Challenges like high costs faced by hawkers prompt debate on not-for-profit system
By Benson Ang, The Sunday Times, 14 Oct 2018
They were meant to help hawkers negotiate lower rates for services like cleaning, lower ingredient costs by bulk-buying, and even introduce innovation such as wireless Internet services - along with offering healthy, affordable food.
Operating surplus is supposed to be shared to improve the centres, and to help keep traditions alive by making sure hawker entrepreneurs get a leg up. But six years since not-for-profit hawker centres were proposed, the operating model is caught in the crosshairs.
Hawkers are complaining of high rents, being saddled with additional fees for services such as tray returns, having to work long hours despite low footfall, and being locked into contracts.
Makansutra founder and well-known food critic K. F. Seetoh is leading the charge against not-for-profit hawker centres, urging the National Environment Agency (NEA) to end the experiment, in an open letter to Dr Amy Khor, who is Senior Minister of State for Health and Environment and Water Resources.
What went wrong?
BIRTH OF A NEW MODEL
The idea of operating new hawker centres on a not-for-profit basis by social enterprises or cooperatives was recommended by the 18-member Hawker Centres Public Consultation Panel, which was formed in 2011 and chaired by entrepreneur Elim Chew.
It was driven by three key considerations, top of which was to let the community "derive maximum benefit from the centre". The other aims were to provide employment to lower-income groups and provide a platform for hawker aspirants.
It was suggested that social enterprise "management" teams look at ways, from loyalty programmes to community events, to increase crowds, and to draw income from ads and to use the funds to benefit the centres and stallholders.
Wi-Fi access was talked about, as was recycling, cutting down energy use and promoting a tray-return system. Instilling social graciousness through posters was also part of the menu. Even then, there was some scepticism. Some hawkers said they would bid for stalls elsewhere if the new rents were too high. Others were worried about having to seek the manager's approval if they wanted to raise food prices.
In 2015, NEA began appointing socially conscious operators to manage new hawker centres.
Currently, seven out of 114 hawker centres are new centres managed by private social enterprises and cooperatives, such as Fei Siong Social Enterprise, NTUC Foodfare, Timbre+Hawkers, Hawker Management by Koufu and OTMH by Kopitiam.
The new centres are Ci Yuan Hawker Centre, Hawker Centre @ Our Tampines Hub, Yishun Park Hawker Centre, Jurong West Hawker Centre, Bukit Panjang Hawker Centre and Market, Kampung Admiralty Hawker Centre and Pasir Ris Central Hawker Centre.
By Benson Ang, The Sunday Times, 14 Oct 2018
Operating surplus is supposed to be shared to improve the centres, and to help keep traditions alive by making sure hawker entrepreneurs get a leg up. But six years since not-for-profit hawker centres were proposed, the operating model is caught in the crosshairs.
Hawkers are complaining of high rents, being saddled with additional fees for services such as tray returns, having to work long hours despite low footfall, and being locked into contracts.
Makansutra founder and well-known food critic K. F. Seetoh is leading the charge against not-for-profit hawker centres, urging the National Environment Agency (NEA) to end the experiment, in an open letter to Dr Amy Khor, who is Senior Minister of State for Health and Environment and Water Resources.
What went wrong?
BIRTH OF A NEW MODEL
The idea of operating new hawker centres on a not-for-profit basis by social enterprises or cooperatives was recommended by the 18-member Hawker Centres Public Consultation Panel, which was formed in 2011 and chaired by entrepreneur Elim Chew.
It was driven by three key considerations, top of which was to let the community "derive maximum benefit from the centre". The other aims were to provide employment to lower-income groups and provide a platform for hawker aspirants.
It was suggested that social enterprise "management" teams look at ways, from loyalty programmes to community events, to increase crowds, and to draw income from ads and to use the funds to benefit the centres and stallholders.
Wi-Fi access was talked about, as was recycling, cutting down energy use and promoting a tray-return system. Instilling social graciousness through posters was also part of the menu. Even then, there was some scepticism. Some hawkers said they would bid for stalls elsewhere if the new rents were too high. Others were worried about having to seek the manager's approval if they wanted to raise food prices.
In 2015, NEA began appointing socially conscious operators to manage new hawker centres.
Currently, seven out of 114 hawker centres are new centres managed by private social enterprises and cooperatives, such as Fei Siong Social Enterprise, NTUC Foodfare, Timbre+Hawkers, Hawker Management by Koufu and OTMH by Kopitiam.
The new centres are Ci Yuan Hawker Centre, Hawker Centre @ Our Tampines Hub, Yishun Park Hawker Centre, Jurong West Hawker Centre, Bukit Panjang Hawker Centre and Market, Kampung Admiralty Hawker Centre and Pasir Ris Central Hawker Centre.
