Hansard, Wednesday, 13 March 2013

1 Mrs Lina Chiam asked the Minister for Finance in respect of the Government Investment Corporation's Report on the Management of the Government's Portfolio for the Year 2011/12, what are the reasons for omitting the annualised nominal rates of return in Singapore dollar terms given these figures are reported in US dollar and Singapore dollar terms in previous years.

Mdm Speaker, I thank Mrs Lina Chiam for the question in which she referred to GIC's "Report on the Management of the Government's Portfolio for the Year 2011/12". GIC has been publishing this annual report on its role as a fund manager for Government reserves since 2008. The latest report in fact provides significantly more information on GIC's investment performance than when GIC started these annual reports five years ago, whilst focusing on the indicators that matter most in evaluating its performance. These indicators reflect GIC's investment mandate. The publication of these indicators is aimed at enhancing understanding of GIC's performance against that mandate.

The information published focuses on the primary metric for evaluating the investment performance of the GIC-managed portfolio: this is the long-term real rate of return, that is, returns over and above a measure of global inflation. This measure reflects GIC's mandate, which is to preserve and enhance the international purchasing power of our overseas assets over the long term.

GIC's mandate of achieving returns above global inflation also shapes its investment strategies. It invests to achieve good, real returns on its overall portfolio over the long term, rather than nominal returns. It selects investment assets and decides on the shape of its portfolio with this aim in mind.

As presented in the 2011/12 report, the annualised rolling 20-year real rate of return on the portfolio was 3.9%. This means that over a 20-year period, on top of having protected the value of the portfolio against global inflation, the

Page: 8

portfolio generated a return averaging 3.9% per year.

The portfolio's real return, that is, nominal returns less global inflation, is the same regardless of the currency used for its calculation. This is because both the nominal returns and global inflation have to be expressed in the same currency for computation. Any change in how one component is expressed in terms of currency will similarly apply to the other. Hence, the currency effect cancels out.

However, to facilitate comparison of investment returns achieved by other global investment funds, the report also includes the nominal return in US dollars, which is the commonly expressed basis internationally. GIC stopped publishing its nominal returns converted to Singapore dollars three years ago, not just last year. The use of US dollars when showing nominal returns avoids confusion when comparisons are made with other fund managers or global market indices. Indeed, in previous years, we have found that some readers had compared GIC's returns in Singapore dollars with the returns of global market indices in US dollars. However, I have to emphasise once again that it is the GIC's real long-term returns, not its nominal returns, that reflect its mandate and are its key performance measure.

I should reiterate, too, that GIC now publishes more information on its performance than when it began this annual report five years ago. Its reports over the last two years include GIC's performance over a five-year and 10-year period, in addition to the 20-year period that remains its primary goal. For each of these periods, GIC also includes comparisons with the performance of market portfolios that are typical of those adopted by large global investors. Hence, it includes comparisons with market portfolios comprising: (a) 60% global equities and 40% global bonds; and (b) 70% global equities and 30% global bonds.

GIC also publishes information on its major investment strategies.

Taken together, GIC is publishing more information and focused on what matters to GIC's mandate.

Page: 9

2 Mrs Lina Chiam asked the Minister for Trade and Industry (a) why is the coal-burning Tembusu Multi-Utilities Complex on Jurong Island allowed to operate considering that coal is one of the most polluting sources of energy; and (b) whether Singapore has met its international obligations to reduce its carbon emissions.

Mdm Speaker, the Tembusu Multi-Utilities Complex (TMUC) employs a mix of clean coal and biomass to produce steam and electricity for chemical companies on Jurong Island. Clean coal is a significantly cheaper fuel option compared to fuel oil and natural gas, and the use of coal is expected to reduce steam prices by at least 10% for customers of TMUC.

To strike a balance with environmental concerns, only the use of low ash and low sulphur coal has been permitted, and biomass is mixed with coal to lower greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions to below that of an equivalent fuel oil plant. The co-generation process employed by TMUC is also more efficient than the separate production of steam and power through boilers and combined cycle gas turbines.

In addition, measures have been put in place by our environmental agencies to ensure that the TMUC meets environmental standards as stipulated under the Environmental Protection and Management Act and its Regulations. TMUC is held to stringent requirements for pollutants, such as particulate matter (PM) and mercury. The company is also required to transport coal via covered transportation systems to prevent fugitive dust emissions, and recycle ash as construction material.

Singapore is on track to meet its unconditional pledge of reducing greenhouse gas emissions by 7% to 11% below 2020 business-as-usual (BAU) levels. To this end, we have already implemented several energy efficiency measures to reduce the carbon footprint of our industries. These include the Grant for Energy Efficient Technologies (GREET), tax incentives via the Investment Allowance for Energy Efficiency (IA for EE), and the Design for Efficiency (DfE) scheme. This year, we are also piloting third-party financing schemes to encourage private financing of energy efficiency projects.

Page: 10

Madam, I thank the Minister, for answering my question. I have two supplementary questions. First, could a committee be set up to study and authorise installation of solar panels on HDB blocks and to support the growth of alternative sources of energy? Second, why has the Energy Market Authority had to reintroduce coal, given the push for liquefied natural gas in recent years?

Madam, I thank the Member for her supplementary questions. The first, on installation of solar panels on HDB block rooftops and so on, in fact, we have a variety of schemes in place to encourage the exploration of the use of solar energy in the context of different environments, whether in terms of buildings or residential flats. HDB is experimenting with some of these, and working with the appropriate private vendors. And some of our developers are doing so. We have a range of schemes in place already, guided by a variety of Government agencies and initiatives.

The second point the Member raised is an important one. I want to emphasise to the House that, ultimately, it is important and incumbent upon us that we keep our energy options open. The fact of the matter is that whilst we are moving on liquefied natural gas as a way to diversify our energy sources, that gives us some diversification but it does not give us diversification in terms of fuel types because we are still predominantly reliant on natural gas. We should not rule out options.

Clean coal is one possibility. We have not gone about this in a large-scale way. But this is a smaller scale plant dealing with the needs in a particularly localised area. In this context, for steam. We think we should try these ideas out, subject to our environmental requirements and concerns, and making sure that our overall strategy remains one that is balanced.

Order. End of Question Time.

Page: 11

[(proc text) Order read for consideration in Committee of Supply [5th Allotted Day]. (proc text)]

[Mdm Speaker in the Chair]

[(proc text) Resumption of Debate on Question [12 March 2013], (proc text)]

[(proc text) "That the total sum to be allocated for Head W of the Estimates be reduced by $100". – [Mr Cedric Foo Chee Keng]. (proc text)]

[(proc text) Question again proposed. (proc text)]

Madam, the Government is now auditing the operations of rail and buses, especially in the reliability and safety aspects. As the total taxi population on the road crosses 28,000 and the estimated daily ridership of 940,000 last year, how would LTA benchmark the safety and reliability of taxi services? Would the Government improve its supervisory framework of the taxi companies such that both their taxis and drivers are fit to serve and able to meet these standards?

Madam, my next cut. May I ask the Minister what is the role and position of taxis in the Master Population Plan 2020 and 2030? The Government has planned for the 2030 public transport infrastructure. What is the Government's plan to make taxi service more accessible to the able-bodied, young, aged and the handicapped?

Page: 12

For the taxi industry to function well, we need to invest in building up the capability and capacity of the industry. To make these heavy capital investments which require time, taxi operators need to have certainty in the Government's policies in the next eight to 16 years or one or two lifespan of a taxi. Could the Government spell out its long-term policy for the taxi industry? What are the conditions that will determine the optimum size of the taxi population in Singapore in the next, say, five to 10 years? Would the Government require the taxi operators to compete in terms of pricing, efficiency and quality of their service so that public commuters could benefit from them?

Madam, my next cut. Since taxis have been taken out from the bidding of COEs, the price of COEs continues to rise to cross the $90,000 mark. Although we cannot conclude that the rise of COE prices has nothing to do with taxi companies bidding for COEs, we can confirm that taxi companies are not the key driving force behind the dramatic increase in COE prices.

What is the Government's long-term plan on how the taxi population will be controlled by the COE quota system?

Taxis are a public transport service. The public commuters expect its pricing to be competitive, orderly and justified. The recent changes in COE policy on taxis had made it impossible for taxi operators to play its intended role to manage the fluctuating cost of COE as they will only find out the COE cost when the vehicle is registered.

With the total cost of putting a taxi on the road fluctuating significantly, we begin to see taxi companies not able to price their taxi rental and meter fare in a very planned and orderly manner.

Taxis are public service vehicles, just like public buses. There is a case to make taxi service more accessible and taxi fare more affordable so that public commuters would treat taxis as their "next car" instead of chasing new cars and further push up the COE prices. So, there is also a case to take taxis out of the COE system, just like the public buses, and replace it with a more stable and reasonable statutory cost structure for taxis without the COE and without making it more expensive to put a taxi on the road than the private car.

Page: 13

Madam, the Vehicle Quota System of COE has been implemented since 1990, the purpose of which is to limit the growth of vehicles each year. As Members know, there are currently five COE categories – Category A for cars with engine capacity of 1,600 cc; Category B for cars above 1,600 cc; Category C for goods vehicles and buses; Category D for motorcycles; and the Open Category, Category E, for all vehicles.

The value of each COE is a function of the COE supply and demand for each category. In recent years, various German car makers have introduced more expensive vehicles with lower engine capacity, below 1,600 cc. This increases the demand for Cat A COEs whilst the supply of Cat A COEs remains unchanged. This could have the effect of pushing up Cat A COE prices, to the detriment of buyers of smaller vehicles.

I would like to ask the Minister about how LTA distributes the number of available COEs for each category, A, B and E especially? Also, when was this distribution last reviewed and whether the assumptions then are still valid today? I would also like to suggest that a comprehensive review be carried out so as to determine the most appropriate way to categorise cars and also the allocation of COEs accordingly.

A possible method is to categorise cars by carbon emissions or fuel efficiency instead of engine capacity. With higher COE allocation for more efficient vehicles, this would likely assist buyers of smaller vehicles and also encourage more environmentally friendly vehicles on Singapore roads.

My last question is about the volatility of COE prices. The prices have been very volatile. Sometimes, bidders are subject to the luck of the draw. COE prices can swing quite wildly from time to time. Does the Minister see any merit in stabilising the volatility of COE prices in each of the bids? And if so, what mechanisms can be used to achieve this?

Madam, the COE system was introduced over 20 years ago, but cannot shake off controversy. Never has so

Page: 14

much been said by so many over so few pieces of paper.

Most people accept the logic in restricting the number of cars on the road and the need to keep traffic moving smoothly. But no one likes to pay more. As a result, we have heard many suggestions on how to change the system, usually with a view to keeping COE prices low for some. I say "some" because there is no one suggestion that really benefits everyone who wants a car. So long as we agree that the car number must be controlled, there would be no solution that pleases everyone.

The real question is what the Government's role is when it comes to determining who gets a car? The problem is that there has been no consistent policy when it comes to cars.

When then Minister Dr Yeo Ning Hong introduced the COE system in 1990, he said that the rationale for having categories based on engine size was to "benefit the lower and middle-income owners". In other words, there was an element of social equity in the system. That rationale appeared to be premised on the fact that back in the 1990s, luxury car makers generally produced cars with larger engine capacities. But this has not been the case for some time. European emission standards and the introduction of turbo charging and supercharging has seen luxury car makers move into the small car market. So, today, luxury car makers dominate the small car category as well. So, lower- and middle-income owners no longer benefit. So, why do we still maintain categories based on engine capacities?

But the latest changes to the ARF appear to reaffirm the principle of social equity, making those who purchase large, luxury cars pay more. That is the intention, but what is the likely consequence? It may mean driving more people to the small car market, which will push up COE prices for that segment. And the latest MAS curbs on car loans will make it even more difficult for low- and middle-income persons to own cars in any event.

So, is there a principle which governs car ownership in Singapore? And frankly, I do not see any. I think we get into these difficulties because we try to fit conflicting principles of free market, social equity and financial prudence. It does not work. It raises expectations and ends up frustrating and confusing many.

I, therefore, ask the Minister to review the system and the principles of COE allocation. It is time to pull the handbrake on the current COE system, send it

Page: 15

back to the workshop for overhaul. First, let us have a simple and clear objective which most, if not all of us, can agree to. Since we cannot please everyone, I suggest that instead of focusing on who gets a COE, we should look at what kind of cars we want to have on our roads. Like Mr Cedric Foo, I think we should put more emphasis on environmentally friendly cars.

Cars can be simply categorised by their emissions, or other environmental factors. The Europeans have done this well. They are car manufacturers. So, over time, they have enforced higher emission and other standards for their cars. The result is that European car manufacturers have had to step up their game, and today, most Europeans buy cars which are well engineered, cleaner and more fuel-efficient than compared to, say, American cars.

We do not manufacture cars, but with the COE system, we can effect similar changes. The engine capacity of cars we buy should not matter. Neither should it matter whether they are diesel, petrol, LPG or hybrid. Such cars occupy the same space and contribute to congestion. But it will make a difference if we promote cleaner, more fuel-efficient cars. Therefore, substantially more COEs should be allocated to those cars which are environmentally friendlier and a smaller number for "dirtier" cars. And this will set a clear and defensible policy and send a strong message about what we value. It will also indirectly help those who can only afford to purchase smaller and cheaper cars as these tend to have lower emissions and be more fuel-efficient.

My second point is about the timing of changes to policies. We have a habit of springing them suddenly on people, such as the recent curbs on car loans, property cooling measures and so on. This makes it difficult for individuals and businesses to plan, and where plans are affected, it causes frustration and resentment. Why can we not give reasonable warning so that everyone can plan and make informed choices?

I can predict the response – if we had given six months' notice, for example, before imposing the car loans, everyone will rush in and purchase a car in those six months. Yes, they may, but so what? Those who rush in will know that others will do so as well, and so they must be prepared to pay more. Others who can choose to wait out the market, in their expectation that prices will fall, will wait out the market. For the rest of us, there will still be the same number of cars on the road.

The concern for those who may over-extend their finances, I think, is overstated. First, it will only affect a small number of people because only a

Page: 16

small group can buy in that short time. There has not been a significant number of car loan defaults and, in any event, I think the Government should take a step back in relation to financial decisions made by people. People should decide what is in their best interests and make their own decisions.

Madam, COE was introduced in 1990 to manage the growth of vehicles in Singapore. At that time, there were four COE categories just for private cars alone. We had categories for, yes, below 1,000 cc, 1,000 cc to 1,600 cc, 1,600 cc to 2,000 cc and then 2,000 cc and above. I checked the Hansard. One rationale for having four categories is so as "not to allow big car buyers to squeeze out buyers of small cars".

Like what Mr Cedric Foo had observed, COE prices for cars below 1,600 cc have been very high for the past months. One probable reason is that luxury car brands like Mercedes, BMW, Audi, they have all introduced cars with engine capacities below 1,600 cc. As a result, the COE prices for Category A cars have increased substantially because buyers of luxury car brands generally have a larger budget.

Whilst owning a car in Singapore is not a necessity, the Government needs to provide a reasonable opportunity for Singaporeans to own a car. It is inequitable if cars are seen to be reserved only for the rich.

I urge the MOT to review the COE system and I propose that COEs be categorised based on OMV of the car. Cars with OMV below $20,000 should be in one category so that Singaporeans who wish to buy lower priced cars can bid for COE in the same band. We should also increase the available number of COEs for this category (Category A) such that the COEs available for this category are the same as that available for Category B and Open Category combined.

We should also promote more off-peak cars so that buyers will find it more affordable to own such off-peak cars. This is especially if they do not drive the car to work daily and need it only for the weekends to ferry their children or parents. If the buyer has to pay $80,000, $90,000 for his car's COE, naturally he will want to drive the car daily, since the daily depreciation cost of the COE alone is between $25 and $30. And we are talking about depreciation for the cars. So, I ask MOT to review the COE for cars.

Page: 17

Madam, further to the suggestions I made earlier for the Government to explore introducing a new COE category – family car category – I would now like to suggest to the Minister whether effort can be made to alleviate the transport components of unit business costs for SMEs as a result of rising COE prices and whether he will consider introducing separate categories for commercial goods vehicles, heavy goods vehicles and very heavy goods vehicles. This will help small business owners and those who use the road as their livelihood.

Next cut. Madam, I would also like to suggest that when we have surpluses from the COE receipts, we can re-channel them to the Singaporeans who use public transport directly. The revenue from the vehicle quota premiums is expected to reach $2.4 billion in financial year 2012, more than the $2 million estimate. We can channel the surpluses to benefit the Singaporeans who use public transport directly, including enhancements and introductions of concessionary and rebate schemes and make public transport more attractive for Singaporeans.

Can the Minister also consider issuing new Singapore Shares in our transport company to all Singaporeans to allow them to have greater ownership and participation and have direct benefit from our public transport system?

In late 2011, I had proposed for the removal of weekend ERP charges in places like the CBD, Orchard Road and some other shopping districts. Since then in May last year, the LTA had reviewed the ERP charges as promised, and delayed the start of the ERP operating hours on Saturday in Orchard from 11.00 am to 12.30 pm and also reduced the ERP rates for the Bugis-Marina area.

Can the Ministry give an update on the outcomes of these changes? Are the results positive? As previously suggested by myself, and also agreed by Minister of State, Mrs Josephine Teo, we could listen to the feedback from the retailers in these areas. So, I had channelled to the Ministry the feedback I received from the Orchard Road Business Association, Marina Bay Business Association and also the Singapore Retailers Association. They are all supportive of the move to remove weekend ERP charges as this would

Page: 18

encourage more shoppers to the shopping districts on weekends. It would also lower the costs to motorists, too.

