Response by MOS Alvin Tan to Adjournment Motion by MP Dennis Tan on “Rethinking Redevelopment and Green Preservation”

Mr Speaker Sir, I thank the member Dennis Tan for his adjournment motion. I wanted to say that our objectives are the same. Our objectives to balance different land use are the same, but we have different views on this, and I disagree with how he has characterised the approach we have been taking all these years. It's fine to have different views, but let me architect and frame how we look at land use planning.

Our Land-Use Needs

This government takes a long-term and a very careful approach when planning how we use our limited land, to support the diverse needs and aspirations of generations of Singaporeans.

We are balancing many competing needs, including the need for green spaces, education, transport, defence, recreation, and many more that the member has outlined.

In recent years for example, as members of this house know and we have debated, Singaporeans' demand for housing has grown. The Government has therefore ramped up public and private housing supply in the past few years, and we will continue keeping up a steady housing supply if demand remains strong.

To meet Singaporeans' needs, we must maximise how we use our limited land. And let me explain how we already are doing so.

First, we are redeveloping brownfield sites such as golf courses, industrial areas, and also activating underused spaces such as viaducts and carpark rooftops.

We are also building higher where possible, and the relaxation of aviation height limits near airports will open new possibilities for future intensification, while maintaining liveable spaces.

As the member alluded to, we are also exploring the use of more underground spaces to free up surface land for more liveable uses, including at Gali Batu. This builds on earlier efforts such as the Jurong Rock Caverns and Deep Tunnel Sewerage System. So we are already looking down, we are already looking up. And through our North South Corridor project, we are also diverting vehicular traffic underground, to free up more ground-level space for cycling, walking, green spaces, and other spaces that Singaporeans enjoy.

We are also co-locating suitable uses within integrated developments, to optimise our land use while also bringing convenience to Singaporeans. These include Our Tampines Hub and Bukit Canberra, as well as upcoming integrated community hubs in Siglap and Toa Payoh. These hubs will bring together sports facilities, healthcare and community spaces in one convenient location. All things which Singaporeans want.

Even as we do our best to optimise existing built-up areas, we will still need to strike that balance between development and conserving and preserving our green spaces.

Stewarding and Protecting our Green Spaces

Today, we have safeguarded more than 7,800 hectares of green spaces, for our nature reserves, nature parks, and other green spaces such as parks and park connectors.

These include our four Nature Reserves, which contain some of our most sensitive and biodiverse habitats.

We have also identified key ecological corridors between core habitats. We have established Nature Park Networks and Nature Corridors, such as the Labrador Nature Park Network and the Clementi Nature Corridor, that are alongside them. NParks' Ecological Profiling Exercise (EPE) also guides our conservation strategies, including to sensitively integrate nature into our urban landscape upfront within our land use plans.

We also ensure our green spaces are accessible and near homes. By 2030, every household will be within a 10-minute walk of a park.

Because of these efforts, in fact we are recognised. Singapore today is recognised as one of the world's greenest cities. MIT's 'Green View' Index shows that we are in fact ahead of most cities in our provision of urban tree coverage, including those with lower population densities.

And we will do more. We have in place supporting efforts that allow us to contribute more effectively to enhance green cover, biodiversity and ecological connectivity. By 2030, we aim to restore and enhance 80 hectares of forest, marine and coastal habitats, as well as to establish 300 km of Nature Ways.

To achieve all this, we adopt a robust, systematic and science-based framework to balance developmental needs and conserving green spaces. We rigorously study the trade-offs and alternatives and consult stakeholders where relevant.

Under our Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) framework, we start by consulting technical agencies on a site's potential ecological and biodiversity value.

If there is potentially significant environmental impact from the development, we require an EIA study to assess in greater detail the nature and the magnitude of the impact, and develop more mitigating measures.

Based on the EIA findings, agencies will carefully consider the extent of potential impact and the adequacy of the proposed mitigation measures, in consultation with nature groups and community stakeholders. These stakeholders' expertise and feedback inform the mitigation recommendations in the EIA.

We then make the environmental study reports publicly available online so the public can provide feedback. This is our default practice, unless there are national security concerns where confidentiality is required. So, I wanted to correct the mischaracterisation of the member when he said that no EIA is needed, as it is brownfield and zoned B2. In fact, I just mentioned that it is not true that brownfield sites automatically do not require EIAs - we make these assessments.

Area East of Sungei Serangoon

On his specific point about Serangoon Forest. he spoke about the area East of Sungei Serangoon and Serangoon Forest. And I previously explained in Parliament in November that this area has been zoned for Industrial use since 1998. In fact, the MPs were briefed in 2018 and in December 2023, the Gazette Notice was published for rezoning to B2, to transport facilities for this bus depot. And then-MP Gerald Giam was informed of the rezoning and gave no comments. The site is intended to be progressively developed to help us to achieve a few objectives: first, to bring economic development and jobs for residents in the area, closer to them, to their homes in nearby towns, such as Hougang and Sengkang, and to future residents of the upcoming new town at Defu and Paya Lebar Air Base.

The planned bus depot, which the member raised, at the southern part of this area is intended to improve public transport services for residents. So there is value and benefit to residents living in the area.

The area was previously a municipal waste landfill known as the Tampines Tipping Ground.

And technical agencies have assessed that this site is not a sensitive nature area and the environmental impact of the bus depot is limited. Hence, an environmental study was not required. The vegetation on the site is the result of regeneration over the last 10 to 15 years, comprising young exotic-dominated secondary forest, scrubland, grassland, and ponds. These habitats are commonly found in cleared or disturbed areas, and generally have lower ecological value than more mature forest habitats such as native-dominated secondary forests. So this is a considered decision, and we will not revisit the matter.

Nevertheless, to mitigate any environmental impact and disamenities to residents, LTA has agreed to put in place necessary measures during construction. These include hoarding the worksite, which also serves to prevent wildlife-vehicular collisions, and conducting checks for bird nests and other wildlife before site clearance.

Beyond the bus depot, agencies are reviewing potential development plans for the remaining areas along the eastern bank of Sungei Serangoon.

Agencies will continue to carefully plan for the provision of greenery and recreational spaces in the area.

Conclusion

In conclusion, Sir, I would like to thank the Member for raising this matter; to GRA Marshall Lim for engaging with residents and agencies; to Tony O'Dempsey and our friends at NSS for advocating to protect the surrounding environment; and to the residents themselves for sharing your views.

I know it matters to all of you, and it does matter.

It matters because we want our green spaces, we all want our homes, our hospitals, our schools, our jobs and workspaces, and transport and facilities to get us around. And I wish we have an abundance of land and space, to do all of that without trade-offs.

But our reality is that we are a city-state. Unique. And unlike other countries where choices are less stark, Singapore has always been about making the best out of what we have and not what we wish we had.

Our survival and present quality of life are the results of deliberate, often difficult, trade-offs. We build upwards and downwards, and constantly repurpose our land for evolving uses.

At the same time, it is our responsibility to be upfront about what we can do and what we cannot do. We must mitigate impact where we can and make adjustments, where possible. But ultimately, we must take a view, and make a decision. And that's on us.

These decisions will continue to confront us as we build our City in Nature, and provide homes and jobs for Singaporeans. Just as it has confronted our predecessors.

Mr Speaker, and to all who are concerned about this matter, I ask for all your support and your understanding. And I thank you for partnering us in this collective effort to build a Singapore into a home that we are all proud of - for our generation, and generations to come. Thank you.