In August, Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong announced that the country's hawker culture will be nominated for inscription into UNESCO's Representative List of the Intangible Cultural Heritage of Humanity - raising a debate on whether enough was being done to preserve the culture.
CHALLENGES
On Aug 28, nine days after the announcement, Mr Seetoh entered the debate. In a post on his website, he said not-for-profit hawker centres were being run like "a hard-core commercial Food Court management system". He highlighted how average rentals, including fees, were around $4,000, more than those at Maxwell Hawker Centre, which he described as possibly Singapore's most popular hawker centre. Footfall at these new hawker centres was patchy.
He also said he was shocked at some of the fees hawkers were being made to pay, including for coin changing services and for spot checks to ensure the quality of food. He described penalties for not opening a stall for set hours. "Despite these startling high cost of operation and management fees, they are expected to offer at least one dish at below $3 in the menu," he wrote.
Speaking to The Sunday Times, Mr Seetoh said: "If you ask me, the older hawker centres operate under a better model. I have met new young hawkers who are very discouraged by the situation and are looking at other jobs, which does not augur well for the future of the street food culture in Singapore."
Last Tuesday, he wrote an open letter to Dr Khor, suggesting that NEA take back control of the new hawker centres. He also highlighted other woes of hawkers he talked to.
One who decided to give up a stall because of a lack of footfall was "made to pay up the remaining years and months of rent and fees left" in the contract, he alleged.
He described how one social-enterprise hawker centre made its hawkers pay customers 20 cents each time they return a tray. This ends up costing the hawkers "anything from $400 to $800 a month", Mr Seetoh claimed.
Tenancy contracts also include clauses which allow management to raise service and monthly fees after giving notice, he added.
Hawkers interviewed said they faced challenges such as high costs and low footfall, as well as long operating hours.
CHALLENGES
On Aug 28, nine days after the announcement, Mr Seetoh entered the debate. In a post on his website, he said not-for-profit hawker centres were being run like "a hard-core commercial Food Court management system". He highlighted how average rentals, including fees, were around $4,000, more than those at Maxwell Hawker Centre, which he described as possibly Singapore's most popular hawker centre. Footfall at these new hawker centres was patchy.
He also said he was shocked at some of the fees hawkers were being made to pay, including for coin changing services and for spot checks to ensure the quality of food. He described penalties for not opening a stall for set hours. "Despite these startling high cost of operation and management fees, they are expected to offer at least one dish at below $3 in the menu," he wrote.
Speaking to The Sunday Times, Mr Seetoh said: "If you ask me, the older hawker centres operate under a better model. I have met new young hawkers who are very discouraged by the situation and are looking at other jobs, which does not augur well for the future of the street food culture in Singapore."
Last Tuesday, he wrote an open letter to Dr Khor, suggesting that NEA take back control of the new hawker centres. He also highlighted other woes of hawkers he talked to.
One who decided to give up a stall because of a lack of footfall was "made to pay up the remaining years and months of rent and fees left" in the contract, he alleged.
He described how one social-enterprise hawker centre made its hawkers pay customers 20 cents each time they return a tray. This ends up costing the hawkers "anything from $400 to $800 a month", Mr Seetoh claimed.
Tenancy contracts also include clauses which allow management to raise service and monthly fees after giving notice, he added.
Hawkers interviewed said they faced challenges such as high costs and low footfall, as well as long operating hours.
One Ms Phang, who operates a stall on the second level of Pasir Ris Central Hawker Centre, for example, said she pays $4,117 a month to the operator for her stall.
This includes $1,608 in rent, $350 in service and conservancy charges, a $550 table cleaning fee, $850 dishwashing fee, $150 cashless system fee, $40 for food waste recycling and $300 for concept and marketing. "We did not expect the footfall here to be so low," said the 29-year-old, who declined to give her full name.
Hawker Yahya Ibrahim, 59, who sells Muslim food at the hawker centre at Our Tampines Hub, said his stall is required to be open for 20 hours a day, as the hawker centre is open around the clock.
"Between midnight and 6am, there are usually only two or three customers. But I still have to keep the stall open. As a result, I sleep only about five hours a night."
Another hawker, who used to operate at Jurong West Hawker Centre, said she gave up recently because her sales dropped to below $300 a day. "I am a divorcee, I have two kids... All my household expenses depend on the stall. I tried to work with the operator, but I could not manage it."
Some hawkers at the Jurong West Hawker Centre have petitioned NEA to remove a 20-cent fee charged for every tray issued. This petition was submitted in August.
WHAT'S NEXT?