Therefore, I hope the Ministry would kindly consider the full removal of weekend ERP charges in the CBD and shopping districts.

Mdm Chairperson, I have spoken at length last night about the improvements that we are making to the public transport system, which is my Ministry's top priority. Before I go on to talk about private transport, taxis and ERPs and so on, I thought it might be useful for me to continue the discussion last night because we were talking about feeder buses and trunks. And if I did not hear it wrongly, Ms Lee Li Lian was saying that there were no trunk or feeder bus services serving her constituents in Punggol East. And so I was intrigued by that statement and went to do some checks on this.

I just wanted to clarify that indeed there are five services that run through the heart of her constituency and, in addition, there are about 10 services that run along Punggol Road which is at the western boundary of the constituency and another bus that runs along the eastern boundary of the constituency.

Our estimate, based on all these, is that about 90% of the HDB blocks in Punggol East are within 200 metres of either an LRT station, or a bus stop, or both. So, it is about 90% of the HDB blocks within 200 metres of an LRT station, or a bus stop, or both. And LTA had also planned previously to augment the bus services as new BTO developments come on stream and they will consider doing so.

I am sure that there was no ill intent behind her remark and that she is simply unaware of the buses running into and around her constituency. However, such inaccuracies, if they are taken up, and repeated often enough on social media, will take on a life of their own and, hence, I wanted to share this information with Members of the House, just to make sure that we get the record straight on the services that are available.

So, let me now move on to talk about private transport. Given our land constraints, we must press on with vehicle ownership and road usage measures to manage traffic congestion.

Our intent is to take a calibrated approach in managing the growth and use of private transport, and, where necessary, adjust our policies and pace of

Page: 19

implementation. For example, we have phased in more gradually the reduction in the annual vehicle growth rate, deferred the adjustment for past over-projections of the Certificates of Entitlement (COEs), removed taxis from the bidding system, and exercised some flexibility for ERP in the evenings and on Saturdays.

Let me first touch on the topic of COEs. We have, and we continue to receive, many well-intentioned suggestions from the public, as well as from Members like Mr Cedric Foo, Mr Hri Kumar, Mr Lim Biow Chuan, Dr Lim Wee Kiak, and they include ideas to re-categorise COEs according to whether it is OMV, value of the carbon emissions of the car, to allow only individuals and not dealers to bid, to tighten financing for cars, and so on. Please be assured that we take all these suggestions seriously. We will study them thoroughly and respond at the appropriate time, sometimes with our sister agencies like the MAS.

That said, I would like to take the opportunity to address some of the key feedback that we frequently receive. First, I do acknowledge that with changes in technology, using engine capacity as the criterion for COE categorisation may no longer be so valid and we will study this further on how to improve this.

Secondly, there are calls to do more to level the playing field to buy a car. As Category A COE premiums rose, I received more requests to give priority in COE bidding to families with elderly members, families with children, allow only one car per household, and so on. I also note that Mr Gan Thiam Poh had a suggestion in Parliament last week for a "family car" COE category.

I understand the aspirations of many Singaporeans to own a car. In fact, about 45% of households today already own a car, and this has increased over time. So, with your permission, Mdm Chairperson, I would like to share this slide with Members [A slide was shown to hon Members. Please refer to Annex 1.] Forty percent in 2008, rising to 45% of households in Singapore owning a car in 2012.

I would have to say that this trend is simply not sustainable due to our land constraints, and so we have to limit supply and find some equitable way of allocating it. We believe that our COE system remains the most appropriate way of allocating this limited but non-basic resource.

Page: 20

By and large, the COE system today already accommodates some social equity considerations. Car quotas are divided into large and small car categories, using engine capacity of 1,600 cc as a simple but generally well accepted basis for the classification. With this, buyers who wish to have smaller cars need not compete for the COE bidding with those who desire larger cars. But outside of this 1,600 cc divide, we try not to impose other social considerations on the COE system to avoid distorting the market further.

Our approach has been to try to address social considerations largely through the vehicle tax structure, in particular, the Additional Registration Fee (ARF). Consistent with this approach, MOF recently announced changes to make the ARF structure more progressive. In the past, it was 100% ARF for all cars based on the OMV and I am sure if you remember from the announcement two weeks ago that we have introduced three categories, and for the ARF rates to be tiered from 100% to 180%. And this means that buyers of luxury cars will now pay higher tax rates than buyers of budget cars.

It is a difficult undertaking to try to allocate cars based on needs, such as to raise a family, to ferry elderly family members or for work purposes. Setting aside the likely problems with implementation and loopholes, I think it would be extremely difficult for the Government to decide fairly who deserves and needs a car and who does not. So, I would say that while our bidding system is by no means perfect, I think it is certainly preferable to some of the other suggestions that we have received, like converting it all to a balloting system.

In Beijing, there is a lottery system for car licence plates. Over one million people enter the lottery for about 20,000 licence plates every month. There have been reports of buyers who have never won the lottery – little wonder why – despite entering it every month since it started more than two years ago. Or buyers who had no intention of purchasing a car in the first place, save for the fact that winning the lottery has become a lot more lucrative. There have also been reports of buyers who get their licence plate on the black market for I think about S$30,000. In contrast, and similar to another Chinese city, Shanghai, our COE bidding system does allow people who want and can afford a car to do their sums, save up and buy one eventually, and not be left to the vagaries of a balloting system. And I think that this is the prudent way to go about buying a car, given that it is a big purchase and a depreciating asset.

Those who want to go for a less expensive option can consider Off-Peak Cars (OPC). Mr Lim Biow Chuan has rightly suggested that we try to do more to promote them. Today, owners who wish to use their OPC during the restricted hours have to pay $20 for an electronic day licence, and this is regardless of

Page: 21

whether they use it for just half an hour or, say, the full 12 hours. We will review the feasibility of making the scheme more flexible and attractive when the technology is available for us to price it differently.

There have also been requests for us to smoothen the supply of COEs to stabilise COE premiums. COE premiums are influenced by many factors, both on the demand and supply side. I think some smoothening of COE supply is a good idea to temper the peaks and troughs of the supply cycle. The difficulty is, of course, how to do it without causing other problems. I have asked LTA to see if there is a practical way of putting aside some of the supply from the upcoming peak that we expect in the next few years – I think starting from 2014 – to save some of it and put it aside for the future when COE supply becomes tighter. This is a longer-term study, and I assure you that we will not be making major changes to the COE market in the near term.

For businesses, we have reviewed with MOF what we can do to help them with rising business costs. As announced during the Budget Statement, besides a 30% road tax rebate, we will also relax the COE renewal rule for commercial vehicles to help owners with their cash-flow. Currently, at the end of the 10-year COE, if owners want to renew their COE for just five years, they can do so only once. We will remove this restriction for Category C, and allow these owners to renew their COEs for another five years. And this will also apply to those who are already on their first five-year renewal, and LTA will release more details on this later.

We will continue to review what more we can do to help businesses, especially small and medium enterprises (SMEs). We will look into Mr Gan Thiam Poh's suggestion to split the COE category for commercial vehicles to separate light goods from heavy and very heavy goods vehicles. But one implication is that since additional sub-categories means smaller quota numbers, this suggestion may result in even more volatile COE premiums. But I think the intent behind Mr Gan's suggestion is really to ask if the smaller light goods vehicles should pay the same COE premium as heavy and very heavy goods vehicles, and this is something we will study carefully.

As there have recently been major changes that affect vehicle ownership, I think it is best that we let them take some time to settle. We have not even seen the outcome of the first COE bidding exercise after the implementation of the progressive ARF and loan restriction measures, which is going on this afternoon as even we speak. And it will take a number of bidding exercises before the effects of the recent changes become clear. Therefore, we will take some time to carefully consider the many suggestions we have received from Members

Page: 22

and the public before we make further changes to the COE system.

Let me move on to talk about ERP. With COE premiums reaching new highs, a common refrain is for us to shift our emphasis to restrain usage. So, in the past, it was ERP charges – too high, control the car ownership, and so on – now, I think we are hearing a different side of the equation. So, to those who are now championing aggressive usage measures like Electronic Road Pricing (ERP), I hope to get their fullest support if we see the need for more extensive usage of the ERP in future.

The ERP system has served us well since its introduction in 1998. Despite the vehicle population increasing by over 40%, we have managed to keep our roads relatively free from congestion with traffic speeds remaining largely in the optimal range. Er Dr Lee Bee Wah, last evening and Mr Seah Kian Peng, this morning, have reiterated their calls to abolish ERP in the evenings and on Saturdays. Since the ERP rate reductions were made in October 2011 and in June 2012, we have generally observed heavier traffic flow and thus lower traffic speeds in the time slots where we had cut or removed ERP rates altogether. We have no plans at the moment to remove ERP altogether in the evenings and on Saturdays as it is clear that ERP is still needed to manage traffic congestion. Without the ERP, motorists, as well as bus commuters, will encounter more congested roads in the evenings when they go home, and on Saturdays when they go to town. Nevertheless, let me assure you that wherever it is possible, and we will certainly continue to see where we can fine-tune our ERP policies at the margins.

Let me move on to talk a little about car sharing. I understand that, from time to time, Singaporeans do like to have more convenient door-to-door options to get around, for family outings, shopping, shopping trips, ferrying elderly parents to medical appointments, for example. We can, and will do more to facilitate these transport arrangements and options.

Car sharing is, indeed, one example. With higher COE premiums, more people have taken to this option to gain access to a car without having to own one. Membership of car-sharing organisations now stands at 8,000, which is an increase of about 33% compared to a year ago. LTA is working with HDB to make car sharing more accessible in the heartlands where it is feasible. To facilitate peer-to-peer car sharing, LTA will study if there is further scope to liberalise the Private Car Rental Scheme. This Private Car Rental Scheme currently allows car owners to rent out their cars on weekends and public

Page: 23

holidays.

Let me move on to talk about taxi services and availability. Mr Seng Han Thong had filed a number of cuts on the role of taxis in our transport system and how to improve it further. Taxis serve specific point-to-point travel needs and can, therefore, we know, provide a higher level of service compared to mass public transport. As Mr Seng had pointed out, taxis also help to meet the transport needs of the infirm and the elderly. And in light of our ageing population, and as we continue to constrain car growth and car usage, taxis will play an increasingly important role. And this is why we had initiated a strategic move to make taxis more available, to utilise the taxi fleet more efficiently, and for taxi operators to meet higher levels of service. I believe the better the quality of taxi services, the more likely some car owners may be prepared to give up their cars and switch to the train or buses for their daily commute, while opting for taxis for the occasional trip.

Today, taxi companies are required to meet the Quality of Service standards set by LTA, which cover areas like call booking and safety. I assure Mr Seng that LTA reviews the service standards regularly, taking into account commuters' experience on the ground. The LTA will also consider overseas best practices and is looking into the possibility of benchmarking our service standards with that in other cities.

LTA has, in fact, tightened the service standards just last October. The revised standards include higher targets for call booking performance and vehicle inspection passing rates, the latter for safety reasons. Generally, most of the taxi companies have been able to comply with the revised standards so far. LTA will continue to monitor this and work closely with the taxi companies to achieve even higher service levels in the future.

I should add that even before the service standards were revised, there had been some improvements in service levels. The average answer rate for call bookings was better in 2012 compared to 2011. The average passenger waiting time at key taxi stands has also improved over the same period. For example, the average waiting time in the city from 5.00 pm to 11.00 pm fell from about six minutes in 2011 to about three minutes in 2012. And I think these improvements may, in part, have been attributed to the December 2011 taxi fare revision.

Dr Lily Neo and Mr Seng Han Thong asked about the impact of the taxi availability framework which was announced last August and introduced at the

Page: 24

start of this year. I think it is too early to draw definitive conclusions. In any case, the longer term and more stringent standards would be gradually phased in over three years – 70% of the taxi fleet in each company to meet 250 kilometres usage; 250 kilometres driven this year and increasing to 80% and then 85% in subsequent years.

We will continue to monitor the results and improve the framework as necessary. If the standards are so successful that taxis start to affect traffic flow, then that is a happy problem that we will be very happy to look more closely into. I do assure Dr Lily Neo that it is quite unlikely, as our 28,000 taxis comprise less than 3% of our total vehicle population of almost a million.

Mr Seng also asked about the long-term plan for taxi COEs. Today, they pay the Category A Prevailing Quota Premium (PQP) for COEs, although the COE itself is drawn from Category E. We have only recently made these changes and, as he has rightly pointed out, taking them out of the bidding system had the opposite effect on COE premiums to what people have suspected, that the premiums had gone up. And the conclusion, therefore, may be that the taxis bidding in Category A in the past may, indeed, not have had such a big effect on the rise in premiums as others had suspected. These are early changes that we have made and it will take time before we see the full effects and we will review the impact at the appropriate time.

Lastly, Mrs Lina Chiam last evening suggested bringing back the individual taxi ownership system. I think it is actually instructive to look at how our taxi industry has developed over the years. Prior to the 1970s, taxis were indeed owned by private individual owners. Since then, all new taxis have to be registered under taxi companies, and individual ownership of new taxis was disallowed. The aggregation of taxis under taxi companies means that they are better organised and able to leverage on economies of scale and resources, provide enhanced service and better meet the changing demands of commuters, say, for example, in call bookings.

Our problem today is that we have actually too many taxis that are not efficiently used, rather than too few. We have one taxi for about every 200 persons – so five for every 1,000. Hong Kong is about half this rate, likewise for London. In New York, it is about probably 1.5 taxis for every 1,000 people, higher than many other cities, and that is our rate today. It is better for us to see how we can strengthen the performance of our seven existing taxi operators,

Page: 25

make better utilisation of the fleets that are under their charge, rather than allow ad hoc, individual players back into the market.

Madam, please let me take some time to briefly update Members on some of our major road projects. First, the Marina Coastal Expressway (MCE) is on track to be opened by the end of the year. The MCE will link the East Coast Parkway (ECP) and the Kallang-Paya Lebar Expressway (KPE) with the AYE in the west. This will give motorists a seamless east-west connection without going through the city centre. When the MCE is completed, the part of the ECP that connects to the AYE will become part of the network of arterial roads that will serve that area.

Second, to make better use of our scarce land space for roads, LTA will study the feasibility of a "reversible flow" traffic scheme. I think some of you, old enough to remember, will recall that Nicoll Highway had something similar to this in the past. This is actually ideal for stretches where traffic data shows a "tidal" pattern, where traffic is heavy in predominantly one direction during the morning peak hours, and in the opposite direction in the evening. We have identified the Kranji Expressway-Pan Island Expressway stretch connecting the residential areas in the north to jobs in the west as a feasible corridor for a "reversible flow" scheme. The LTA has awarded a contract for advanced engineering consultancy studies, which are now in progress.

Third, since the alignment of the 21.5-kilometre long North-South Expressway was announced in 2011, LTA has commenced some advance works and awarded three advanced engineering consultancy contracts. These consultancy contracts will guide major construction works, which we plan to start in 2015.

In future, the opportunities to build more roads will become more limited. While we will still expand local road networks to provide access to new developments, we will prioritise road widening in local areas for bus lanes, as our priority is public transport. We must be careful not to widen local roads beyond what is absolutely necessary as they will encroach into the living environment of residential neighbourhoods, and cause more dust and noise pollution. So, we will do this judiciously, and wherever possible, we will make sure that priority is given to public transport.

Let me now move on to the topic of green transport. The land transport sector will do its part to mitigate climate change and promote environmental sustainability. The Carbon Emissions-based Vehicle Scheme (CEVS) was

Page: 26

implemented at the start of this year. Under the CEVS, low-emission car and taxi models are given incentives in the form of rebates off their Additional Registration Fee. Dr Lim Wee Kiak asked during the Budget debate if it has made a difference.

Today, others have also said that we ought to consider having a COE category for vehicles of this nature and put more COE quota into this category. Let me share with Members of the House what the take-up rate had been like over the first few months. Close to 50% of cars registered in the first two months qualified for CEVS rebates, obviously, a much higher rate of over 80% for Category A cars, and a quite respectable 20% for Category B cars. So, 50% of the cars that were registered in the first two months qualified for some form of CEVS rebate, from $5,000 to $20,000. This is more than double the 20% that would have qualified for rebates in 2011. We used the 2011 data because we suspect that in 2012, there might be some pent-up demand that people sort of waited for the introduction of this scheme. So, 50% may have been distorted by the accumulation of pent-up demand and we would have to monitor this in the coming months. But I think we have seen some shift to more environmentally-friendly cars. I, therefore, believe that it has some effect to encourage more buyers to choose low-emission models. In total, for those who are interested, we have given out about $13.5 million in rebates in the past two months.

We will watch the take-up rate closely over the next two years because we promised that we will review this scheme towards the end of 2014 after we have seen how it has transformed market demand. LTA will then review the scheme based on its impact on purchasing decisions, advances in vehicle design and technology, as well as the progress of Singapore's overall carbon mitigation plan.

For commercial vehicles, as was announced by the Minister for the Environment and Water Resources, the LTA and the National Environmental Agency will implement an Early Turnover Scheme to incentivise owners of pre-Euro and Euro I diesel vehicles, which are the oldest and most pollutive diesel vehicles on our roads, to upgrade to the cleaner Euro V emissions standards. The details of the scheme will be announced over the next two months and we will see how the take-up will be thereafter.

