminders, Police will consider requiring the permit holder to put in place on-site measures to ensure election meetings end on time, for example, automatic timers for the power supply for the audio system, and so on. Police will also consider requiring parties or candidates to provide a deposit which could be forfeited should any breach of permit conditions occur.

Sir, I thank the Senior Minister of State for his reply. I am, indeed, very surprised that there have been quite a substantial number of breaches since 2001. My concern in raising this question is I describe it as a banal act of lawlessness, because you can have situations in which parties would compete to see who can push the limits of the conditions governing the permits to the extreme. And I think this would be problematic for crowd control and public safety. I can imagine a situation where you could have a party which pushes it to the limits and the police were forced to intervene. I think that would be a very problematic situation. I certainly hope that the Ministry will take this matter with the necessary urgency. It does not seem like reminders and warnings are of much use.

Currently, Mr Speaker, Police assess the circumstances surrounding each case individually, and will take the appropriate course of action. We believe that we should take a non-escalatory approach at this point in time because as you all know, election periods are times when emotions run high. We want to act on circumstances and evidence, and most of the time, these breaches can be rectified on-site. For example, there are not enough lights or the rostrum is said to be put on one side, and it was actually put on another side. These things can be rectified quite quickly. Those are the kinds of breaches that many of the breaches were like, although the more serious ones where safety and security are compromised, certainly Police would take a very more serious view on that.

I would just like to ask the Minister of State whether the breaches that have been committed in the last few elections were committed by several parties or just one party.

If the Member is asking about breaches by certain political parties – all parties committed these breaches.

Mr Low Thia Khiang, last question.

Page: 724

Sir, I assume the PAP also committed the same breach. Sir, my question is this: whether there had been any public disorder due to the breach of the rules. For instance, not enough lighting or a breach of time limit. Are we assuming that a breach of the regulations or rules necessarily resulted in public disorder?

I think it is prudent for the Police to take a precautionary stance. We do not want any small or even what seems to be a minor breach to be taken lightly. Police orders ought to be taken seriously, no matter how minor the directions are, so that the permit holders, as well as the candidates, can carry out their rallies in an orderly fashion, and then the security and safety of the crowds can be assured. So, no matter how small, how minor, how major, Police will certainly take action on that.

Page: 724

15 Mr Baey Yam Keng asked the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Home Affairs (a) what are the SCDF requirements and/or guidelines for allowable items to be placed by residents at HDB lift lobbies; and (b) whether SCDF will consider allowing residents to place items, such as flower pots and bicycles, in lobbies where the space is large enough not to cause any obstruction to movement of people or during emergencies.

Page: 724

Mr Speaker, items placed at common areas of HDB blocks can seriously hamper fire-fighting efforts and evacuation in both fire and medical emergencies. To educate the public and create a safer living environment, SCDF has issued guidelines on the use of common areas by residents, which are available on SCDF's website.

The key principles are, first, that combustible items, such as wooden cabinets, sofas and carton boxes, should not be placed at the common areas, as they pose a serious fire hazard. Second, it is important to maintain free passage to facilitate the carrying of people on stretchers, and for mass evacuation purposes. A minimum clearance width of 1.2 metres is required along passageways. Third, fire safety equipment must be properly maintained and regularly checked.

These principles apply equally to HDB lift lobby areas. Generally, we encourage residents not to clutter up these areas, which could hamper rescue efforts by SCDF officers and other emergency personnel.

SCDF works closely with the Town Councils to enforce these guidelines at HDB common areas. Residents can check with their respective Town Councils if they need clarifications on how these guidelines apply to their specific circumstances.

I thank the Senior Minister of State for the answer. I would like to ask whether in cases of bicycles or potted plants − are these considered combustible materials? In lift lobbies where there is a minimum access area of 1.2 metres, would these items be allowed? Based on my experience, I have been getting quite consistent enforcement guidelines or enforcement practices by Town Councils that these are not allowed because of SCDF guidelines. The HDB, MND checking of Town Councils' performance leading to the quarterly reports seem to also adopt the same practices. So, I would like to ask the Ministry whether they could exercise some flexibility so that residents can have reasonable use of the lift lobbies so that the common space can be shared and that the Town Councils are not unduly penalised by blind application of the guidelines.

Page: 725

Mr Speaker, we thank the Member for raising the clarification. Firstly, you are right. We should not blame SCDF for all these. If there are items placed outside the houses or in the lift lobbies which are combustible or present an obstruction for emergency evacuation, yes. These are requirements not only for the purpose of imposing rules but for the safety of the residents. But if there are other things, clutters or decorations or plants which may bring other kinds of problems, which do not necessarily impose fire hazards or evacuation problems, these are rules which MND or Town Councils have, in implementing them. It might be good for the Member to file a separate PQ to address the overall general principle on use of common areas because what I will address is only on the safety and security issues.

Mr Baey Yam Keng, last question. Keep it short.

Just to clarify that I should be filing this PQ to MND who oversees the Town Councils?

Yes, that would be MND.

Page: 725

16 Mr Gan Thiam Poh asked the Minister for Transport how much subsidy has been given by the Government to each Singaporean for public transportation in the past 10 years.