Let's cast a critical eye on population plan rather than dismiss it outright
By Jessica Cheam, The Straits Times, 2 Feb 2013
JUDGING by the reaction of Singaporeans on- and off-line to the newly released White Paper on Population, you'd think that a death sentence has just been passed on Singapore.
The backlash on the projected population figures of 6.5 million to 6.9 million have ranged from knee-jerk instincts to take flight ("it's time to get out of here") to more amusing ones, in particular, a picture of a triple-decker MRT train making the rounds online.
When I first heard the projections earlier this week, my initial reaction, like many Singaporeans, was: Wow, it already feels so crowded in Singapore, can we afford to take in more?
While it certainly does not "feel" like it, practically, urban planners will tell you this is possible.
Experts whom I've interviewed over the past week point to Singapore's good track record in urban planning. Since Singapore achieved independence in 1965, it has managed to achieve, on average, double-digit economic growth in the early decades, without sacrificing quality of life, as well as avoiding the problem of pollution that plagues many other Asian cities as they develop.
The Republic also fares well on many international liveable-cities indexes, despite its density.
It was not until fairly recently that planners seem to have been caught off-guard by the speed of population growth, which has led to the current infrastructure lags, such as in housing supply and public transport.
In the Urban Redevelopment Authority (URA) 1991 Concept Plan, the planning parameter used by URA was four million, projected to be reached by 2010, which seemed reasonable given that the population was three million in 1990.
But in the end, the four million figure was crossed a decade earlier - in 2000. In 2007, when Singapore's population was 4.6 million, URA revised its planning parameter - the estimated population by which land use plans for the next few decades are based on - to 6.5 million, up from a 2001 projection of 5.5 million.
I remember that when URA announced those figures, there was a similar hue and cry. But we have had years to contemplate this, so the projected range of 6.5 million to 6.9 million should have come as no surprise. In fact, it is hardly a drastic revision.
What makes it hard for Singaporeans to accept, however, is that this figure is now a real possibility instead of a hypothetical "planning parameter". The Government must know that it will lose political points with such projected scenarios - but here's the thing: it is much better to know now and be able to plan ahead, than to be caught unawares again.
What makes it hard for Singaporeans to accept, however, is that this figure is now a real possibility instead of a hypothetical "planning parameter". The Government must know that it will lose political points with such projected scenarios - but here's the thing: it is much better to know now and be able to plan ahead, than to be caught unawares again.
On Thursday, National Development Minister Khaw Boon Wan used the analogy of inviting 1,000 people to a banquet but not being sure how many would turn up. "Will it be 700 who turn up, or 800? What do you do? I think, to avoid embarrassment and chaos, you prepare for the maximum," he said.
In other words, the Government will now rather over-build than under-build. And no wonder, given the widespread unhappiness over the infrastructure bottlenecks of recent years that have cost the ruling party politically.
The projected population figures, as policymakers have stressed this week, are not targets.
They are outcomes, premised on a whole set of assumptions that include the number of babies Singaporeans are likely to have, the pace of workforce and GDP growth hoped for - to sustain a dynamic economy.
Veteran MP Charles Chong rightly pointed out this week that the population figure "cannot be cast in stone" and will depend on a whole host of factors that will interact and change in years to come.
What is far more important than the headline population figure are the policies that underpin the projection, and which will determine what Singapore will be like in 2030.
The national discourse on immigration, growth rates, productivity and workforce growth for the next two decades is yet to run its course, and the final number could very likely be different from the projections.
But what planners have to do in the meantime is to plan for all possibilities, which is what the Land Use Plan, released on Thursday following the White Paper on Population, is all about.
It is comforting to know that, if it ultimately is in Singapore's interest to have a 6.9 million population, then at least we are prepared for it, and prepared well.
Outlining a vision for a green city, the plan promises that the environment, culture and heritage will be protected even as Singapore develops. URA assured the media at a briefing this week that its planners have sustainability embedded deep into their planning efforts.
Programmes to ramp up infrastructure such as bus services, rail networks, cycling lanes and decentralised commercial centres will go a long way in mitigating congestion and overcrowdedness.
It is in our public and personal interest to pore over these plans with a critical eye and with care, instead of dismissing them - or worse, taking flight - without giving Singapore a chance to prove that it can deliver on them.
The possibilities are truly endless, if you consider what technological innovations will enable us to do with the right planning.
As Professor Heng Chye Kiang, dean of the NUS school of design and environment, put it: "It's possible to house more people on this island if we plan properly. We have a good track record on that."
We have to give our planners a chance to prove themselves once again.
We have to give our planners a chance to prove themselves once again.
No comments:
Post a Comment