Let me conclude on this segment. We will continue to innovate and make improvements to the way we optimise road usage. We will introduce advanced technology to manage traffic in the years to come, regularly consider ways to refine our vehicle ownership measures to improve their effectiveness. The opportunities to build roads will become more limited in future, and when we

Page: 27

are able to do so, we will give priority to buses even as we expand those roads. We will continue to facilitate more travel options, and help people to make more responsible, environmentally friendly choices to meet their travel needs. In so doing, we hope to transform private transport in Singapore, to keep our people and economy moving.

Mdm Chair, may I ask what are the Ministry's plans to enhance road safety for cyclists and pedestrians? When policy changes are considered for road safety, traffic flow and regulation, what is the priority? Is it the smooth flow of vehicles, or efficiency, or is safety aspect the primary concern? Would the Ministry consider an approach that requires pedestrian safety to be the prime concern of any policy change? A framework, where in assessing any road safety measures, safety of the vulnerable is put above all other considerations? Where there is an intersection of human and vehicular traffic, could measures be put in place such that the safety of the pedestrian is prioritised above everything else?

For example, would the Ministry consider removing the combination of the flashing green man to signal pedestrian crossing and turning vehicles? Traffic flow will be affected as cars will be required to stop at the red light rather than having the option to move on in the absence of pedestrians. But I suggest that this is an acceptable inefficiency in the pursuit of improved safety. Currently, at such junctions, there is a reliance on the good sense of the driver. There is also a presumption that the pedestrian will be visible to the driver of the vehicle. Removing the flashing "green man" at intersections will be an example where efficiency and traffic flow is sacrificed so that pedestrian safety is put ahead of all these considerations.

Madam, the tragic accident in Tampines in January would not be so devastating if the vehicle involved were not a cement mixer. In view of the rising trend of traffic offences by heavy vehicle drivers and disproportionately higher and increasing number of fatal accidents, I have three suggestions for the Ministry to consider.

One, set up a mechanism involving the local community to plan the routes for heavy vehicles accessing construction sites in a built-up estate. LTA currently forbids cement trucks to go on the expressway. Can heavy vehicles be restricted near school zones and heavy pedestrian areas too?

Page: 28

Two, implement a penalty system for employers and hirers of heavy vehicle drivers so that they would be more responsible in hiring and training their drivers.

And three, require all heavy vehicles to install digital video recorders.

Madam, as we ramp up infrastructural projects, there will be more heavy vehicles on the road, so let us make our best effort so that they can be safer on the road.

Mdm Chair, Commander of Traffic Police, AC Cheang Keng Keong said last year, "While we will die from old age or may succumb to illnesses, we should not be dying on the roads due to traffic accidents. There is a need for road users to act responsibly."

Although traffic accidents have seen a decline in 2012, the recent accidents were more emotional because they involve young children. The Traffic Police has emphasised the 3Es of Enforcement, Engagement and Education. Traffic Police are now more visible. I encourage the Ministry to consider the appointment of more Road Safety Ambassadors and I ask for an update on road safety measures in our schools.

In life, it is a terrible thing to waste on the road no matter how the statistics read. And while we can continue to teach our young about road safety, we must take caution that no amount of education can prevent children from running across the roads on impulse.

Although there are fewer fatal and injury accidents in 2012, we must always ensure our roads remain safe for all users, especially for vulnerable groups like elderly and young pedestrians. It does not really matter who has the right of way because when flesh and metal collide, the consequences are devastating.

Today, I wish to speak on three areas of concern, namely, school zone, zebra crossing and signalised junction. The LTA has launched a zero-accident movement for its contractors to tighten up safety processes at their worksite in 2012. Likewise, can LTA start a zero-accident movement for our school zones as well?

Page: 29

The update by the Second Minister for Home Affairs last February showed a decline in the number of accidents within school zones involving injury or fatality. There were 16 accidents in 2012, down from 28 the previous year. Can we reduce the number to zero? I believe we can.

Thus, I propose we should make it mandatory for primary schools to have dedicated school-crossing patrol wardens at critical school hours. Having a warden is the only way to ensure vehicles travelling in both directions will stop and remain stationary at the zebra crossing until the whole crossing is clear, as stipulated in our Road Traffic Act. For signalised pedestrian crossing, the warden can also ensure children will not attempt to cross the road in an unsafe manner.

Second, all zebra crossings should be raised island-wide with speed-regulating stripes leading to and away from such crossings. This will educate drivers in the long run that they will have to slow down whenever they approach a zebra crossing, regardless of whether there are pedestrians at the crossing or not. This is a good driving habit to inculcate.

Third, signalised junctions should be programmed with some degree of predictability. I agree with Dr Janil on the flashing "green man". Currently, there are different signalling sequences governing such junctions. Some junctions allow motorists to turn right when it is safe to do so. Other junctions do not allow turning unless the green arrow lights up. There is even a junction that allows motorists two chances to turn – one at the beginning and one at the end of the green light cycle. All this while, the pedestrians are also in permutation for the right of way to cross the junction. Many times, we have seen turning motorists moving forward at junctions even though they are not supposed to do so. We have also seen motorists getting caught in the middle of the junction because of the confusion.

The most dangerous part of it all is when turning vehicles who are keeping an eye on oncoming traffic forgot about the pedestrians' right of way at the turn. There are about 170 accidents involving pedestrians at signalised junctions per year in the past five years, from 2007 to 2011. The number of traffic accidents at such junctions that do not involve pedestrians is about seven times higher.

I urge the Ministry to look into making signalised junctions more predictable. I believe when we take out the guesswork of using this junction, motorists and pedestrians will make fewer mistakes. We may end up spending a little more time on the road, but cultivating a little patience in the interest of

Page: 30

road safety is a good thing. Courtesy on the road is about giving way to fellow road users, and exercising a little patience is all there is to it.

Madam, just last year alone, we saw two fatal accidents outside a primary school in Sembawang, where both the victims were less than 10 years old. Similarly, two teenage girls were knocked down outside their secondary school in Woodlands. I have driven along the Sembawang road where the fatal accidents happened. I must say because of the bend of the road, and the fencing on the central divider, visibility of pedestrians to the drivers is greatly reduced.

I would like to propose that fences be constructed on both sides of the road rather than on the central divider. But, may I know what is the Ministry's plan to enhance road safety around schools?

Madam, once again I would like to declare my interest as I am a staff of SBS Transit. Many traffic rules are meant for safety reasons while others are meant to improve the traffic flow on the road. On the former, I am glad that Second Minister for Home Affairs, Mr Iswaran, has announced measures to step up enforcement to make the roads safer. For the latter, I trust that it is under the jurisdiction of LTA.

Very often we observe that motorists encroach into yellow boxes and bus lanes during the bus lane hours, or park their vehicles indiscriminately at bus stops to pick up or let passengers alight. We need stricter enforcement of traffic rules so that buses can move more smoothly to benefit more than three million bus passengers every day.

Instead of increasing the number of enforcement officers, it might be better for the authorities to install more cameras and other technology to detect motorists who violate traffic rules. However, stricter enforcement actions do not mean that LTA should give a summons to the motorists on their very first violation. LTA could take a leaf from Traffic Police who give motorists two to three warning letters before issuing speeding summons. We hope to develop a system whereby motorists know with certainty that they would be caught

Page: 31

should they violate traffic rules. At the same time, motorists would be made aware that the authorities are targeting repeat offenders and not those who are first-time violators and that they would be given a chance.

Mdm Chair, cycling in Singapore has certainly picked up momentum. It is getting more popular. You see many bikes and many bike shops appearing today in almost any community and the heartlands.

Cycling has always been a part of my life. In school, I cycled to school from home. Of course, when I started working, it became part of a fitness routine. That goes the same for many Singaporeans, and I can attest to the development of the cycling infrastructure in Singapore.

It used to be just cycling on the roads. Today, we have cycling lanes, even shared paths with the pedestrians within the heartlands, especially in cycling towns like Tampines and Pasir Ris. It is just not recreational any more, it is also part of sports, part of fitness lifestyle for many, many Singaporeans.

Cycling itself has diverse needs that we have to cater to, and also diverse interests. Many a time, because of the increase in the popularity of cycling, you see accidents, and it is one accident too many.

Many measures would have to be taken in terms of safety measures, and I know that the Ministry has taken a multi-prong approach of 3Es – Enforcement, Education and also the Environment, which is really the infrastructure. I am glad that the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Transport, Assoc Prof Dr Muhammad Faishal Ibrahim, and the staff of MOT and LTA have taken a keen interest in cycling and they have engaged the community really well and implemented several measures. I urge them not to discontinue some of the efforts and also to consider some new measures, especially those that we can see in some successful cycling cities, for example, Amsterdam and Holland.

Let me just give an example that I took from the website – the Bike Fares from the Amsterdam city. They have a population of 16 million, but they own 18 million bikes, and, nationally, the total bicycle accident deaths hover around only 200. In Amsterdam, about six people die in bike-related accidents yearly. The average distance travelled by bike per person per day was 2.5 kilometres in 2006. Some of these data are dated, but you can measure the appropriate

Page: 32

numbers relatively. A bicycle is used for almost a quarter of all journeys and 35% of journeys are shorter than 7.5 kilometres. I think the cycling habit is somewhat similar to the cyclist behaviour in Singapore.

Let us continue to take a multi-prong approach. Let us focus on the 3Es and continue to build infrastructure that is safe for cyclists, not just on the road but also build up dedicated lanes that are safe for pedestrians while they share the path with cyclists.

I think it is really important that we do not just take care of cyclists but we have to educate them. And also educate or do road shows or clinics in schools, in dormitories, office places, so that more people are aware of the safety not just for the cyclists but for themselves as pedestrians, and even the motorists, to embrace the different road users, especially those two-wheelers on the road. And then we can have a safer culture and environment for cyclists in the future.

Mdm Chair, on cycling, Minister of State Teo has spoken up on behalf of cycling as a lifestyle choice and a fitness choice. I would like to also advocate for it as a commuting choice. I would like to ask the Ministry to provide an update on the progress of the National Cycling Plan. Are there any significant observations that have been made in monitoring the patterns of intra-town cycling? What measures does the Ministry intend to adopt to encourage more people to cycle?

There are specific obstacles to the adoption of cycling as a primary mode of transport. Foremost is safety. are there measures that are going to be implemented to improve the safety of cyclists on the road? A corollary is the issue of cycling behaviour: are there measures that will be taken to improve the compliance of cyclists to existing road safety regulations?

Ours is, generally, a good physical environment for cycling as a primary means of transport. We do have heavy rain, but we do not have ice, the hail, the snow, the sleet; no typhoons or strong winds. Our roads are generally in excellent condition, and there are relatively few steep hills. Some of those steep hills are, of course, of interest to sports and fitness cyclists; but for commuting, thankfully there are relatively few steep hills. Our density means that most things are within a cycle-friendly distance, emphasised by groups of road cyclists that happily traverse the entire nation on an early morning Sunday ride.

It is a shame then that the greatest risks to the safety of cyclists are not the large forces of nature, nor the problems of basic infrastructure. The risks to

Page: 33

cyclists are not intractable nor intrinsic, the greatest risks are human behaviours, the behaviours of other road users and the behaviours of cyclists. These are difficult problems to solve through policy and legislation, but no less critical to address. What is MOT doing to address these issues?

Another obstacle to the option of cycling as a primary means of transport is security. To promote cycling, we need an improved provision of secure bike parking facilities, in the HDB estates, at transport nodes, and also at the workplace.

I am sure the Ministry has many plans to look at cycling paths, park connectors and other initiatives. But I would suggest that we need to directly address the safety of cyclists and the security of their bicycles in order to positively influence the use of cycling as a primary mode of transport.

Mdm Chairperson, cycling remains a popular and convenient means of transport over short distances for many Singaporeans, and even foreign workers near industrial areas. Its popularity as a sport has also increased markedly over the years. The extension of the National Cycling Plan to seven HDB towns in the very near future is also likely to increase ridership. Unfortunately, the popularity of cycling to run chores for work or leisure has also resulted in a larger number of accidents, brushes and near misses both on our roads and in the housing estates. In fact, a Straits Times report last month observed that the general level of safety awareness has not kept up with cycling initiatives. Would the Ministry consider an inter-agency educational campaign covering cycling etiquette and other personal road safety measures for cyclists on our roads as part of a National Safe Cycling framework?

In working towards a review of the safety-related aspects of cycling for work or leisure, there would also be scope for cooperation with other Ministries like MND to address ridership patterns on the common property of Town Councils as well. Even though existing Town Councils' bye-laws technically prohibit cycling in some common areas, these are difficult to enforce in practice, and some cyclists and teenagers, in particular, innocuously float this rule, putting children and older Singaporeans who are not able to react quickly at harm. A National Safe Cycling framework can support Town Council's effort in educating cyclists to dismount from one's bicycle and to push it along under HDB void decks in particular. To this end, would the Ministry consider a legislative review of the Road Traffic Bicycles Rules? And more importantly, work towards greater exposure and public awareness of these rules for the

Page: 34

community at large.

I would also like to ask the Minister: as the National Cycling Plan is rolled out over seven HDB towns by next year, are there any plans of rolling out this initiative to other constituencies?

Madam, I have been a champion for cycling since I became a Member of Parliament in 2001, and the experience has been not unlike a mountain-bike ride; ups and downs over rough terrain. There are challenging obstacles which test your will power and determination. But unlike a mountain-bike ride, the experience cannot be said to be enjoyable. However, the going has gotten better in recent years.

A major breakthrough was when Tampines was named Singapore's first cycling town in 2010, and after a draining battle with bureaucracy. I must say that this breakthrough was possible only with the strong support of my fellow Tampines Members, especially our Minister-in-charge at the time, Mr Mah Bow Tan, and Mr Teo Ser Luck who was then in Transport. I should also thank the Cabinet Members, in particular, the then Minister-Mentor Mr Lee Kuan Yew, who recognised cycling as a sustainable form of transport.

Progress since then has been a series of stops and starts. We are grateful for the 1.2-kilometre cycling lane in Tampines that LTA built in 2010. But 1.2 kilometres do not get one very far. LTA has promised to build another 5.7 kilometres by 2011, and after several postponements and also some appeals from me, this stretch will now be completed by this year. I suppose better late than never.

But is this the right approach to investing in cycling?

If we are serious about promoting cycling as a mode of transport, we need long-term, sustained and a consistent investment and a strategy. Only with a steady and dependable stream of cycling funding can we be able to develop the expertise and initiatives needed to move cycling forward.

The authorities should welcome citizen-led initiatives. By showing a greater willingness to try them out, we foster a sense of ownership of the town. So far, however, my experience with this has been mixed at best. I make these

Page: 35

comments more in sorrow than in anger.

One example: we noticed that busy junctions can be dangerous for both cyclists and pedestrians, as they come into conflict while trying to beat the "green man". I asked LTA to please draw a line to separate cyclists from pedestrians at these crossings. This will create a separate bike crossing, and make it safer for both pedestrians and cyclists to cross the road.

I took photos of such bike crossings in other cities, such as Paris and London, and passed them to LTA. This was met with resistance over a long period. I had to bring the matter up to higher levels before one was finally piloted at a busy junction in 2010. It proved successful. Residents found it increased their safety and, since then, two more have been added and we hope there will be more.

Now I am in a battle with LTA to introduce a directional arrow on cycling lanes to guide cyclists to keep left so that they would not come into conflict with each other. I have seen it in many major cycling cities in the world and I have made this request to LTA about two years ago. And we are still discussing.

Madam, it is obviously good news that we have got a Parliamentary Secretary who says he is keen to promote cycling, but we need to make sure his enthusiasm is shared across the Government, and in the bureaucracy of the Transport Ministry. For that, we need a coherent policy framework and a vision for cycling. Without this, we will continue to have a piecemeal and ad hoc approach. The policy framework should include a cycling infrastructure which is integrated seamlessly with the transport system, including cycle-rail integration, cycle lanes and secure bike parking, as well as bold measures to increase road safety for cyclists, as have been mentioned by several Members before me.

Most important is to shape a culture, an attitude, which accepts that cycling is a mode of transport, where cyclists are respected and not treated as a nuisance. And where requests to improve cycling conditions and safety are not treated as trivial.

Madam, we need a transformative policy change in our approach to cycling of the kind we see in major cities, such as Paris, London and New York. We need strong leadership to drive the policies forward.

Page: 36

Your time is up, Ms Ng. Mr Patrick Tay.

Madam, in the Nee Soon East constituency, we have a few major foreign worker dormitories with more than 10,000 foreign workers situated within a stone's throw away from the HDB flats. Early last year, acting on feedback of overcrowding of feeder bus service 811 exacerbated by foreign workers in the nearby dormitories who use the feeder service as well, our grassroots worked with the dormitory operator and helped appeal for a private bus operator to run a feeder service customised for the foreign workers in the dormitory.

However, earlier this year during my block visits, residents shared with me and I have confirmed that the overcrowding of the same bus service has come back, filled by the spillover from the foreign workers. In fact, even without the foreign workers, the bus is already very crowded and many residents have to wait for the third and fourth bus to board.

I am, therefore, asking MOT to seriously look into the mandatory provision of transport for the tens of thousands of foreign workers from their dormitories directly to their place of work, as they add to the strain on our public transport system, especially feeder services, as, in my case, during the busy time windows daily.