Asked about the issues that have been raised, NEA told The Sunday Times that the model for new hawker centres was decided after extensive consultation with a wide range of stakeholders, including many involved in the food and beverage business. "It is still at its early stage, and we should give it time to evolve," NEA said.
And while operators are given flexibility to "deploy different business strategies", NEA also said it monitors the operators closely.
For instance, operators are not allowed to vary the charges to stallholders at any time during the tenancy term, said NEA. Any new charges, including optional charges for value-added services offered by the operators, are subject to NEA's approval. This condition helps to control the cost for stallholders over the period of the tenancy.
"None of the operators has raised the rental or operating costs, including service charges that they had said they will charge the tenants at the start of the tenancy," NEA said.
On the issue of how a hawker at Jurong West Hawker Centre who decided to give up his stall had to continue paying $2,000 a month until the tenancy ends or a new tenant is found, NEA said: "We note that the terms on premature termination are in line with standard industry practice. Notwithstanding (this), we note Hawker Management's clarification that in practice, it exercises compassion and flexibility on a case-by-case basis, including not charging rents for the balance of the tenure in the event of premature termination."
Hawker Management, a subsidiary of Koufu, runs the Jurong West Hawker Centre, where some hawkers have complained about the fee of 20 cents charged for every tray issued.
NEA, while pointing out that this tray-return incentive system was already part of the tenancy agreement, has asked Hawker Management to work with the stallholders to address their concerns.
In between Mr Seetoh's two posts, the issue was raised in Parliament on Oct 1.
Dr Khor said that rentals together with operating costs at the new hawker centres are significantly lower than those in comparable foodcourts and coffee shops. She added that the Government will continue to refine and improve the management model.
Operators interviewed said they made sure hawkers knew about fees upfront.
For instance, a spokesman for NTUC Foodfare said all charges are itemised and fully disclosed so that hawkers may review the cost before deciding to apply for a stall.
Ms Chew, who headed the 2011 hawker panel, urged for more dialogue between hawkers and management. She told The Sunday Times: "In every business, there needs to be enough time to adapt and change into a sustainable business model... for any management model to work, all parties have to come together to find the best solutions."
Some hawkers at the Jurong West Hawker Centre have petitioned NEA to remove a 20-cent fee charged for every tray issued. This petition was submitted in August.
WHAT'S NEXT?
Asked about the issues that have been raised, NEA told The Sunday Times that the model for new hawker centres was decided after extensive consultation with a wide range of stakeholders, including many involved in the food and beverage business. "It is still at its early stage, and we should give it time to evolve," NEA said.
And while operators are given flexibility to "deploy different business strategies", NEA also said it monitors the operators closely.
For instance, operators are not allowed to vary the charges to stallholders at any time during the tenancy term, said NEA. Any new charges, including optional charges for value-added services offered by the operators, are subject to NEA's approval. This condition helps to control the cost for stallholders over the period of the tenancy.
"None of the operators has raised the rental or operating costs, including service charges that they had said they will charge the tenants at the start of the tenancy," NEA said.
On the issue of how a hawker at Jurong West Hawker Centre who decided to give up his stall had to continue paying $2,000 a month until the tenancy ends or a new tenant is found, NEA said: "We note that the terms on premature termination are in line with standard industry practice. Notwithstanding (this), we note Hawker Management's clarification that in practice, it exercises compassion and flexibility on a case-by-case basis, including not charging rents for the balance of the tenure in the event of premature termination."
Hawker Management, a subsidiary of Koufu, runs the Jurong West Hawker Centre, where some hawkers have complained about the fee of 20 cents charged for every tray issued.
NEA, while pointing out that this tray-return incentive system was already part of the tenancy agreement, has asked Hawker Management to work with the stallholders to address their concerns.
In between Mr Seetoh's two posts, the issue was raised in Parliament on Oct 1.
Dr Khor said that rentals together with operating costs at the new hawker centres are significantly lower than those in comparable foodcourts and coffee shops. She added that the Government will continue to refine and improve the management model.
Operators interviewed said they made sure hawkers knew about fees upfront.
For instance, a spokesman for NTUC Foodfare said all charges are itemised and fully disclosed so that hawkers may review the cost before deciding to apply for a stall.
Ms Chew, who headed the 2011 hawker panel, urged for more dialogue between hawkers and management. She told The Sunday Times: "In every business, there needs to be enough time to adapt and change into a sustainable business model... for any management model to work, all parties have to come together to find the best solutions."
**** New rules for social enterprise hawker centres from 1 Jan 2019, including standard termination notice: NEA
Operators to tweak 'onerous' contract terms for hawkers
Social enterprise hawker centres will offer operational and tenancy flexibility to protect interests of hawkers
By Cheryl Teh, The Straits Times, 10 Nov 2018
Several "onerous" contractual terms will have to be tweaked by operators of social enterprise hawker centres (SEHCs) to protect the interests of hawkers.