Secondly, many of us have also seen many cyclists cycling in void decks and walkways which is illegal and poses a danger to residents, especially the elderly and the young. Many of our constituencies have rolled out education and enforcement efforts as well as building obstacles to impede and building specialised bicycle paths around the neighbourhood. The challenge is that many still flout the rules because it is convenient and easy to do so. What more can MOT do to curb this besides the creation of more cycling paths?

In the same vein, I have personally seen many abandoned bicycles at MRT stations and void decks as some of these bicycles cost little. Will MOT study the feasibility of the issuance of licence for bicycles as in decades ago, with a serial number attached and linked to an owner, so that people who flout traffic rules or law and abandon their bicycles or when these bicycles are stolen, they can

Page: 37

be more easily traced and enforcement action taken?

Mr Ang Wei Neng, please take your two cuts together.

Madam, many residents like to cycle like Minister of State Teo Ser Luck. They cycle to MRT stations and to run errands, especially when the amenities are not within walking distance from the home. A lesson learnt from the recent fatal accident involving two brothers cycling in Tampines reminds us of the importance of safe cycling, and this is the very town that the Member Ms Irene Ng is promoting as a cycling town.

First, I would like to urge LTA and the Traffic Police to work very closely together to promote safe cycling. Perhaps, we should strongly discourage minors from cycling on the road as they may not fully appreciate the road safety requirements and are ignorant of the Highway Code.

Secondly, I hope the LTA and URA can work closely together to jointly build off-road cycling paths exclusively for cyclists. To this end, I hope the Minister could update us on the pilot plan to construct dedicated cycling paths in seven HDB estates.

Thirdly, I would like to urge LTA to provide safe and secure parking facilities at MRT stations where many say that the parking facilities are not adequate, and also at commercial facilities at the HDB town centres as well as HDB void decks so that residents will not have to park their bicycles along the common corridor which will cause obstruction to other residents. We need to promote safe cycling more aggressively as it is a more sustainable mode of transport, as mentioned by many Members.

Madam, during the COS debate last year, I used three photographs to illustrate the need to retrofit lifts at Pedestrian Overhead Bridges (POBs) next to MRT stations. Following my plea, I am glad the Minister for Transport Mr Lui eventually announced that the MOT would install lifts at 40 POBs next to MRT stations. However, the locations of 40 POBs remain a mystery. I hope the Minister for Transport could unveil the mystery soon, and I certainly hope that the POB beside the Lakeside MRT station will be one of them.

Page: 38

In addition, I hope MOT will consider also building escalators at those heavily utilised POBs next to MRT stations.

Madam, last month, MOT announced plans to fit lifts at about 40 pedestrian overhead bridges near train stations or bus interchanges. At the Kampong Arang estate at Mountbatten, there is a large number of elderly residents who face daily challenges in crossing the POB without a lift. These elderly residents are restricted in their ability to travel to other parts of Singapore as they struggle on their weak knees to climb up the almost three-storey-high bridge.

MOH had recognised that there is a large proportion of elderly residents in my estate at Tanjong Rhu. Hence, MOH had set up an eldercare facility with physiotherapy machines in the estate to better provide for these elderly seniors. However, strangely, LTA did not see the urgency to cater to this same group of elderly residents.

Years ago, HDB had embarked on the LUP programme for HDB estates because HDB knew that lifts on every floor would benefit the elderly, families with young children and the disabled. I submit to the Minister for Transport that these same reasons are equally compelling for the provision of lifts at pedestrian overhead bridges.

I thank Members for their many questions, comments and suggestions. Madam, Minister Lui has announced our goal to increase the peak period public transport mode share to 75% by 2030, a significant increase from 62% today. With as many as three out of four people taking public transport, we must significantly improve our public transport system and its supporting infrastructure, such as roads and walking facilities.

With your permission, Madam, I will display some slides on the LED screens. When I joined MOT last August, I tried to meet as many stakeholders as possible. I met public transport commuters, drivers, cyclists, motorcyclists, pedestrians, students and retirees, as part of the focus group discussions for the review of the Land Transport Master Plan, and informal discussions which I held regularly.

I also visited the two public transport operators. These sessions helped me better understand our transport needs and the viewpoints of various

Page: 39

stakeholders. I thank all of them.

Many good ideas have also been expressed in Parliament over the past few months, as well as in the various speeches that Members have just made. I would like to take this opportunity to share with Members some of the plans and initiatives that we will pursue in three areas – road safety, cycling and in creating an elderly-friendly land transport system.

Let me start by talking about road safety. Safety is a key consideration when we design our transport system. Unfortunately, in 2012, we experienced the tragedy of 169 road-related deaths. Like all Singaporeans, I am saddened each time I hear of a new road accident. It has prompted me to reflect on how safe our roads are, and ask what more we can do in this area.

Compared to other countries, Singapore has a fairly good track record in road safety. In 2012, our road fatality rate was 3.2 per 100,000 persons, an improvement from 3.8 in 2011, and lower than many other countries, as we can see on the slide [A slide was shown to hon Members. Please see Annex 2.]

But numbers give little comfort to those who have suffered the loss of their loved ones. This is why, with every serious accident, we investigate and review thoroughly to determine if additional measures are needed to enhance safety at the accident location. For instance, under the "Black Spot Programme" for locations with a high occurrence of accidents, LTA will implement additional road engineering measures to reduce the number and severity of accidents. Some examples include traffic calming markings painted on the roads, and advance warning lights to alert motorists to stop. LTA also has a comprehensive preventive programme in place, such as regularly auditing the safety performance of roads, both during the day and night, to identify potential road hazards before accidents happen.

I agree with Members, such as Dr Janil Puthucheary and Mr Pritam Singh, that we can do more for vulnerable road users, particularly children and the elderly. Last week, the Second Minister for Home Affairs described a comprehensive "Safer Roads Singapore" strategy to keep our roads safe. In conjunction with this strategy, I am chairing an inter-agency committee to specifically review safety measures on the road for pedestrians and cyclists. The Committee on Pedestrian and Cyclist Safety will develop an Action Plan for the next five years, and will actively engage local communities and the people, public and private sectors.

Page: 40

On pedestrian safety, the Committee will pay special attention to the needs of the elderly and school children. Members, such as Dr Intan Azura Mokhtar, Mr Alex Yam and Mr Png Eng Huat, have raised the issue of road safety for schools, in the past like Dr Lim Wee Kiak, will be pleased to know that one of the very first areas that the Committee will review is safety within school zones. LTA and the Traffic Police regularly review and improve traffic safety measures in collaboration with schools. We have already implemented several measures to enhance road safety near schools, such as the recognisable red-textured road surface, additional railings and traffic calming markings. The schools also play their part in educating the students, as well as their parents, on road safety.

The Committee, which includes members from LTA, the Traffic Police and MOE, as well as the Singapore Road Safety Council, will build on these efforts. It will examine the possibility of reducing speed limits around schools, as some people have suggested, and providing additional infrastructure, such as speed humps, flashing LED lights and more signages. We will also consider Dr Intan's suggestion for railings at both sides of the road in school zones, instead of only at the centre divider. All these will complement the stricter enforcement stance that the Traffic Police takes at school zones. We may start off with piloting some of these measures at selective locations to better understand their effectiveness. Our message is clear – for school zones, our priority is to ensure the safety of our children.

But we need to go beyond putting in more traffic schemes and measures at our school zones. We need to put in equal effort to inculcate in our young a safety consciousness when they use our roads. So, I agree with Mr Alex Yam and Mr Teo Ser Luck on the need to review road safety education in schools. The Second Minister for Home Affairs has shared the Traffic Police's efforts to educate school children on road safety. We can certainly do more, for instance, doing road shows, as what Mr Teo has suggested. My personal view is that we need to find creative ways to get the message across, especially to our young ones in schools, and I welcome any suggestions the public may have. In fact, the Committee will explore customising the safety message for different groups of road users, to achieve greater resonance. Over time, we hope to shape behaviour so that there is a sustained culture of safe and courteous road use.

The elderly is another group we need to educate on crossing roads safely. We have expanded the Green Man Plus scheme to more locations, to give the elderly more time to cross the road. I will talk more about ensuring that the transport system caters to the needs of the elderly in a little while.

Page: 41

More broadly, the Committee will look into how pedestrian safety on our roads can be improved. Dr Janil has suggested instituting a "pedestrian safety first" framework. I think, by and large, this is the ideal approach, especially for places where there is high pedestrian traffic. However, in a dense road network like ours, where all road users share a common space, we need to adopt a balanced approach, where we place the highest priority on the safety of pedestrians and motorists, while still keeping the road network reasonably efficient.

A good illustration of this point is the simultaneous right-turning traffic and pedestrian crossing arrangement, where motorists can make use of the gaps in oncoming traffic and pedestrians crossing to make a right turn at junctions. This is a common international practice, for example, in countries such as the UK, the US, Japan and Australia. Dr Janil has asked us to remove it for safety reasons, and LTA has indeed done so, on a case-by-case basis, after careful observation of the traffic flows, and in situations where LTA found that motorists' view of the pedestrian crossing could be blocked. The right-turn movements at these junctions would then be guided by red-amber-green arrow signals.

However, I would hesitate to remove the traffic scheme for all locations, as it could result in an unmanageable build-up of traffic, and may result in some impatient motorists resorting to reckless behaviour to beat the traffic lights, and ultimately put pedestrians at greater risk. As Dr Janil himself highlighted, it is unfortunate that oftentimes, it is human behaviour that poses the greatest safety risk, not infrastructure. We, therefore, need to consider the characteristics of each road junction individually before we consider removing this simultaneous turning traffic arrangement, instead of introducing a blanket rule. In cases where removing the arrangement is not advisable, there are alternatives to alert motorists, for instance, intelligent road studs that flash in tandem with the "green man" signal to remind motorists to give way to pedestrians. The Committee will study these alternatives. But I would also urge pedestrians to practise basic safety habits, such as looking out for cars before crossing, even if the traffic lights are in their favour. The best rules and the most sophisticated traffic control system can never deal with the occasional careless or reckless driver.

Let me now respond to specific queries two Members have raised. First, Mr Baey Yam Keng asked about ensuring safety around construction sites in residential areas. LTA works with agencies and contractors to try to ensure that

Page: 42

heavy vehicles accessing construction sites avoid areas with high pedestrian activity and schools. However, this may not always be possible, depending on the location of the construction site. In all cases, clear warning signs are put up around construction sites to alert road users of the movement of heavy vehicles. LTA is working with Mr Baey to review the routes taken by heavy vehicles in Tampines. The Committee will review Mr Baey's other suggestions for a penalty system for employers and hirers of drivers of heavy vehicles, and installing video recorders in all heavy vehicles.

Secondly, Mr Ang Wei Neng suggested leveraging on technology to be more productive in enforcing traffic rules to ensure safety and improve traffic flow. Since November 2011, LTA has conducted a CCTV trial at Beach Road and Marine Parade Central to detect and enforce against illegal parking, which is a safety hazard. The trial has shown that CCTVs are effective in detecting and deterring illegal parking, and has helped to improve traffic conditions in those areas over time. LTA will thus be expanding the use of CCTVs to more locations island-wide. More details will be released later, and LTA will continue to explore other areas where technology can be deployed to aid enforcement. The Traffic Police will also upgrade their network of red light and speed cameras island-wide, to complement the employment of more manpower to patrol our roads. Collectively, these measures will help both agencies better detect and deter traffic offenders. Lastly, LTA will review Mr Ang's suggestion on issuing warning letters before summonses, possibly for offences with minimal or no safety implications.

Madam, next, I would like to focus on cycling safety. This is a common concern among the feedback I have received and from cycling enthusiasts as well as concerned parents. I asked them for their ideas, and I was pleasantly surprised that many of them have stepped forward to volunteer their time and effort, to partner us in spreading the safe cycling message. Let me share two examples.

A few months ago, Mr Steven Lim, President of the Safe Cycling Task Force, and I went to meet Mdm Roslinah Rajab, who had written on my Facebook wall about how her son nearly got into an accident with a vehicle while cycling to school. She brought along a few of her friends to meet us, and, as a group, they felt that they, too, had to do their part to promote safe cycling. One of the things they wanted to do was to produce a short video to spread the safe cycling message. So, we helped to facilitate the filming of the video, which they have titled "Rolling Smart" and uploaded on YouTube.

Page: 43

Mr Lim and the Safe Cycling Task Force also suggested that the existing signs alerting motorists to the presence of sports cyclists along popular training routes should be made more visible. I have asked LTA to work with the Task Force on this, and they will put up these signs by the middle of the year on these routes, as well as several other routes that are starting to become quite popular with cyclists, for instance, in Tanjong Rhu and in Yishun.

While we can do more to alert motorists to the presence of cyclists, I have also received feedback from pedestrians, casual cyclists and motorists on the risky behaviour of some cyclists. Dr Janil also raised this just now. One particular issue that keeps surfacing is cyclists who ride through zebra crossings without stopping to look out for oncoming vehicles, let alone dismounting. We need to remind cyclists that they, too, need to play their part to ensure safety, and we will consider Mr Teo Ser Luck's suggestion of a dedicated public education budget to do so. LTA will also launch a guidebook on safe cycling tips in a few months' time, and continue to try new ways to remind cyclists to dismount at zebra crossings. One initiative that we are trying out is painting new markings at zebra crossings well-used by cyclists. LTA will trial this at three locations around Tampines, starting today. In conjunction with the trial, LTA is working with the Traffic Police and local community volunteers to engage cyclists to encourage them to dismount at crossings.

Where space permits, we will try out building separate mid-block bicycle crossings for cyclists. This has been done at Park Connectors, as well as two locations at neighbourhood centres, in Tampines and Simei. You can see them on the slide. Several more will be completed at Tampines and Sembawang Towns this quarter. Mr Teo Ser Luck would be pleased to know that we will identify more suitable locations for such crossings in tandem with the cycling paths that we are building.

A few people that I have met have suggested an on-road cycling lane pilot. In other countries, they are implemented as painted lines on roads with no physical protection for cyclists. We may not want to follow their example, given our heavy traffic situation, and for the sake of the safety of our cyclists. I seek Members' and Singaporeans' understanding that on-road cycling lanes would also affect the movement of buses, require the removal of street-side parking and expose cyclists to turning traffic if the lanes are not properly designed. That said, LTA is identifying roads where these issues could be overcome, and studying the feasibility of trying out on-road cycling lanes along these roads.

On the other hand, Mr Ang Wei Neng suggested that we need to discourage young children from cycling on roads, as they are particularly vulnerable. This

Page: 44

is a tempting suggestion, but the more important point is that on-road cycling is risky, and no one, young or old, who is not confident of cycling on the road, should do so.

I would like to thank Mr Teo Ser Luck for sharing with us about the Amsterdam experience. Indeed, our staff, together with myself, we have been trying to study the experiences of other cities. What I find is that there are many lessons that we can learn from them. Nevertheless, I realise each city or even localities have their own path, have their own journey in their cycling, building up their cycling framework, building up their culture as well as the norms of road safety. It is important for us to note that there are countries whereby people, by their development of the country, where many would have cycled before they drive. So, currently, when they drive, they would understand how it feels like to be a cyclist. For some countries where its development is so fast, many would not have the experience. So, each country would have their own paths and providing for signs, signages or even markings on the road, we have also looked at various countries. What we want to urge Members and Singaporeans to understand is that it is a journey that we need to go on together. It is a journey where we will have trials, where we should try. If it does not work, we will improve. But I hope Members and Singaporeans would be open to try some of these ideas that LTA staff have been working very hard over the years to see how they can have a balanced approach in providing the diverse needs of transport mode for our people.

And looking at the journey that we have, I realise that it is a long journey. For many cities, they have taken 50 years or more to arrive at where they are today. My predecessors, like Mr Teo Ser Luck and fellow Singaporeans, have started the journey of safe cycling, providing the infrastructure for safe cycling and so forth. So, we have started the journey and I think we are going in the right direction and I look forward to Members' support.

Indeed, based on my engagements, the cycling community agrees with me that off-road cycling is much safer than cycling on the road. Off-road cycling paths provide a safe cycling environment for a larger group of cyclists of different ages and competency levels. Hence, given the safety considerations, the Government will prioritise resources to build more off-road cycling paths. To this end, we have made good progress in building cycling paths in seven cycling towns under the National Cycling Plan which is integrated with the rest of our transport plans.

Dr Janil, Mr Ang and Ms Irene Ng would be pleased to know that LTA will finish building off-road cycling paths in Tampines and Sembawang this year.

Page: 45

The cycling path networks in the remaining five towns – Bedok, Changi-Simei, Pasir Ris, Taman Jurong and Yishun – as well as areas, such as East Coast, Jurong Lake District, Marina Bay and the Punggol Eco-Town, will be progressively completed by 2015.

We will expand this programme by adding 90 more kilometres of cycling paths to several more HDB towns, bringing the total network to some 210 kilometres of dedicated off-road cycling paths to about 16 towns, or more than half of all HDB towns, by 2020. Our eventual aim is for every HDB town to have a comprehensive cycling network for residents to cycle to the MRT station or to buy their groceries at the neighbourhood centres. Coupled with the extensive Park Connector Network that the National Parks Board is building, we will truly have an islandwide safe cycling network for Singaporeans to enjoy. LTA is also studying the feasibility of building cycling paths at major industrial estates so that workers in the estates have the option of cycling within the estate and to and from the nearest MRT station. It will take some time for all the cycling infrastructure projects to be completed, so I ask for some patience, and would like to assure cyclists that we are working hard to accomplish this.

In the meantime, I have asked LTA to see if we can prioritise resources to quickly plug short gaps in the cycling path network. Avid cyclists have alerted me that there are opportunities to connect existing Park Connectors to MRT stations nearby, for example, the ones at Sengkang and Yio Chu Kang. These are low-hanging fruits that can be picked before comprehensive cycling plans are finalised and rolled out. LTA will work with the local communities to close these gaps in the cycling network so that cyclists need not go onto the road or footpath to complete the final leg of their journey to reach the MRT station. In the long term, the cycling paths that LTA is building will be well-integrated with the Park Connectors.

Next, there have been requests to allow foldable bicycles on the public transport system beyond the current hours, specifically, during the morning pre-peak window. This will enable cycling to effectively close the last mile connectivity gap for trips to work. I support this idea. The challenge is for us to find the right cut-off timing in the morning such that the foldable bicycles do not add to our morning peak-hour crowds. We will study this carefully.

To facilitate the ease of cycling as a first-and-last mile mode of transport, we will build more bicycle racks at our MRT stations. Last year, we announced that we will be building 2,400 racks at 20 MRT stations. These have been favourably received and we will build another 600 racks at 12 more MRT

Page: 46

stations by the third quarter of next year.

Dr Janil and Mr Ang Wei Neng proposed for more secured bicycle parking around HDB estates, especially at void decks. Mr Ang also suggested using closed circuit television (CCTV) cameras to monitor these bicycle racks. Most of these racks are provided by the Town Councils, but community groups are also stepping forward. I was happy to hear the Senior Minister of State for National Development, Mr Lee Yi Shyan, speak earlier in Parliament that Yuhua residents are coming together to discuss the provision of secured bicycle parking facilities within their estate to support the 24 kilometres of cycling paths in Jurong Town. We should also be able to gain some useful ideas to design secured bicycle parking from those submitted by the public for the ongoing Bicycle Bay Design Competition jointly organised by the Singapore Police Force and the National Crime Prevention Council.

For those who do not own bicycles or would prefer the convenience of using bicycles for one-way trips, LTA is planning a pilot bicycle-sharing scheme, like those in other cities. Currently, the plan is to conduct the pilot at the Jurong Lake District, which will have a comprehensive network of cycling paths by end 2015, and a mix of different land uses that will provide strong demand for the shared bicycles throughout the day. We will request proposals from the industry in the coming months. We will also consider piloting bicycle sharing in one of the cycling towns if there is interest from the community and Members here. With all the above initiatives, I expect cycling to become even more popular as a mode of transport in the future. I welcome Members who have been advocates of cycling, like Ms Irene Ng, Mr Teo Ser Luck and Dr Janil, to continue this journey with us.

Before I wrap up on cycling, let me briefly address Mr Patrick Tay's suggestion to license bicycles to curb offences, and Mr Teo Ser Luck's suggestion on some of the areas. Mr Teo has also spoken to me about the mandatory Highway Code training sessions, which he feels would effectively require the licensing of bicycles. We used to license bicycles but stopped in 1982 because it was too onerous for bicycle owners, especially those who cycle only for recreational purposes and not as a mode of transport. Furthermore, licensing would need to be coupled with adequate enforcement to be effective. As licensing is neither practical nor cost-effective, it is something we do not think is needed for now. Other countries, such as the US and the UK, have

Page: 47

adopted a similar position.

I also note Mr Tay's point on sharp spikes in crowding on our public transport system due to foreign workers from dormitories. A survey conducted by MOM and the Migrant Workers' Centre in 2011 showed that most employers provide dedicated transport for their foreign workers, and that less than 15% of foreign workers living in dormitories take public transport. Nevertheless, we understand that there are certain localised bus routes and areas where public transport overcrowding is more acute. An interagency panel, including MOM and MND, is working closely with stakeholders, including dormitory operators and employers, to consider practical solutions.

Lastly, I would like to take a look at the future of our transport system. As our population ages, the needs of our elderly will become more acute. We will need to ensure that they will be able to move around easily, not just around transport nodes, such as MRT stations and bus interchanges, but also around our roads and public places, as Mr Heng Chee How had emphasised. The transport sector must play our part to make it easier for seniors to pursue active ageing.

We are making good progress in improving the barrier-free accessibility of our transport system. All our MRT and LRT stations are barrier-free and, soon, all our bus interchanges will be, too. Half of our public buses are already wheelchair-accessible and, by 2020, all of them will be so.

To enable the elderly to navigate our roads more easily, we have started to install lifts at selected pedestrian overhead bridges. Mr Lim Biow Chuan and Mr Ang would be pleased to know that lifts at six bridges will be completed by the end of the year, and we will build lifts at about 40 more bridges. LTA plans to build the lifts in batches of about six each. Tenders will be called this quarter for the first batch of overhead bridges near Admiralty, Boon Lay, Lakeside, Marsiling, Outram Park and Serangoon MRT stations. These bridges were chosen because they are near major transport nodes and key amenities and are used by many people daily, and because in these areas there is no barrier-free alternative nearby. Tenders for the second batch of lifts will be called next quarter.

Beyond these plans, we need to take a more comprehensive look at how our transport system can cater to the needs of the elderly. I agree with Mr Heng that we should work with other agencies to study their needs, especially in estates where they are significantly higher in numbers, and expand existing

Page: 48

programmes, such as lifts at overhead bridges, as Mr Lim Biow Chuan had asked for, or pilot innovative solutions where we can.

We are also mindful that the little things matter for the individual's travel experience. LTA has been working closely with MOH, HDB and the community to make land transport infrastructure more elderly friendly in the City For All Ages pilot projects in Marine Parade, Bedok, Whampoa and Taman Jurong. For example, LTA will smoothen out uneven parts of pavements where the elderly may run a risk of tripping. In Marine Parade, LTA has also piloted elderly friendly bus stop seats with hand grips for the elderly to support themselves when getting up from their seat, as well as bus panels with larger fonts so that the elderly can read them easily. These elderly friendly improvements came about because residents, young and old, had proactively offered suggestions to us based on their daily travel experience, and I thank all of them.

Madam, I have outlined several ways by which we intend to make our transport system safer, more accessible and more inclusive. Through the feedback sessions and channels, I have come to realise that there are many diverse needs of Singaporeans that the public transport system has to fulfil. In the past, when Singapore was developing, we had to make difficult choices as we could only afford the most cost-efficient public transport system. We had to prioritise our scarce resources and make sure that the needs of the masses were taken care of first. Today, we can afford to do a bit more, for example, in making our buses and trains barrier-free, and building more cycling paths, and we will certainly do so.

Moving forward, we will continue to meet as many stakeholders as possible, engage them in a dialogue to understand their concerns and, from there, work with them to develop and prioritise solutions that can best meet their needs. I hope that Singaporeans will work together with us to improve our transport system.

Madam, Changi Airport is a source of pride for Singaporeans. More than just a public convenience, it symbolises in many ways the progress which Singapore has made and, like the rest of Singapore, it has grown, adapted and improved over the years.

Changi Airport is also a centrepiece of Singapore's aviation industry and is an iconic symbol of this sector in Singapore. However, over the years, Changi

Page: 49

has come under pressure both regionally and internationally. A number of new and very impressive Asian airports have started operations in the last few years and travellers are more willing to endure stopovers in the Middle Eastern airports in exchange for paying slightly lower fares.

Being part of the industry myself, I am concerned that Singapore's position as an air hub is being eroded by our regional and international competitors. Would the Minister please provide an update on how Singapore has fared as an air hub over the last year or so, as well as to elaborate on the prospects and challenges for Singapore's aviation industry. Are there plans to further encourage the growth of the industry and, if so, what do we see as factors which continue to give Singapore an edge over our competitors?

Now, turning to Changi Airport specifically, could the Minister provide an update on the development of the new Terminal 4 and also provide some insights on how it may further grow the low-cost carrier (LCC) segment in Singapore? Has the temporary move from the Budget Terminal to Terminal 2 resulted in an increase in overall fares for LCC passengers since they are now being serviced out of a full-service facility?

Also, has a decision been reached as to the use of Changi Airport's third runway for civilian flights?

Finally, would the Minister please also provide us with an update on the work of Changi 2036 Steering Committee which was announced in last year's COS? Has the Committee been able to provide any preliminary recommendations to enable Changi Airport's market-leading position to be retained?

Madam, it has also been some years now since it was announced that Seletar Airport could be transformed into a world-class aerospace park. Since the announcement of this initiative in 2007, much progress has been made on the project, including the improvement of roads, drainage and utilities to making available of additional land for commercial leases and the commissioning of a new control tower and an extended runway. The infrastructure development is moving at a good rate and the Seletar aerospace park development is now into its third and final phase. I would like to ask the Minister to provide some details, however, on what other support has been

Page: 50

provided to attract business to the Seletar aerospace park.

We are looking to make the Seletar aerospace hub a market-leading business and general aviation facility, and a maintenance, repair and overhaul (MRO) centre, but solely to provide infrastructural support does not seem quite to be enough. Part of Seletar's disadvantage, when compared with Changi Airport, is the distance from and the lack of good public transportation links to central Singapore. It is certainly not difficult to get to Seletar but just that little bit more inconvenient than it is to get to Changi. But it is factors such as these which can make or break a project. Would the Minister, therefore, let us know if there are any plans to make Seletar Airport more accessible to business and general aviation clusters? And while there are already a number of companies providing MRO operations at Seletar, could the Minister let us know if there is capacity to grow this industry at Seletar and, if so, what incentives are being made available to companies intending to set up MRO operations there?

Like Mr Charles Chong, I am interested to know about the recommendations and findings of the Changi 2036 Steering Committee on airports.

As the Minister knows, the Kangaroo route is very important to many airlines in Singapore, and this is the route between Europe, Singapore and Australia. With the introduction of long-range aircraft, some carriers, especially from the Middle East, are now implementing Europe, Middle East to Australia flights and thereby bypassing Singapore altogether. Would the Minister share with us strategies to see how we can remain relevant for such routes?

Also, Seletar Airport, as Mr Charles Chong explained, could potentially be an airport for private jets. I see two benefits in that. One, there could be a higher level of CIP services for such private jet owners than available at Changi Airport; and second, it frees up the runway at Changi.

Madam, before I start, I would like to declare that I am the Managing Director of Pacific International

Page: 51

Lines and the past President of the Singapore Shipping Association (SSA).

In my COS speech today, I will touch on two subjects. Firstly, extending the tenure of the Maritime Sector Incentive-Approved international Shipping Enterprise Award (MSAI-AIS) scheme by 10 years. I am happy to note that the maximum tenure of the MSI-AIS has been increased from 30 years to 40 years. This is good news, especially for those companies which are into the third incentive period. They are grateful for the clarity, and their shipping profits have been granted a further 10 years of tax exemption, even though many shipping companies are suffering from heavy losses.

Secondly, we need to safeguard and grow Singapore's status as an international maritime centre, better known as IMC. For close to two decades, the Maritime and Port Authority of Singapore (MPA) has carefully nurtured an ecosystem of businesses built around the port, shipowners, operators, ship managers, brokers, financiers and marine insurers, to establish Singapore as an IMC. Today, we have some 5,000 maritime companies employing 170,000 local and foreign personnel, contributing to about 7% of our GDP.

Last year, Singapore maintained its position as the world's busiest port and the world's largest bunkering port. Our ship registry reached 65 million gross tonnes and is ranked amongst the top 10 ship registries in the world.

Shipping is a global business which carries 90% of world trade. Its highly mobile business structure employs multinational seafarers and shore-based staff which often require job rotation opportunities to serve clients across its global network. This requires people with technical skills and international experience/perspectives.

Thus, when Work Permits and Employment Passes become increasingly difficult to obtain, it will not only affect foreign expertise coming into Singapore but also limit the transfer of skills and knowledge to our locals. How will these companies continue to operate without skilled manpower? And if these companies should decide to relocate, would not there be a reduction in job opportunities for Singaporeans too? Our status as an International Maritime Centre (IMC) would also be eroded!

Many shipping companies have also shared with me their concerns about the high business costs which was also partly contributed by the strong Singapore dollars. Over the past four years, the Singapore dollar has appreciated by 25% against the US dollar. In fact, in the shipping industry, most

Page: 52

of us earn our revenue in US dollars.

Ever since the downturn in 2008/2009, the shipping industry has already implemented drastic cost-cutting measures to mitigate against the weak global market in order to survive. This has not been helped by the high fuel costs.

The shipping community has heard our Government's call for increased productivity and would review its work processes to do more with less. I look forward to our companies working with the Maritime and Port Authority of Singapore (MPA) and the Singapore Shipping Association (SSA) to roll out its initiatives in the near future.

Last but not least, I urge more Free Trade Agreements to be signed, especially with countries in Latin America, Africa and other emerging markets. Shipping is not only a facilitator but also a catalyst for economic development and we should tap on the growth potential and opportunities available to us.

In conclusion, the MPA has done a fantastic job in presenting Singapore as an IMC, but more can be done for the shipping industry especially during this very difficult period. This will allow us to emerge stronger and be better prepared for the upturn and recovery. Together, we can further strengthen Singapore's status as an IMC which will benefit our country for years to come.

My tripartite partner has just spoken so it is the union's turn. Madam, the Budget 2013 initiative of tightening foreign worker policies has been most consistent with what Singaporeans have hoped for – "A home with a strong Singaporean identity and sense of belonging".

As we continue to grow Singapore as an international maritime hub, we must now shift our focus back to the number of Singaporeans within the industry. The maritime industry is a key industry that contributes more than 7% of GDP. MOT and MPA have contributed greatly in growing our fleet to more than 4,200 Singapore-flagged ships. The growth of our maritime industry not only benefits our economy; it also translates to 170,000 jobs in the maritime sector.

In the last COS, I urged the Government to look into plans for maritime manpower development and I am thankful that the MOT and MPA have, in the

Page: 53

last year, started the Special Limits Marine Engineer programme and continued to train Singaporeans as Nautical Officers under the Special Limits Officers Programme.

The WDA, e2i and SSA have also shown their support to the Singapore Maritime Officers' Union (SMOU) where I am the Executive Secretary, in our Tripartite Nautical Training Awards (TNTA) programme which was introduced to train those who are not academically inclined, thus giving these Singaporeans a chance they would have never otherwise been given to join this industry.

It is heartening to see more Singaporeans coming forward to apply for these programmes to fulfil their aspirations to sail as Seafaring Officers. Furthermore, these programmes also provide an opportunity for our low-income Singaporeans to improve their social mobility with decent work and good wages.

In the mid-1980s during the recession, many viewed seafaring as a sunset career as wages were low for Singaporeans who were competing with low-cost foreign seafarers.

However, today the scenario has changed. An entry-level third officer for foreign-going vessels can earn an average of S$3,800 per month. A sea captain can earn from S$10,000 to S$25,000 a month depending on the type of vessel. The S$10,000 monthly wages of a captain is more than three times our national median wages in 2012.

After some years at sea, should these seafarers decide to come ashore, there are executive and management career opportunities in the maritime industry. Many are also earning no less than what they used to earn at sea.

Today, out of some 20,000 officers in more than 4,200 Singapore-flagged ships, only about a staggering 1,605 are Singaporeans. This is tragic, because these are well-paying jobs with good career prospects and good wages. I strongly believe we must change this situation and work towards 20% of Singaporeans employed on Singapore-flagged ships by 2030.

It is my aspiration to see more of these 20,000 well-paid jobs going to my fellow Singaporeans and we need to step up our efforts to show Singaporeans how attractive these careers can be so that they can choose the right education

Page: 54

path.

If we can train 500 cadets or more per year, if our shipping employers make available training berths on their ocean-going commercial vessels and more Singaporeans can have the opportunity for an exciting and promising sea career, we will be able to grow this Singaporean core to more than 8,000 Officers out of the 20,000 seagoing officers. I would like to ask the Minister to look into ways to incentivise our employers to provide training berths to train our Singaporean cadets.

Furthermore, the commitment of a dedicated training ship will be seen as our Government partaking in a stake to build a Singapore Core that will compete in a global environment as well as build our resilience for manpower needs in essential services locally to serve shipyards, harbour crafts, shipping companies and other related companies to serve Singapore as a Maritime Hub. I urge the Minister to assign just one ship for training purposes.

Madam, I would now like to shift my focus from foreign going to the local and home-trade officers categories. While we continue to train our officers, another group of our Singapore Core continues to face a more urgent and basic bread-and-butter issue. Local and home-trade Singaporean seafarers who, at one time worked in our harbour, today face unemployment.

Madam, in our recent dialogue with members, many feedback that over the years, their jobs were taken over by foreigners who today manned most of our vessels in harbour. Personally, I am also concerned about security issues. As such, Singaporeans seafarers were disheartened, and gave up their hope to revalidate their certificates to be employed.

One of the many examples is Singaporean, Mr Omar, presently aged 59, started sailing in 1978 and by 1998, at age 45, his monthly wage was $3,000. Seafarers like Mr Omar were hired on contract. By 2006, employers of Singapore-flagged ships were hiring lower wage foreigners instead of Singaporeans, and Mr Omar, then aged 53, lost his job. He managed to find employment onboard sand barges within the port. He now works 12 hours a day with only two Sundays off, earns a basic wage of $1,500 with overtime pay – his average monthly salary is less than $3,000. If Mr Omar had not lost his job to the foreigners, he would be earning over $4,000 a month with two days off for every six days he works.