After getting feedback from hawkers, patrons and operators, the National Environment Agency (NEA) yesterday said stalls at these seven centres can choose to open five days a week, instead of the six which some social operators require.
And if hawkers choose to open longer than eight hours, operators will need to engage them to find how they plan to do so, and if they have sufficient manpower.
Hawkers will also not be "locked" into their tenancy agreements. Instead, they can keep their security deposits - capped at two months' rent - if they decide to give up their stalls, as long as they give notice, which should not be more than two months. The changes, which also include caps to fines for contract breaches and removal of legal fees for tenancy agreements, will kick in from next year.
Speaking to reporters yesterday at Ci Yuan Hawker Centre, Senior Minister of State for the Environment and Water Resources Amy Khor said that regardless of the way hawker centres are run, the objectives remain the same: to provide affordable food options for residents, but at the same time ensure that hawkers make a livelihood and get a fair deal.
After the recent scrutiny over the way SEHCs are run, "we note that some of the terms (of the contract) may seem onerous. Some of the contracts have been replicated by SEHCs from other food establishments, although they say they exercise some flexibility in practice," she added.
Seven out of 114 hawker centres are currently managed by private social enterprises and cooperatives - Fei Siong Social Enterprise, NTUC Foodfare, Timbre+Hawkers, Hawker Management by Koufu and OTMH by Kopitiam.
There had been complaints that some operators had based the way they run SEHCs on their experience in running private foodcourts.
There have also been concerns over how much SEHC hawkers are charged for services such as tray returns and dish cleaning.
Dr Khor acknowledged that there were still other concerns, including the cost borne by hawkers. NEA, she added, is looking at these issues as well, and will see if changes are also needed.
But she also reiterated that SEHCs need to be given time to find their footing.
"Teething issues are inevitable. But despite teething issues, the SEHCs have actually achieved some good outcomes - not only for the patrons, but also for the hawkers."
Most stalls at SEHCs, she highlighted, provide three meals a day, serving an important community need, especially for dual-income families that eat out. Many other existing hawker centres provide only one or two meals.
Dr Khor also said that food prices at SEHCs are generally lower than prices in surrounding foodcourts.
SEHCs are also helping to sustain the hawker trade, she added. Their hawkers have a median age of 43, much lower than the median age of 60 at other centres.
SEHC operators have put in several initiatives to nurture new hawkers. At Fei Siong-run Ci Yuan, for instance, new hawkers are given on-the-job training to gain skills and knowledge that can help them in operating hawker stalls. Dr Khor shared that 10 such hawkers have continued to ply the trade through this programme.
At Ci Yuan, 97 per cent of hawkers have renewed their contracts, Dr Khor also pointed out.
Moving on, she stressed the need to continue to recalibrate the SEHC model, and to ensure that hawkers' views are taken on board.
"Even though the operators have had dialogues with the hawkers on an ad hoc basis, we must have a more structured process so that these issues can be resolved together and quickly," Dr Khor said.
SEHC operators have been asked to form hawkers' feedback groups. The seven centres have each organised at least one feedback session, with NEA representatives sitting in.
Said Dr Khor: "Operators and hawkers can hence become joint partners in the hawker centre, to discuss things that can make the hawker centre better."
New rules for social enterprise hawker centres: Changes a good first step, say stakeholders
By Cheryl Teh and Calvin Yang, The Straits Times, 10 Nov 2018
A good start, but tweaks will be needed along the way. At the same time, hawkers and operators of social enterprise hawker centres (SEHCs) should also learn to work closer together in addressing issues.
This seemed to be the sentiment of various stakeholders, after the National Environment Agency (NEA) moved to address some of the problems highlighted by hawkers in recent months.
Entrepreneur Elim Chew, who chaired the 18-member Hawker Centres Public Consultation Panel that recommended the not-for-profit hawker centre model in 2012, said: "Operators and hawkers need to take joint ownership and work in partnership too."
A hawker at the Hawker Centre @ Our Tampines Hub, who declined to be named, believes the changes announced by the NEA yesterday would help young hawkers find a foothold. "Some hawkers are still young and passionate, and need the encouragement to stay on in this line," he said in Mandarin.
Still, some at the hawker centre, which is run by OTMH by Kopitiam, wondered if it will continue to operate 24 hours. There have been complaints that there is insufficient footfall in the wee hours to justify the opening hours at some stalls, even though it was residents who had voted for the scheme.
Food critic K. F. Seetoh, who has been vocal on the issues affecting SEHCs, said the measures were a step in the right direction. But he called for fresh ways to increase footfall at some centres, including bussing in tourists. He added: "Online and social media promotion can also be addressed."
An NEA representative told the media yesterday that the agency's "stock take" of the social enterprise model has yet to be completed, and that more changes will soon be announced.
"Going forward, NEA, as the regulatory agency, will re-balance the soft-touch regulatory approach to SEHCs, and exercise greater oversight to ensure the needs of both patrons and hawkers are well served," said the NEA spokesman.
*** NEA to do 'stocktake' of not-for-profit hawker centre model, errant operators will be taken to task: Amy Khor
It is looking into contractual agreements of operators
By Tee Zhuo, The Straits Times, 20 Oct 2018
The National Environment Agency (NEA) will do a "stock take" of the not-for-profit hawker centre model, which allows social enterprises and cooperatives to run these centres, said Senior Minister of State for the Environment and Water Resources Amy Khor.
The NEA has also been asked to quickly iron out problems related to cost and contractual terms used by these operators, she wrote in a Facebook post yesterday.
Dr Khor said the NEA is already reviewing the contractual agreements with a view to prescribing some of the terms used by operators in these contracts.
Her comments came in the wake of complaints from hawkers at these not-for-profit centres about high rents and being saddled with additional fees for services such as tray returns.
"We hear the concerns raised... NEA will not hesitate to take operators to task if they are found to be errant," said Dr Khor, who is also Senior Minister of State for Health.
Not-for-profit hawker centres came under the spotlight in late August when food critic and Makansutra founder K. F. Seetoh claimed they were being run like "a hard-core commercial foodcourt management system".
Tenants at Jurong West Hawker Centre also submitted a petition in August to its operator, Hawker Management - a subsidiary of food centre operator Koufu - complaining about a scheme in which they had to pay customers 20 cents each time a tray was returned.
This was resolved on Thursday after the operator agreed to charge customers a 20-cent deposit for the use of a tray, which is refunded when the tray is returned.
Dr Khor said in her post that the not-for-profit model, piloted about three years ago, was intended to address challenges faced by the hawker trade, such as manpower constraints, and try out innovative practices while meeting the evolving dining needs of residents.
At the same time, the authorities set controls on food prices. Operators whose bids offered the lowest total cost to stallholders were assessed more favourably, and rentals cannot be raised during the tenancy period "to ensure that Singaporeans continue to have access to affordable food... and that our hawkers can earn a decent living", she added.
Currently, seven out of 114 hawker centres are new centres managed by private social enterprises and cooperatives.
Describing the stock take as a "good step forward", Mr Seetoh said he hoped it "will involve taking a closer look at the contracts issued by the socially conscious operators" to see if they do push the aim of helping new hawkers. "I hope the authorities will work more closely with the community... I am sure there are many people out there with good ideas about how to manage and encourage a new generation of hawkers."
Additional reporting by Benson Ang
Amy Khor asks social enterprise operators to form hawker feedback groups to address concerns
By Benson Ang, Lifestyle Correspondent, The Straits Times, 25 Oct 2018
In yet another move to address hawkers' concerns on the way not-for-profit hawker centres are run, Dr Amy Khor said she has asked all social enterprise operators to form feedback groups in the centres they manage.
"The operators will meet the hawkers' feedback groups on a regular basis to discuss concerns and issues so that these can be addressed quickly," Dr Khor, who is Senior Minister of State for the Environment and Water Resources, posted on her Facebook page yesterday.
"The National Environment Agency (NEA) will also actively engage these feedback groups to better understand ground issues, and facilitate timely responses. I am glad to share that the operators have welcomed this idea."
This comes a week after she shared how the NEA is doing a "stock take" of the social enterprise model and reviewing contractual agreements - some of which have come under scrutiny.
"We will give an update once the review has been done," she added yesterday.
Earlier in the day, entrepreneur Elim Chew, who had chaired the Hawker Centres Public Consultation Panel that in 2012 first recommended the idea of social enterprises operating hawker centres on a not-for-profit basis, spoke to the media.
The 52-year-old said the upcoming "stock take" should address the rental and extra costs that hawkers get saddled with, and how operators can help these hawkers do better.
Not-for-profit hawker centres came under the spotlight in late August when food critic and Makansutra founder K.F. Seetoh claimed they were being run like "a hard-core commercial foodcourt management system".
He claimed that rents at these centres were higher than the norm, as hawkers had to pay for a variety of services, including dish washing and tray returns.
Currently, seven out of 114 hawker centres are new centres managed by private social enterprises and cooperatives such as Fei Siong Social Enterprise, Timbre+Hawkers, NTUC Foodfare, Hawker Management by Koufu and OTMH by Kopitiam.