Page: 55

Furthermore, because of the current dependency ratio, foreigners are employed on Singapore-flagged ships in much better conditions. Whereas Singaporeans can only find employment, on foreign-flagged ships which are in poorer conditions.

I would like to urge the Minister to work with MOM to review the current dependency ratio of disadvantaged Singaporeans in the harbour craft sector. We must further plug the loophole. Companies are currently taking advantage by fulfilling this ratio with local administrative staff, instead of seafarers. This situation has disheartened many of the seafaring officers from revalidating their certificates. Most of them are unable to afford the course fees.

I hope that the Minister will look into providing financial assistance in the form of subsidies and training allowances to this group of less well-off seafaring officers, who are out of job and need to revalidate their expired certificates, so that they can return to working onboard vessels in the harbour and earn decent wages.

Madam, why should well-paid jobs on better and newer vessel, benefit only the foreigners and not our Singaporeans? To achieve our 2030 vision of having 20% Singaporeans seagoing officers on board Singapore-flagged ships, there must be constructive Tripartism.

Lastly, if we are truly committed to building a Singapore Core, I believe the target of 20% by 2030 can be achieved.

Mdm Chair, Mr Charles Chong has highlighted the importance of our air hub, Changi Airport. The air connectivity provided by Changi greatly enhances Singapore's proposition as a global business centre. It provides critical support to our manufacturing, logistics, financial and tourism sectors.

Our air transport and airport sectors are important contributors to the economy in their own right, contributing some 7% of GDP and 165,000 jobs. But their impact on the whole economy is much more than that.

Let me respond to Members' questions about the performance of Changi Airport and its prospects.

The year 2012 was a historic year for Changi as it handled 51.2 million passengers, surpassing the 50-million mark for the first time. This was a 10%

Page: 56

increase over 2011, exceeding the 5.2% growth of passenger traffic achieved by Asia-Pacific carriers collectively.

However, airfreight volumes declined 3.2% year-on-year, in line with the global slowdown in the air cargo business. But this was less severe than the 5.5% decline in air cargo traffic experienced by airlines in the Asia-Pacific.

A new Singapore-based low-cost medium-to-long haul carrier, Scoot, commenced services in June. This new addition to the SIA family reflects changes in the aviation landscape where increasingly, low-cost carriers are driving air traffic growth in regions like Europe and Asia. Low-cost carriers (LCCs) are also increasing the connectivity of air hubs by establishing links with secondary cities that might not be commercially viable for full-service carriers to operate to. Indeed, LCCs accounted for about 28% of total passengers handled at Changi in 2012. Of the 155 direct city links at Changi, 10 are operated solely by LCCs.

In addition, Singapore concluded eight new Air Services Agreements (ASAs) and expanded five existing ones in 2012, bringing our total number of ASAs to over 120. Of note is the expanded ASA with Japan which will enable Singapore carriers to mount more services to Tokyo's Haneda Airport, which business travellers favour for its proximity to the city, and they can do so from 2014.

We will continue to pursue air services liberalisation ahead of demand to give our carriers the flexibility to grow or launch new connections once opportunities arise. This will help Changi to build on its superior connectivity. Also, in September, the Budget Terminal closed to make way for the new Terminal 4. Construction of the new terminal will commence later this year and will be completed in 2017.

As Mr Charles Chong has noted, airlines previously based at the Budget Terminal had to move to Terminal 2 during the construction of Terminal 4. The move has benefitted both airlines and passengers. Although passengers now have to pay $10 more in passenger charges, they have access to better facilities such as covered aerobridges as well as a wider range of retail shops and F&B options. Terminal 2 is also better suited to support airlines' transfer operations. For example, the relocation has enabled Tiger Airways to launch new transfer

Page: 57

products and services.

Both Dr Lily Neo and Mr Charles Chong asked for more details of the design features of the new Terminal 4. I am pleased to share with Members that Terminal 4 will offer a user experience similar to those at the other terminals, with aerobridges, airside passenger and baggage transfer to other terminals, and attractive commercial offerings. Its design will also facilitate quick flight turnaround, in line with the operating models of LCCs. I will say a little bit more of the experiments that we are going to do at Terminal 4.

One important measure of performance at Changi Airport is on-time departure. On-time departure performance deteriorated at the end of 2011 due to a higher incidence of bad weather and a surge in air traffic. However, with coordinated action taken by CAAS, the Changi Airport Group, airlines and other airport stakeholders, departure delays have been sharply reduced and are now back to pre-2011 levels. This was despite aircraft movements increasing by nearly 8% in 2012.

All in all, Singapore's aviation sector did well in 2012. For 2013, we project passenger traffic growth to moderate to 5%, in line with the subdued global economic conditions. In the longer term, we expect traffic to grow steadily, driven by the strong growth of the Asia-Pacific which will spur increased travel to, from and within the region, through existing and new city links at Changi.

During MOT's Committee of Supply Debate last year, I announced that I would chair a multi-agency Changi 2036 Steering Committee to develop a holistic long-term plan for the expansion of Changi Airport. This would include the civilian use of Changi's third runway, additional passenger terminal capacity and related infrastructure and transport links to support Changi's future growth.

The Committee has held extensive discussions with various stakeholders and arrived at several key conclusions regarding: runway capacity; terminal capacity; and raising productivity further.

Let me share our conclusions with Members.

First, a study by NATS, the air navigation service provider for London's Heathrow Airport, has concluded that by implementing various measures, Changi Airport's existing two runways can accommodate about 430,000 aircraft movements per year, which is one-third more than the record number of 324,000 movements last year. By implementing runway optimisation and other

Page: 58

measures, such as Mr Cedric Foo's suggestion of moving some aircraft to Seletar Airport, we expect the increased capacity of our two runways to be sufficient to cater to Changi Airport's growth until around the end of this decade. Thereafter, a third runway will be needed for Changi to continue to grow.

Exactly how soon we will need a third runway at Changi for civilian use depends on various factors, including air traffic growth and the aircraft mix operating at the airport. For example, airlines may up-gauge narrow-body aircraft to wide-body aircraft to carry more passengers, rather than applying for new departure and landing slots. This will allow Changi to support more passenger traffic with the same runway capacity.

Nonetheless, the Committee has decided that Changi's Runway 3, currently used by the Republic of Singapore Air Force (RSAF), should be readied for civilian co-use as early as possible and we estimate this to be before the end of this decade.

Even as MOT and CAAS develop the detailed plans for this, preparatory works have already started. The works are complex and will take time. We will announce the detailed timelines for the works and the implementation of a three-runway system at Changi Airport in the second half of the year.

As for passenger terminals, I updated this House at last year's Committee of Supply debate that Changi Airport's total passenger capacity will increase from 73 million passengers per annum (mppa) to 85 mppa by 2018 with the addition of the new Terminal 4 and an expanded Terminal 1.

As Members know, passenger traffic at Changi rebounded strongly after the 2009 global financial crisis and has remained high. However, we should be reminded that in the last decade, even starting with a lower base, passenger traffic at Changi saw a compounded annual growth rate of just 3.9%.

We are now at a much higher base than at the beginning of the last decade. Looking ahead, we expect the compounded annual growth of passenger traffic at Changi to be around 5% till the end of this decade and moderate to 3% to 4% in the next decade.

This is neither a conservative nor aggressive estimate as growth in Singapore is moderating even as emerging regional economies pick up pace. At these growth rates, we expect to need additional terminal capacity by the

Page: 59

mid-2020s.

To position Changi for the longer term, we should plan for expansion of its passenger terminal capacity. Other airports are thinking along similar lines. As I shared last year, and Mr Charles Chong also pointed out, many air hubs elsewhere are planning substantial capacity increases.

For example, Dubai Airport is rapidly adding additional capacity and recently opened the world's first Airbus A380-only concourse with 20 contact stands that can handle 15 million passengers per year; so one concourse handling nothing but A380s. By providing ample capacity, Dubai will allow its home carrier Emirates and other airlines to expand their networks. This extensive connectivity is a key reason behind the Australian carrier Qantas' decision to tie up with Emirates and re-route its Europe-bound flights via Dubai instead of Singapore from March this year.

While Dubai has taken full advantage of its geographical position to grow its air links and is now connected to many more cities than Changi, we continue to have an edge in connectivity within the region, including to countries like China, India and Indonesia. Changi Airport must take the competition seriously and work hard to retain superior air connectivity.

We should therefore make plans to expand Changi Airport's capacity to build on an advantage that has taken years to acquire. We need room to grow our connectivity with many more emerging cities. This will also support airlines' growth plans and anchor them here.

Over the past year, the Changi 2036 Steering Committee has been working on a Concept Plan for the 1080 ha site at Changi East, which lies between the current Runway 2 and Runway 3. Based on studies done, there is sufficient land to develop a mega-passenger terminal as well as an airfreight centre, an air logistics centre and MRO hub on the site; MRO referring to Maintenance, Repair and Overhaul.

With these new facilities, new roads and public transport links will also be needed to serve the airport. Existing roads may also have to be diverted. MOT, CAAS and LTA will study these issues further and engage the aviation community on the Concept Plan in the months ahead. We aim to finalise the Concept Plan by the end of this year.

Page: 60

In addition to Changi Airport, we are also developing Seletar Airport and Seletar Aerospace Park (SAP) as a hub for business and general aviation and aerospace activities. Since its launch in 2006, SAP has attracted numerous aerospace companies, including global names such as Rolls Royce, Pratt & Whitney and Eurocopter.

Mr Charles Chong asked if there is still capacity to grow the aerospace industry at Seletar. As he has highlighted, the development of the 30 ha Phase 3A of SAP commenced last year and is slated for completion in 2014. In addition, Phase 3B, with an additional 30 ha of space, will be developed in due course to cater to the industry's growth.

However, as Mr Charles Chong also highlighted, the success of Seletar Airport and SAP requires more than just infrastructural expansion. Accessibility is indeed an important factor. Today, the area is served by bus service 103 which connects commuters to Serangoon Bus Interchange and Serangoon MRT station. Commuters travelling to SAP from towns such as Tampines, Bedok, Yishun, Woodlands and Sengkang can also make same-stop transfers to service 103 at the entrance to SAP. In addition, JTC has also been operating shuttle bus services between SAP and the nearby MRT stations, as well as a lunch-time bus service within the SAP itself.

We will continue to monitor the pace of development in the area and will add capacity should demand warrant it. With our strong fundamentals of economic and political stability, a quality workforce, respect for intellectual property and good business connectivity, I am confident that SAP is in a good position to ride the growth of the aerospace industry in the region and continue to attract new investments.

Madam, the plan to expand the airports at Changi and Seletar also needs to take into account the changing manpower landscape in Singapore. Even though value-added per worker in the sector is already much higher than the services sector in general, we should aim to operate our airports in more efficient ways. The new Terminal 4 offers us an opportunity to innovate and explore ways to do more with less.

For example, CAG is exploring having self-service kiosks and automated check-in and immigration clearance facilities in the new Terminal 4:

Page: 61

Passengers will be able to obtain their boarding passes easily without having to wait in line for service staff to process their check-in.

Those with check-in luggage can deposit their bags at automated baggage-drop facilities.

At departure immigration, passengers can scan their boarding passes, passports and thumbprints for automated verification.

At the boarding gates, passengers will proceed to their aircraft via automated counters.

Such practices are also being adopted in other airports such as in Munich and Sydney. They allow for faster and more efficient check-in and immigration clearance, while reducing the manpower required.

Terminal 4 will also feature productivity innovations that will make it easier for airport staff to do their work. For example, mechanical baggage lifters will be installed to assist baggage workers in lifting check-in bags, so that they no longer need to move the bags manually. This will greatly reduce the physical strain on baggage workers and open such jobs to more seniors.

Such innovations are timely as they allow for smaller-scale experimentation before being adopted on a larger scale at the new terminals at Changi East. In addition, CAAS is also working with its partners to identify other ways to increase the productivity of the airport and upgrade jobs.

An Airport Productivity Steering Committee, led by CAAS and comprising stakeholders such as CAG, airlines, airport service providers and other Government agencies, has been established to drive this effort in a more holistic manner. This will be an important effort to ensure that our airport expansion plans raise productivity for the sector to even higher levels.

In summary, let me assure Members of this House that the Government is committed to ensuring the continued competitiveness of Singapore as an air hub, in terms of both the "hardware" and "software" that have made our airport "a source of pride for all Singaporeans", to borrow the words of Mr Charles Chong. With our ongoing efforts and plans, I am confident that Singapore and

Page: 62

Changi Airport will be well-equipped to capitalise on the strong growth of air travel in the Asia Pacific and maintain our leading hub position.

Mdm Chair, let me know turn to the maritime sector. I thank Mr Teo Siong Seng and Ms Mary Liew for their comments and suggestions for this key pillar of our economy. Before I address their specific points, let me first update Members on the performance of the Singapore maritime sector in 2012.

Two thousand and twelve was not smooth sailing for the global maritime industry. Shipping companies were affected by weak demand, overcapacity of ships, high fuel prices and increasing environmental concerns, which Mr Teo highlighted earlier.

As a transshipment hub at the crossroads of major trade routes, our port also felt the impact of these problems, but nonetheless, we registered good growth in 2012. Container throughput grew over 5% to reach 31.6 million twenty-foot equivalent units (TEUs) – the first time that our port crossed the 30-million TEU mark. We maintained our global lead in vessel arrival tonnage, which increased by 6% to reach a record high of 2.25 billion gross tons. We also remained the world's top bunkering port, even though bunker sales fell slightly by 1% to 42.7 million tons.

Last year, we attracted several new shipping companies and maritime service providers, while existing maritime players continued to grow their presence here. Today, there are about 130 international shipping groups and more than 5,000 companies in Singapore offering a full spectrum of maritime-related services.

Our efforts to develop in Singapore a leading IMC are bearing fruit. For example, in the area of maritime arbitration, BIMCO – one of the world's largest shipping associations – recently included Singapore as an arbitration venue in its shipping contract forms, alongside London and New York. It is a great honour to have Singapore named as an arbitration venue. It is something that we have worked hard to achieve.

These positive developments in the face of global challenges reflect the strong fundamentals of our maritime cluster. So, while we expect 2013 to be another difficult year for the global shipping industry, we are also cautiously optimistic that our maritime cluster here will continue to grow.

Page: 63

To maintain Singapore's competitiveness as a global hub port and IMC, we will continue with three key strategies – first, to invest in infrastructure ahead of demand; second, to sharpen our maritime policies and schemes to meet changing business needs; and third, to grow a core of local maritime talent.

Let me start with infrastructure. Despite the difficult short-term outlook, we take a long-term view of our port and will continue to grow port capacity ahead of demand. To this end, the expansion of Pasir Panjang Terminal is on track and the first set of new berths will be ready in 2014. When this expansion is completed, our port capacity will increase by 50% to 50 million TEUs per annum.

We are not stopping there. In the long term, we will consolidate our container port activities at Tuas with a handling capacity of up to 65 million TEUs per annum. Consolidation will increase efficiency through greater economies of scale, and reduce costs through the elimination of inter-terminal haulage. A new port at Tuas will also allow us to introduce new technology and processes to meet future challenges, in particular, to improve manpower productivity. We expect the first berths at Tuas Port to be operational in about 10 years. With the consolidation, existing port land will be freed up for exciting redevelopment opportunities.

Our second strategy is to continually sharpen our maritime policies and schemes to ensure that they remain relevant to maritime companies, a matter that Mr Teo also raised. As announced in Budget 2013, we will provide ship owners and operators with greater tax certainty by extending the maximum tenure of the Approved International Shipping Enterprise (AIS) award under our Maritime Sector Incentive (MSI) scheme from 30 to 40 years.

For our maritime sector to remain competitive, we must strive for productivity-driven growth. A key enabler of this is to promote maritime R&D to support businesses as they innovate and develop new capabilities. For instance, MPA uses its Maritime Innovation and Technology (MINT) Fund to co-fund R&D efforts by our port operators in areas such as automated port systems and port optimisation techniques. The Singapore Maritime Institute has also launched the Next Generation Container Port Challenge to spark new ideas that can achieve a quantum leap in port performance.

I am glad that Mr Teo and others in the shipping community support this important drive towards higher productivity. We will continue to work with the industry to sharpen the competitiveness of our maritime sector, including exploring Mr Teo's suggestion for more free trade agreements with emerging

Page: 64

markets.

Our third and most important strategy is to grow and maintain a core of local maritime talent, a subject which Ms Mary Liew brought up. We are making steady progress in grooming a core group of Singaporeans to take up seafaring and shore-based careers in the maritime industry. Today, of the more than 170,000 people employed in the maritime sector, about 76,000 are locals, compared to about 56,000 locals some 10 years ago. Over this period, we have seen a larger core of Singaporeans in maritime activities, such as port operations, ship management and ship chartering. Many more locals are now working in the maritime industry, very often in PMET jobs.

This has been achieved through the close partnership that MPA has forged with industry, unions and educational institutions. I agree with Ms Mary Liew that we must continue to make maritime careers attractive to Singaporeans. Indeed, MPA works closely with partners to raise awareness of the wide range of maritime careers through outreach activities such as the MaritimeONE platform. To date, over 100 MaritimeONE scholarships have been awarded to aspiring seafarers and other maritime professionals. Most recently, in September 2012, MPA launched the Singapore Maritime Gallery to showcase our maritime heritage and career opportunities that Maritime Singapore has to offer. I am told that even though it is quite new, quite a lot of school groups have already made their way to the Maritime Gallery. It bodes well that our youths have started to learn about our maritime history and the career opportunities in this sector from an early age.

We are also working actively to broaden the range of maritime training opportunities. There are now specialised courses at NITEC, diploma and degree levels to prepare our students for exciting and fulfilling careers in the maritime sector.

For aspiring seafarers, the Singapore Maritime Academy (SMA) offers programmes that prepare students for their diplomas and their first professional sea-going qualifications. Ms Mary Liew raised the need for our seafaring cadets to have sufficient training opportunities. I would like to assure her that our cadets are indeed able to get access to opportunities for operational experience, which they need for their qualification. MPA will continue to work with SMA and the shipping groups to ensure that this remains the case.

As Ms Liew mentioned, we are also growing our core of local seafarers for our harbour craft sector. To this end, MPA and its partner agencies have

Page: 65

introduced "Place-and-Train" programmes for Deck Officers and Marine Engineer Officers who work on ships plying in and around Singapore. Apart from co-funding their course fees, MPA has since October 2012, topped up the monthly training allowances for these cadets, leading to at least a doubling of their allowances depending on their training phase. I am very pleased that MPA took in feedback from Members after last year's COS debate and worked expeditiously to introduce these enhancements to our seafarer training programmes.

Response to these programmes has been encouraging, and I look forward to the graduation of the first batch of Deck Officers later this year. In addition, I would like to assure Ms Liew that we welcome former Singaporean seafarers like Mr Omar to rejoin the maritime sector and we will look into how we can help them revalidate their skills. I think Ms Liew talked about supporting them financially. So, we will take a close look at that.

We are also doing more to help our maritime professionals upgrade their knowledge and skills to meet the evolving needs of the industry. Mr Teo had talked about how important international exposure is. We agree, and we will make available all the support that we can to enable more of our local professionals to upgrade themselves.

Over the past year, MPA's S$50 million Maritime Cluster Fund (MCF) for Manpower Development has provided funding support to over 4,000 maritime professionals for their training and development. This is almost twice as many as the 2,200 beneficiaries in 2011. To further encourage manpower development, MPA has since October 2012, increased the co-funding support under the MCF from 50% to 70%. MPA and its industry partners have also introduced more Continuing Education and Training (CET) opportunities such as the Professional Development Course in Maritime Logistics offered by the Chartered Institute of Logistics and Transport.

As Members can see, there is no lack of effort to grow a core of local maritime talent. And I support Ms Liew's call for more Singaporeans to take up opportunities in this sector. I can assure her that if she can help us find 500 cadets, we will do everything on our part to take everyone in. But at the same time, I would llike to reassure Mr Teo that we will continue to keep Singapore open and employer-friendly as long as the skills and expertise of the foreign professionals here complement those of our local workforce.

Page: 66

As to the current dependency ratio which Ms Liew talked about, I heard the very opposite from Mr Teo who had earlier voiced concerns over the tightening of our foreign worker policies. This illustrates how fine a balance we have to strike between the concerns of our maritime companies and keeping opportunities open for our locals. I am confident that by working together, we will be able to strike the right balance, and if need be, we will review and take a closer look at the dependency ratio.

Madam, the maritime sector not only provides critical connectivity for our economy, but also contributes directly to our growth. Building on our strong maritime foundation, the Singapore Government will continue to work with our tripartite partners in developing new infrastructure, capabilities and talent so as to ensure the continuing success of Maritime Singapore.

Mr Cedric Foo.

Madam, do we have time for clarifications?

We do.

Thank you, Madam. My first question is on contestability in the public transport sector. I spoke about this yesterday. In the long run, we would like to see parcels of bus and rail services being bidded upon by various prospective transport operators in a way that introduces competition and, therefore, a self-regulatory mechanism, instead of the Public Transport Council (PTC) and committees looking over what they will do. Can I have the Minister's comments on whether or not this is a long-term goal?

Mdm Chair, let me first thank Mr Cedric Foo for the very thoughtful question because this looks into the industry's structure over the longer term, and if I may share briefly on where we intend to go in this regard.

For trains, I think the direction is quite clear. We introduced contestability for the Downtown Line in 2011. This was a contest between the two incumbent operators. After much consideration, we decided to eventually award this to SBST. Going forward, all new lines – the next set of lines will be the Thomson-Eastern Regional Line – will come under the contestability framework. We do not rule out the possibility that over time, even foreign players will be invited to participate in these contests.

Page: 67

Over the longer term, we intend to transit the existing rail lines that are run either by SMRT or SBST into this new framework. We will have to work out how to do so, the timeframe and the details but we certainly hope to see some progress within the next two to three years.

On buses, we have talked about contestability in 2008 and certainly, again, emphasised in 2013 Long Term Land Transport Master Plan, and that is indeed the direction that we want to go. The challenge is in putting together packages of routes, together with the supporting infrastructure like depots and interchanges that will support this contestability framework.

We intend over time to move towards something like what they would have in London where there are seven operators, in their case, contesting to run and operate different packages of routes. We will need to be very careful to make sure that the packages are configured appropriately. This is something that will take time.

The existing licences for the two bus operators running the current 200-plus routes will run out in 2016. This is something that we are looking at very carefully to see how we can move ahead with contestability for bus packages, perhaps not to the full extent but to some extent, even prior to that taking place.

Mdm Chair, I have two clarifications both on road safety. Let me thank hon Member Dr Intan for raising the issues on Sembawang Drive which is in front of Sembawang Primary School with regards to the local factors that may have some safety concerns. I would like MOT to look into the local factor and see how some of the road safety enhancement measures that were mentioned by the Parliamentary Secretary can be implemented there.

The second clarification is the United Nations General Assembly has declared that 2011 to 2020 is a Decade of Action for Road Safety, and specifically one of the initiatives is the UN Global Road Safety Awareness Week which is coming up on 6 to 12 May this year. I am just wondering whether if MOT or the Government has any plans, in terms of promoting road safety during this UN Global Road Safety Awareness Week. My constituency together with the Singapore Motor Sports Association and all the schools in my division are coming together to promote road safety. I hope MOT can support our initiatives.

Page: 68

Madam, I would like to thank Dr Lim who is a very strong advocate for road safety over the many years that I have known him. About the Sembawang case, local factors are important. We have been looking at them and, in fact, we have been working with Dr Lim and his grassroots. Beyond that, like what I have said earlier, we are also looking at the students. We can provide the infrastructure and so forth, but I think it is important for us to continue to educate our students so that they can develop the values of road safety wherever they are.

The other clarification was about the UN campaign. Certainly, there will be an inter-agency effort to support this where LTA, Traffic Police and the Singapore Road Safety Council would come in and give support. We also have other campaigns like the Road Safety Month and a few others by the Traffic Police, and so forth.

I would like to urge Members to become the advocates for road safety. It can start from all of us. We can start by sharing this with our family and friends; whereby we help Singaporeans to develop values with regards to safety, care and sharing of the road. Over time, whether they are cyclists, pedestrians or even motorists and drivers, the values will be there and we would apply them accordingly.

With regards to how we would support such initiatives, we will continue to do so and we will take a multi-pronged approach to enhance the level of awareness of safety as well as the infrastructure, even at the local level.

Madam, I have two clarifications. First, is concerning weekend ERP. I have taken note of Minister Lui's sharing that it has led to slower traffic flow at those areas arising from the deduction in ERP charges and the change in timings. The data I asked for cover quite a few areas: Marina Bay, Orchard Road and the CBD areas. I would like, if possible, for Minister Lui to be specific in those three areas. I do believe that for Marina Bay – from my own experience and that of my residents and friends who tell me – traffic flow is really quite light. If it is not possible for full removal of the weekend rates for all the areas that I have cited, can we go into these specific areas? If one area is possible, let us try.

My second clarification is for Parliamentary Secretary Faishal Ibrahim. First, I am very happy to hear the news that there will be lifts coming to the pedestrian overhead bridge at Serangoon, except that at Serangoon, I have two pedestrian overhead bridges, one which is immediately next to Nex Shopping Mall. I

Page: 69

assume this first batch of lifts that is coming up applies to that area. Not very far away, less than 300 metres, there is another pedestrian overhead bridge. I am very concerned for that one because it is along Upper Serangoon, very near to Lorong Lew Lian area. Lorong Lew Lian is a very old estate. In fact, it contains the first blocks in the whole Singapore to get the lift upgrading programme many years ago. It reflects how old it is. There have been many times that the residents have raised the issue about the overhead bridge there. I assume that the lift in the first batch is coming to one near Nex at the MRT station. If it is, can I suggest that the Ministry consider having both these pedestrian overhead bridges to be included in this first batch? While the need is critical for both areas, I think it is even more pressing for the one at Lorong Lew Lian because that is where I have a number of elderly residents.

Do give me a chance to reply and share with him some data. I will touch on the ERP clarification, and perhaps Parliamentary Secretary Faishal Ibrahim may want to respond to the point on pedestrian overhead bridges (POB). Just to share some data on which we based the decision not to move further on ERP rates in the Orchard cordon as well as the Bugis/Marina Centre. I would share with Members the 2012 speeds before the removal or the reduction of the ERP charges as well as the speeds as we have it for the first quarter.

For Orchard cordon, what we did was we removed charges from 11.00 am to 12.30 pm. Speeds for all three bands, 11.00 am to 11.30 am; 11.30 am to 12.00 pm and so on, all fell. In particular, in the 12.00 pm to 12.30 pm band, traffic fell from 22.3 to 19.

9. For the Bugis/Marina Centre cordon, we reduced the charges from 12.30 pm to 2.00 pm to $1, instead of $2. For two of the three periods, the speeds fell between 1 kilometre and 2 kilometres per hour and, for the other one, it was marginally the same. We do not see, at this point in time, more scope to reduce the charges further and we will just continue to watch the situation.

I thank Mr Seah for the clarification. The one that we are going to build will be near to Nex. As he knows, we will give priority to those which are near to transport nodes. Nevertheless, we will take that into account. I will speak with the Member offline.

I do urge Members to make your clarifications short, and not to make speeches instead. Ms Irene Ng.

Madam, I thank the Parliamentary Secretary for his efforts to push cycling policy forward. I am quite happy to hear the news

Page: 70

that LTA is now experimenting with a dismount bike sign at zebra crossings. This is actually a long standing request from our cycling wardens who go around to identify problem areas in the neighbourhood. We have also given feedback to LTA when they showed us their recommendation of how they want to implement it, that it will not be effective because the way they drew it is on the zebra crossing, without any words to signal to cyclists that they should dismount before they go on to the zebra crossing. The signs are on the zebra crossings; by the time the cyclist sees the sign on the road, they are half way cycling across the zebra crossing.

I have already given the feedback to LTA to please consider having the sign sign-posted before cyclists reach the zebra crossing, with the sign "Bike Dismount" and the same signage used on that signpost so that cyclists would have been alerted to that before they reach the zebra crossing and they would dismount, and not only see the sign when they are cycling across the zebra crossing.

Ms Ng, what is your clarification?

I am asking the Parliamentary Secretary to please review the signage that he has just told us about in Parliament. The second clarification is on the wider point about cycling policies. Other than piloting some initiatives in some towns and giving some cycling lanes here and there, can I ask the Parliamentary Secretary whether there is a vision for cycling that we can look forward to?

Madam, I again thank Ms Irene Ng for her question. In fact, we have looked at the suggestion that she has raised. Interestingly, while there are diverse needs, there are also diverse views. We hear her suggestion but when we asked other people, they had different views and they seem to accept it. What I suggest is that perhaps this is a trial period. We will continue with it and we see how the cyclists respond to it. If there is a need for us to change it after the trial period, then we will do so.

Secondly, the clarification was about vision. There is a clear vision of what we are doing for cyclists. It is not only from now where I started, even when I was a backbencher, I saw how Minister of State Teo Ser Luck was pushing it, the way he tried to promote the National Cycling Plan, I think I was very touched by it. Today, we are just continuing this journey. As I have shared earlier, many countries take 40 or 50 years to be where they are today. I think we are moving

Page: 71

in the right direction and we certainly have a vision.

Two points. Minister Lui has misunderstood my point. I probably spoke too fast yesterday. Yesterday, I mentioned Rivervale Crescent in Punggol East, not Punggol East in general. There are services along Rivervale Drive as well as Sengkang East Way, but not Rivervale Crescent. Blocks most affected are Blocks 183A-D, 184A-C, 185A-D, especially the elderly where they need to walk all the way out to take the LRT, then they go to Rivervale Plaza for their daily maketing needs. The second point, I sent an email to LTA together with a map of the place on 9 March. Apart from the standard reply that my feedback is receiving attention, I have not received any other updates. I hope that the residents of Rivervale Crescent do not have to wait too long.

I suppose this was 9 March of this year. Yes. I will ask LTA to make sure that they give the Member a proper reply. I thank the Member for the clarification and, indeed, I must have misunderstood her last evening. Certainly, if I recall correctly for Rivervale Crescent that there are new BTO developments that are coming up and LTA was already being put on notice last year on this and requests were made for them to consider the possibility of introducing services. The larger point that I would want to make is that – and this is to all Members of the House – it is sometimes not possible and not desirable for buses to ply every Crescent, every Drive, every Avenue, every Road, every Street. If we do so, it makes the route more circuitous and the journey would take much longer – more time and distance for commuters to get to their destination.

What commuters want most of all is to try and get to the key nodes and key amenities as quickly as possible. So, while we look to the Member's request for Rivervale Crescent, the larger point I want to make is that sometimes, there is, indeed, a need to walk to the nearest bus-stop or to the LRT station. Also, I tried to clarify a little bit earlier that overall, for Punggol East, about 90% of the blocks would be within 200 metres of an LRT station or one of the bus stops that is serving the constituency. Specifically, on the new blocks and the point that the Member has made, and the request that she has raised to LTA on 9 March, I will make sure that they give her a reply.

May I ask the Minister whether MOT is able to take back the existing rights from the present PTOs if MOT so wishes in the

Page: 72

immediate term, so that MOT can revamp and have an improved new model for our public transport.

Madam, I thank the Member for that clarification. I was not sure if the Member was referring to buses or to trains, so I guess I have to try and deal with both.

For buses, as I have mentioned earlier, the licence expires in 2016. I am quite sure that the PTOs will be more than happy to return all the routes to us. The financials are an indication of how they see things. The challenge indeed is how to have good and proper continuity rather than the returning of the routes.

On trains, as I have mentioned earlier, going forward, for Downtown Line, Thomson Line and the other lines, there will be a competitive tendering process. What will happen is that the bidders will bid for the right to run those lines. They will pay an annual licence charge that is fixed and then we will have two other component charges based on revenue and profitability. The money that is collected from these charges and licences will be set aside as a sinking fund to renew the infrastructure as well as to buy more capacity, more trains and so on.

For the existing lines, there are licence agreements. It would be very difficult and we certainly will be open to legal challenge if we tell them that we want to take back the lines at whatever point in time before the expiry of the licences, unless there is proper negotiation and an agreeable exchange by both parties.

Minister, in fact, I remember in last year's COS, there were a lot of questions about the 800 buses and 1,000 more bus-drivers. After that, I raised a PQ in Parliament to ask whether it is possible for some of the bus operators to work with LTA during the peak hours – for example, the school buses, after they drop off the children at school and before they pick up the children from school thereafter. I was very pleased that, after the PQ and during the recess, yourself, together with Mr Yeo Guat Kwang, we talked about it. After that with the Chinese Chamber of Commerce and Industry, we conducted a series of meetings. LTA has been very cooperative. I believe now a tender has gone out for bus operators to work with the LTA during peak hours. So, with that, is there any chance to reduce the 800 buses that you need?

Madam, I thank the Member for that clarification. Certainly, I want to acknowledge the very good work by Mr Teo and the Chamber in supporting us to try and bring the private operators onboard. I

Page: 73

mentioned in Parliament yesterday that in fact, we are tendering out more routes for private operators, particularly during the morning peak hours whether it is City Direct from the towns using expressways bypassing all the MRT and feeder connections directly to the city area, we are going to have a total of nine routes that we want to tender out to the private operators. The first of which has already gone out earlier. We hope to also draw on the capacity that the private transport operators may have to run short services in towns that will bring people more directly to the MRT stations.

Specifically, on the Member's point about the 800 buses, in fact, what we are doing is we are trying to accelerate the programme. Initially, when we first looked at it last year, we said that we would try to do the bulk – about 70% within the first three years but the whole programme will run till 2016.

We have since seen good progress. We think that by the end of this year, about 50% of the buses that the Government has promised, 550 can be rolled out and the bulk of it by the end of next year. We think that there may be more areas of need. I hear from many Members of Parliament that they would like to have even more augmentation to the feeders, more new routes, more trunk routes, but particularly more feeders. What I am trying to do is to make sure that we accelerate the Bus Service Enhancement Programme (BSEP) while taking onboard some of the additional requests and views that have been put forward so that we can look at what more we need to do.

Madam, I would like to ask the Minister for Transport – he mentioned about the nine routes that would be tendered out to the private operators. May I know whether Punggol, Sengkang and Buangkok are covered under these nine routes that he mentioned?

I ought to get back to the Member on the specifics of that area.

Madam, I have three clarifications for the Minister. Firstly, are the new feeder and city direct bus services that are being contracted out to these private bus operators part of the $1.1 billion BSEP or are they extra? If they are extra, how much more will it cost the Government?

The second clarification is will these private operators be subject to the same quality of service standards and penalties as the current PTOs?