Ms Chew said yesterday: "Every cost must lead to a benefit to consumers and hawkers... and for everyone up the chain and down the chain as well."
She also discussed the thinking behind the suggestion of running new hawker centres on a not-for-profit model, admitting that the way it is currently run needs "tweaking".
She explained that the model was proposed because the panel envisioned hawker centres as a community space where residents from all walks of life can interact freely, and was thinking of ways to make them "a better place".
Following reports of hawkers reselling their leases or subletting their stalls, the panel also wanted hawker centres to be run in a way that could benefit all Singaporeans, hence the recommendation that the centres be managed by social enterprises.
Asked if the current situation reflects the panel's vision, Ms Chew said some of the new hawker centres, such as Bukit Panjang Hawker Centre & Market, Yishun Park Hawker Centre and Pasir Ris Central Hawker Centre, have well-planned spaces.
For example, she noted, the second level of Pasir Ris Central Hawker Centre has a "hipster" hawker concept, which would help attract young hawkers.
She said: "When I went to Pasir Ris, I said, wow, this is what we hoped to have."
She also addressed claims that some operators are "profiteering" from the new hawker centres.
She clarified: "The phrase 'not-for-profit' does not mean the operators make no profits.
"It means that they make 'sustainable profits', which should be ploughed back into the hawker centre - whether by making the place better or bringing in programmes."
"Ultimately, it comes down to profit and loss," she added. "So, how can we get this right?"
Asked about an online petition - which has gathered more than 300 signatories - calling on NEA to abolish the new model and run the hawker centres itself, she replied: "Then we go back to the old model, where someone can sublet their stall to other people, and (we might) have a foreigner cooking nasi padang that isn't like nasi padang. What then?"
Asked whether there should be a deadline for the issues to be solved, Ms Chew said: "You can't fix (a deadline). A hawker centre is quite a complicated thing... It is like raising a child."
But she added that "we must do it as fast as we can" so that the issues hawkers face can be addressed.
New hawker centre model tries to balance competing interests
We thank Mr Lim Tong Wah and Mr Seah Yam Meng for their letters (Study reasons for unhappiness with new model; and Time to learn lessons and put things right; both published on Oct 20).
In 2012, when the Government resumed the building of hawker centres after a close to 30-year hiatus, the National Environment Agency (NEA) sought a management model that prioritises consumers' needs - such as food affordability, availability and a clean environment - while balancing the sustainability of the hawker trade in terms of profitability and addressing unattractive working conditions.
The socially conscious enterprise model is a recommendation, after extensive consultations, to inject something different in our approach to balance these competing interests.
The aim is to leverage the expertise of socially conscious enterprise operators in food and beverage, property and lease management, and introduce new and innovative ideas to achieve the social mission of hawker centres on a not-for-profit basis.
Besides offering affordable food in a clean environment, the operators are required to implement initiatives to enhance the vibrancy of the centre and sustain the hawker trade. These include measures to increase footfall, the curation of food mix, introducing famous food recipes and hawker mentorship programmes.
As pointed out by Mr Lim, there is an inherent trade-off between food prices and hawkers' profits.
NEA seeks to achieve a balance by requiring the hawker to serve an affordably priced food option while favouring centre operators with a lower total cost to stallholders.
Operators are also not allowed to vary the charges to stallholders at any time during the tenancy term.
We agree with Mr Lim that some hawkers are able to be profitable after accounting for rentals, and hence, besides cost, footfall and patronage at hawker centres are equally important.
Indeed, hawker centres in good locations like Kampung Admiralty and Our Tampines Hub are doing well. NEA will continue to plan for future hawker centres with good locations and connectivity to benefit both hawkers and consumers.
Mr Seah cited the Sports Hub as a private-public partnership that has met with problems.
The hawker centres run by socially conscious enterprise operators are pilot projects, and form seven out of 114 hawker centres in Singapore. They have brought some benefits but there are also areas that need to be reviewed and improved, which we are doing as part of the stock take of the management model.
Ivy Ong (Ms)
Director, Hawker Centres Division
National Environment Agency
ST Forum, 25 Oct 2018
We thank Mr Lim Tong Wah and Mr Seah Yam Meng for their letters (Study reasons for unhappiness with new model; and Time to learn lessons and put things right; both published on Oct 20).
In 2012, when the Government resumed the building of hawker centres after a close to 30-year hiatus, the National Environment Agency (NEA) sought a management model that prioritises consumers' needs - such as food affordability, availability and a clean environment - while balancing the sustainability of the hawker trade in terms of profitability and addressing unattractive working conditions.
The socially conscious enterprise model is a recommendation, after extensive consultations, to inject something different in our approach to balance these competing interests.
The aim is to leverage the expertise of socially conscious enterprise operators in food and beverage, property and lease management, and introduce new and innovative ideas to achieve the social mission of hawker centres on a not-for-profit basis.
Besides offering affordable food in a clean environment, the operators are required to implement initiatives to enhance the vibrancy of the centre and sustain the hawker trade. These include measures to increase footfall, the curation of food mix, introducing famous food recipes and hawker mentorship programmes.
As pointed out by Mr Lim, there is an inherent trade-off between food prices and hawkers' profits.
NEA seeks to achieve a balance by requiring the hawker to serve an affordably priced food option while favouring centre operators with a lower total cost to stallholders.
Operators are also not allowed to vary the charges to stallholders at any time during the tenancy term.
We agree with Mr Lim that some hawkers are able to be profitable after accounting for rentals, and hence, besides cost, footfall and patronage at hawker centres are equally important.
Indeed, hawker centres in good locations like Kampung Admiralty and Our Tampines Hub are doing well. NEA will continue to plan for future hawker centres with good locations and connectivity to benefit both hawkers and consumers.
Mr Seah cited the Sports Hub as a private-public partnership that has met with problems.
The hawker centres run by socially conscious enterprise operators are pilot projects, and form seven out of 114 hawker centres in Singapore. They have brought some benefits but there are also areas that need to be reviewed and improved, which we are doing as part of the stock take of the management model.
Ivy Ong (Ms)
Director, Hawker Centres Division
National Environment Agency
ST Forum, 25 Oct 2018
New hawker centre model needs tweaks, time to evolve: National Environment Agency
We agree with Mr Elvin Ong and Mr Goh Boon Kai that hawker centres are to provide affordable food and a means to make a decent livelihood for hawkers (Time to end not-for-profit hawker centre experiment; Too many additional charges in new hawker centre model; both Oct 16).
Our hawkers have a median age of 60 years, and new entrants are needed to ensure sustainability of the trade.
As the hawker trade faces renewal challenges, extensive consultations were carried out with a wide range of stakeholders.
The Hawker Centres Public Consultation Panel recommended that new hawker centres operate on a not-for-profit basis by social enterprises or cooperatives.
Such operators would leverage their expertise in F&B and lease management, and introduce new ideas to achieve the social mission of hawker centres.
For the model to work, the operators have some flexibility to employ different business strategies, with the Government setting certain key parameters, such as control on food prices and costs charged to stallholders.
Hence, three years ago, the National Environment Agency started piloting the model by appointing socially-conscious enterprises to manage the first two new hawker centres.
There are seven such hawker centres now, out of 114. The operators are to ensure affordable food, high standards of cleanliness, vibrancy, and introduce productivity measures to help hawkers cope with manpower constraints.
As Mr Ong stated in his letter, "What Singaporeans want is affordable food in a clean and comfortable environment". These objectives have been largely met in the new hawker centres.
The operators have also introduced measures that benefit stallholders and patrons, such as shuttle services, family-friendly weekend activities, offers for senior citizens, and "hawker-preneurship" programmes for new hawkers.
Recent discussions have centred on the cost and contractual terms of stallholders. But a key challenge also is long hours and hard work.
The operators overcome this through centralised productivity measures, and e-payment services.
This management model is not perfect, and NEA will take action against errant operators. Its implementation is at its early stage, and needs time to evolve.
NEA will continue to take in feedback and work with the operators to sustain the hawker trade and culture.
Ivy Ong (Ms)
Director, Hawker Centres Division
National Environment Agency
ST Forum, 22 Oct 2018
** 20-cent refundable deposit tray system to be implemented at Jurong West Hawker Centre
Hawkers, operator settle tray-return fee dispute
Jurong food centre tenants to stop paying 20 cents for each tray; patrons to pay refundable deposit
By Benson Ang, The Straits Times, 20 Oct 2018
Hawkers at Jurong West Hawker Centre will no longer have to pay a 20-cent fee each time a tray is returned, following discussions with the hawker centre's operator.
Instead, the system will be changed to one where customers pay a 20-cent deposit to collect clean trays for use, and are refunded the same amount when they return the trays at designated collection points.
The decision came after Hawker Management, which manages the Jurong centre, met most of its hawkers over the past few days.
In a statement yesterday, Hawker Management said: "In line with the objective to encourage a gracious society where patrons play a proactive role in returning their trays, the tray-return initiative will thereby help to reduce cleaning fees for tenants while easing the workload of the cleaners."
Hawker Management will work closely with tenants to work out the mechanics and operational details.
Once these details are finalised, it will announce when the new deposit-based tray-return initiative will take effect.