Page: 74

And thirdly, is this contracting model, where the operators are paid a fixed contract price and the fares go to the Government, a new model that MOT is thinking of extending to all the PTOs for the bus services after 2016 when their contracts expire?

Madam, I thank Mr Giam for his clarifications and some very good questions there. On the new feeders, no, they are not part of the $1.1 billion BSEP. At some point in time, we would have to go back to MOF and discuss this again, not just because we are introducing nine new routes for a few hours a day but because when we accelerate the BSEP programme, we are bringing forward the implementation of new routes, augmentation of feeders, bringing forward the recruitment of new drivers, using more fuel, doing more maintenance. Once we decide we want to accelerate the programme, then obviously, the cost will have to change and we have to look at this more closely together with MOF.

It is not just the new feeders that we are introducing that will affect the $1.1 billion programme but the fact that we intend to accelerate and bring forward the completion of the BSEP programme. That is something that we all believe we want to do and certainly, from the feedback of Members that they want to do this as quickly and as much of it as possible.

Will the private operators be subject to the same penalties? The tender process is on-going. I do not want to frighten some of them away. I do not yet know what response I will get from them. And certainly, when I see the tender responses from the private operators, then we will be in a much better position to sit down with them and to see how much of the standards that we would like to impose are acceptable.

At the end of the day, it is still, in that sense, a pilot and experiment, bringing in private transport operators to run some of these routes. It will be a period of time before we make the full adjustments as to the kind of standards that we would like to impose on them completely.

Gross cost model – gross cost is the term where basically, the Government takes the revenue risk while we pay them a certain fee to run the buses regardless of the passenger load. It is too early to say as to whether we will apply this to the two PTOs going forward. There is certainly a possibility. It is done in many other cities. In London, they use the gross cost model. But let us settle on what we can do with the private operators first before we decide

Page: 75

further.

I would like to thank the Minister of State for her very comprehensive answer as well as assurance. I just have one clarification and that is – as far as the union is concerned, we will do our best to build up the Singapore Core. However, it takes the concerted effort of the tripartite partners as well. And I just want to ask if the Minister would look into any incentives to incentivise our employers so that they can provide the berth places to these cadets. Because the feedback from the SMA as well is that they have to worry about looking for a berth place for these cadets before they can bring them in to train them. So, I hope that the Minister of State can look into it.

The other aspect is the dependency ratio. I would like to just share that, I have already written this letter last year in early December to MOM to look into it but I was informed that MPA is still working on it. I hope that I can hear some response soon.

Madam, I thank the Member for her two clarification questions. If there is, indeed, a shortage of training berth places, we will certainly do something to address this. However, the feedback that we have received is quite different – that it is difficult to find the warm bodies who want to take up these opportunities. Nonetheless, this is something that we will take a closer look at.

On the dependency ratio that the Member talked about earlier, in general, we would want all sectors to be able to uplift their productivity. These include the harbour craft and maritime sector as a whole.

As to what we should be doing to increase our efforts on this front, that is an area under review right now.

Last clarification. Mr Cedric Foo.

Madam, when I suggested to allocate more COEs to smaller cars, the Minister explained that by fixing the ARF tax for bigger cars, that is a consideration to make sure that the larger car owners pay more. There are three components in a total value of a car – the COE, the ARF and the OMV of the car. Would it not be shifting from one bucket to another? Does the Minister see the COE falling therefore, the progressivity of that larger car tax

Page: 76

not happening?

Madam, let me thank Mr Cedric Foo for that clarification. I think the intent of his question is: is there a possibility and in what way can we put more COEs to Category A?

I would say that there have been a number of quite major changes recently for the financing restrictions as well as the ARF. My belief is that it would take a number of bidding cycles, certainly two or three, before we see some clarity as to what is happening, what COE premiums are going to be like and whether there will be a shift of consumer behaviour from the larger to the smaller cars because of the ARF, the higher downpayment and because of the need to repay within five years and the ability to borrow less. We do not know but we think the possibility is that it may put more pressure on Category A COEs. I think that was his point.

What we want to see is what is the outcome of the measures that have been introduced, before we take the next set of moves. There has been no shortage of suggestions on a related line – basically, do a redistribution of the COEs. Should we then confine it to Categories A, B and E, or should we include also Category C and Category D because I know there were advocates for Category C for it to have more COEs – and more COEs for Category C, more COEs for Category A. They have to come from somewhere because I think we are quite clear that we do want to maintain the growth rate at 0.5%.

The second suggestion is, instead of using 1,600 cc, to use some other category. And indeed, we may consider that or a combination of different criteria so that we can draw a somewhat different line between Category A and Category B cars.

These are all preliminary thoughts. As I have mentioned earlier, there is no intent in the very, very near term to make further changes, until we have greater clarity on the changes and the impact of the changes, then we will consider what else needs to be done.

Mr Cedric Foo, do you wish to withdraw your amendment?

Page: 77

Madam, although Members have not had all their wishes granted, I think we have made good progress. The Minister's posture has evolved in the course of the COS. He started by saying, "I am sympathetic", then "I am considering", and, more recently, we are hearing "I will do more". So, we all wait with bated breath; it is a good trend. I thank the Minister, Minister of State and Parliamentary Secretary for engaging us so patiently, and I beg leave to withdraw the amendment.

[(proc text) Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. (proc text)]

[(proc text) The sum of $562,232,500 for Head W ordered to stand part of the Main Estimates. (proc text)]

[(proc text) The sum of $6,354,672,000 for Head W ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates. (proc text)]

Madam, I beg to move, "That the total sum to be allocated for Head K of the Estimates be reduced by $100".

During the Edusave Awards ceremony held at my constituency this year, many parents spoke to me and expressed their support for MOE's focus on character development. They were appreciative of the fact that their children were being recognised for their good character and had the opportunity to receive the Edusave Character award.

I welcome MOE's continued focus on character development. We should maintain the focus on imparting values to the students and ensure that all students learn about other important values like humility, integrity, loyalty and gratefulness, so that they can become useful and contributing citizens. In this regard, I urge MOE to work closely with parents to ensure that parents and schools partner each other to reinforce the importance of values to their children. The saying is that "it takes a village to raise a child". Thus, imparting of values cannot be the sole responsibility of the schools or the parents. There must be joint efforts by schools, parents and the community.

Page: 78

MOE has consistently emphasised that our education system is student-centric and aims to help every student develop to his or her best potential.

As a parent of two school-going children, I appreciate that many teachers in schools are very dedicated and go the extra mile to help students understand their work better. Teachers play a key role in our children's future. We must continually look for such teachers who are passionate; teachers who can motivate well and care for their students. Whilst I appreciate that many of our teachers are currently well qualified, I urge MOE to also consider staff who have good attributes of being a good teacher even if they may not have good academic qualifications. So, look very hard for good teachers, because it will make a huge difference to our students, our children.

I also welcome MOE's learning support programme where weaker students are provided with stronger support – a student weak in Mathematics can be placed in a smaller class of maybe four to 10 students, where more individual attention can be given. Could I ask MOE what else can be done to strengthen the support for weaker students?

For students who may be slow developers, I appreciate the many pathways available for today's students. If a student does not do well in the PSLE examinations, he or she has the option of going to ITE or polytechnic first. And these institutions do offer very high quality training programmes to provide our students with the right foundation as well as equip them for the workforce. If the student continues to do well, he can eventually make it to university at a later stage. Could the Minister share more about the plans to increase the number of university places for our students? Are we on track to increase the available university places for our students?

Next, let me talk about stress. One constant feedback which I received from many parents is about the huge amount of stress for students. Parents are concerned about excessive homework for their children. They are also concerned that the subjects taught in school are getting more and more difficult. The situation is worst if your child is in Primary 5 or 6 due to the impending PSLE. I know. I have a child in Primary 6 this year. All these will discourage our young couples from having more children if they feel that education for their children is so stressful.

In view of this stress, I call on MOE to consider the following:

Page: 80

First, review the curriculum of the students at all levels. Compare what Singapore schools are teaching vis-a-vis schools around the world. On 5 March, a journalist from TODAY newspaper, Ms Ng Jing Yng, wrote an article about the Finnish education system. She wrote about how the children were given time to rest and play after school and homework. And when asked about tuition, the parent says: "What tuition?" Tuition is unheard of in Finland and, yet, Finnish pupils perform well in international tests. Is there anything we can learn from the Finnish education system that will fix Singapore education system?

Next, I urge MOE to reduce the amount of homework and stress in schools. If schools continue having endless assessments and making tests more and more difficult, students will not see school days as a time to discover new things nor will they experience the joy of learning. MOE should ensure that every school does not try to test its students beyond what is expected of the students. In an article in The New Paper on 13 January 2013, Primary 5 pupils were given a spelling list which I myself struggle with. The words that were given − anemometer, buccaneer, podgy, suffuse – I do not even know whether I pronounce them correctly. It is one thing to try to stretch the ability of students. But if pushed to the extreme, stress will simply pile up and students will resent school work.

Reinforce to all schools that they must be reasonable in giving homework. Last month, over the radio, DJ Joe Augustin was complaining about the homework which was given to students to do over the Lunar New Year holidays. Parents had also complained to me about their children having to study for a test immediately after the Lunar New Year holidays. What is the message which the school is sending to the students? That it is not important to observe family gatherings during Lunar New Year? What is the message to parents? Forget about reunion dinners because there is homework or tests? I urge MOE to signal to schools that public holidays should remain holidays. Schools must manage their time and complete their syllabus strictly within the school term.

I feel that children must be given time and space to relax and to appreciate other aspects of life. We must move from the focus on academic grades in schools. MOE can do more to get parents to buy in the concept that education is a life long journey and that grades are and should not be the only measure of a child's achievement.

Page: 80

Madam, preschool education for our children has been less than ideal all these years. Preschools themselves vary vastly in quality from one to another. Preschool fees also differ greatly among them, ranging from $100 to $1,000. The children from the well-off families are the ones that usually get to attend the higher quality preschools.

Preschools should not just equip our children with reading and numeracy skills in preparing for primary schools. Good preschool education emphasises the importance of early brain development in children. Some of these examples are social awareness, living environment awareness, group interaction skills, motor skills and overall confidence.

I hope MOE will be able to embrace these attributes in its effort on improving the overall standard of preschool education and on providing more equivocal standards for all. I also hope MOE will place great importance on giving all our disadvantaged children the preschool education they badly need. This will enable them an early start and a better chance for social mobility. We need a system in place to identify these children for good preschool education. Perhaps the identification of these children should be made at time of birth where detailed social history is more easily obtainable.

Student care centres are very beneficial for children from disadvantaged families as these children usually lack supervision in their less than conducive home environments. In view of our limited student care centres, especially the school-based ones, could MOE reserve these places for such children in these schools? More often than not, the parents of these children will not come forward to request for such places. The parents that can provide adequately are the ones that usually apply for their children to be even better supervised. Could MOE systematically identify and help children from disadvantaged families to get such care? Could these children also be paired with social workers, who can then assess if they have parents that also need assistance in improving their home environment? In situations where student care is not available in the schools, could MOE collaborate with MSF to have these children placed at community student care centres near their homes?

Madam, I applaud the move to set up a single Government agency to drive early childhood development. I look

Page: 81

forward to the improvements that the Early Childhood Development Agency (ECDA) can bring. For instance, it will have the mandate to level the playing field for all our young children. Efforts to raise the quality of preschool education in the highly disparate preschool sector can now be more coordinated and concerted across childcare centres as well as kindergartens.

In terms of policy and long-term plans, I hope we will also benefit from a strong and cohesive direction for early childhood development. This is certainly necessary in order to "future proof" our children in today's fast changing and globalised economy. Parents now have clearer indication as to what is expected at preschool and before entering Primary 1. So, I believe we can look forward to better information flow and uniformity of direction with the formation of ECDA.

However, there are a few questions and issues that I hope the MOE as well as MSF can look into as the agency undertakes its important responsibilities. For instance, how will ECDA integrate the overlapping roles of MOE and MSF in the areas of teacher training, professional development as well as pay structure? Will there be synergy in training and curriculum for teachers in childcare centres as well as kindergartens? Currently, the different training routes, qualifications, working conditions as well as pay scales between childcare and kindergarten make career progression and development in this sector an onerous one.

One other key area that I hope ECDA can address is the merit of a central or national training school for early childhood educators. Today, we have a variety of training providers with various levels of competency and knowledge. To prevent fragmentation and uneven quality of training, I urge the MOE as well as MSF to examine the possibility of establishing a national academy of early childhood teachers, just like how the National Institute of Education (NIE) trains the teaching profession now. Should this function come under the NIE, there could be flow-through advantages in training, teaching quality and research that span from preschool to learning in lower primary school.

Research has shown that children from poorer circumstances tend to have greater learning needs and difficulties. They not only lag behind their peers in academic milestones, their struggle with behavioural and also family problems often put them in disadvantaged positions. I hope that a substantial portion of the $3 billion injection of funds over five years will go to assisting these children to close the gap. To this end, the Development Support Programme, announced last year, is a key initiative that will help preschoolers with learning difficulties. Can we look forward to having this nationalised eventually? Early intervention

Page: 82

and support is certainly crucial before these children enter Primary 1.

With regard to preschools for best practices that MOE aims to set up, I hope that MOE can ensure a certain percentage of places set aside for children from low-income families. We want to provide opportunities for all, especially those from disadvantaged positions.

Next, on improving the teacher-student ratio. Our teaching force has grown by more than 10,000 or about 43% since 15 years ago. I understand that the size of student cohort has also steadily decreased. For instance, in 2001, the size of Primary 1 cohort was over 49,000. Ten years later, in 2011, the size was over 39,000. In view of this, is the current teacher-student ratio in our schools reflective of this growth in the teacher numbers as well as the decreasing number of student cohort?

While classes in lower primary levels have been reduced to about 30 students a class, the overall class size for older cohorts in most primary and secondary schools hover around 40 per class. I hope the MOE will take steps to see how class size can be further reduced, especially for Primary 3 to Primary 6, where younger children can benefit from closer contact and guidance from teachers.

I am confident that we can take our children to the future as we seek to help them develop their potential wherever they are.

Madam, my constituency runs a reading programme for children aged four to eight from lower income families and I read to them sometimes. It troubles me that they lack the literacy skills and the socio-emotional abilities expected of their age.

Studies have shown that ability gaps between the advantaged and disadvantaged open up early in the lives of children. Given the trend of a widening income gap, there is an increasing opportunity gap which needs urgent attention.

To ensure that no one is left behind, it is crucial to strengthen our outreach to disadvantaged families and to strengthen their support system. We should

Page: 83

direct our greatest effort at their formative years. In this regard, I welcome the initiatives to build more student care centres and for MOE to pilot several Government-run kindergartens in schools. I urge the Minister to site these student care centres and kindergartens in neighbourhood schools with a higher proportion of disadvantaged children.

There should also be a more systematic effort to rotate the best teachers in the system to neighbourhood schools in poorer estates so that students of all backgrounds would have access to them.

Looking at how the education system has evolved in Singapore, I sometimes cannot help but wonder if we should hit the reset button.

The tuition syndrome, for one, needs to be fixed. Many parents blame this syndrome on schools – their children complain that they cannot understand what is being taught in school. Should we not be concerned with this?

Are our teachers conducting their classes with the assumption that children should and would go to tuition to learn what they were taught in school and, if so, is this healthy?

We should go back to basics. Just like the Finns, who reformed their education system to ensure access and opportunity for every student. In Finland, its students do the least number of class hours per week in the developed world, yet get the best results in the long term. They sit no mandatory exams until the age of 17 to

19. They do not go for tuition after school. This egalitarian approach that they take means that all classes contain a mixture of ability level pupils, with most classes containing two or more teachers who focus on those needing additional support.

I would like to ask the Minister for his assessment whether such a system could work in Singapore.

Madam, most schools in Singapore have class sizes of around 40, while Primary 1 and Primary 2 classes have 30 students. This is large compared to the OECD's average of 21 per class.

Page: 84

There are drawbacks of a large class. Each has to deal with more disciplinary and administrative issues. While weaker students risked being marginalised because teachers' time is divided amongst many students, MOE has previously said that "Empirical evidence on the benefits of a smaller class size remains inconclusive".

The Brookings Institution notes that large class-size reductions can have significant long-term effects on students' achievement. These effects seem to be largest when introduced earlier, and for students from less advantaged backgrounds.

The Tennessee STAR and the follow-up Wisconsin SAGE projects demonstrated the positive effects of smaller class sizes on students' cognitive and non-cognitive outcomes. These effects persisted throughout the school life of the students. Other studies also show smaller classes have benefited disadvantaged students.

Class size reduction is not the magic bullet to better students' development. It has to be implemented together with other holistic policies.

MOE saw it beneficial to have class size of 25 for gifted students. I hope such benefits can apply to all primary levels. I urge MOE to extend class size of 30 to Primary 3 and Primary 4 and, eventually, across all primary levels.

Madam, what Singaporeans hope for is "A home with a strong Singaporean identity and sense of belonging". However, many Singaporeans do not feel this way where our education system is concerned. One such example is Mr T K Lim.

Mr Lim and his wife Jo are working class parents with four children. Their eldest daughter passed her "A" Level last year and was accepted by the University of Western Australia to pursue BioMedical Science (Double Major) degree but she was rejected by NTU and NUS.

With three other younger siblings, she did not want to impose on her parents financially and decided to retake her "A" Level in the hope of getting into our local university this year.