The operator added that following the meetings, a committee comprising hawker representatives will be formed and it will work closely with Hawker Management to drive and implement changes at the hawker centre, including on how to improve footfall.
In addition, the statement said Hawker Management has also noted all other feedback and comments gathered from the meetings, including contractual terms, and is in the midst of reviewing them internally, with a view to address all outstanding matters quickly.
When contacted, Makansutra founder and food critic K. F. Seetoh, who first raised the issue of the tray-return fee in a website post on Oct 9, told The Straits Times that the new system is "a good start".
However, he added: "I think people should not be incentivised to be gracious. We do not pay people to be civic-minded."
Rather, he suggests that a sense of civic mindedness can be encouraged through education, especially of the young.
"Ikea does not pay people to return trays, yet most customers there do so conscientiously. If it can be done at Ikea, why can't it be done at a hawker centre?"
Despite the outcome, some hawkers still feel that tray use should be free. Mr S. Govindaraju, 39, who co-owns a stall selling nasi briyani and roti prata at the hawker centre, said: "I do not like the original tray-return system. But with this new system, I am concerned customers will not want to come here now. If you ask me, I think there should be no system at all, and people should be able to use trays for free."
Hawkers, operator settle tray-return fee dispute
Jurong food centre tenants to stop paying 20 cents for each tray; patrons to pay refundable deposit
By Benson Ang, The Straits Times, 20 Oct 2018
Instead, the system will be changed to one where customers pay a 20-cent deposit to collect clean trays for use, and are refunded the same amount when they return the trays at designated collection points.
The decision came after Hawker Management, which manages the Jurong centre, met most of its hawkers over the past few days.
In a statement yesterday, Hawker Management said: "In line with the objective to encourage a gracious society where patrons play a proactive role in returning their trays, the tray-return initiative will thereby help to reduce cleaning fees for tenants while easing the workload of the cleaners."
Hawker Management will work closely with tenants to work out the mechanics and operational details.
Once these details are finalised, it will announce when the new deposit-based tray-return initiative will take effect.
The operator added that following the meetings, a committee comprising hawker representatives will be formed and it will work closely with Hawker Management to drive and implement changes at the hawker centre, including on how to improve footfall.
In addition, the statement said Hawker Management has also noted all other feedback and comments gathered from the meetings, including contractual terms, and is in the midst of reviewing them internally, with a view to address all outstanding matters quickly.
When contacted, Makansutra founder and food critic K. F. Seetoh, who first raised the issue of the tray-return fee in a website post on Oct 9, told The Straits Times that the new system is "a good start".
However, he added: "I think people should not be incentivised to be gracious. We do not pay people to be civic-minded."
Rather, he suggests that a sense of civic mindedness can be encouraged through education, especially of the young.
"Ikea does not pay people to return trays, yet most customers there do so conscientiously. If it can be done at Ikea, why can't it be done at a hawker centre?"
Despite the outcome, some hawkers still feel that tray use should be free. Mr S. Govindaraju, 39, who co-owns a stall selling nasi briyani and roti prata at the hawker centre, said: "I do not like the original tray-return system. But with this new system, I am concerned customers will not want to come here now. If you ask me, I think there should be no system at all, and people should be able to use trays for free."
Jurong West Hawker Centre operator, tenants discuss alternatives to controversial 20-cent tray-return system
Ideas to address unhappiness include raising food prices, making customers pay deposit
By Benson Ang, The Straits Times, 17 Oct 2018
Modifications to a tray-return system that has stirred unhappiness at Jurong West Hawker Centre were floated during a meeting yesterday between some hawkers and the centre's operator.
These included a possible 20-cent increase in food prices at the centre, and having customers pay a 20-cent deposit when they buy food and get the money back when they return the tray.
A hawker, who declined to be named, told The Straits Times (ST) about the discussions at the meeting based on what she heard from those who attended it.
Unhappiness has been brewing among the Jurong West Hawker Centre tenants over the policy to charge a 20-cent fee for every tray issued to them.
ST understands that when the patrons return the tray, they would receive 20 cents as an incentive.
A petition to remove the fee, signed by 12 hawkers, was submitted in August.
The petition said that the tray-return system created numerous arguments between the hawkers and customers, and claimed that Jurong West Hawker Centre was the only hawker centre in Singapore where stallholders were being charged for the trays.
In a statement yesterday, Hawker Management, which operates the hawker centre, said it had a meeting with six tenants yesterday. They were among 12 hawkers who submitted the petition.
Hawker Management - a subsidiary of food centre operator Koufu - described the meeting as cordial and effective, and said both the operator and the tenants recognise that all parties are aligned in their objective to drive improvements to the hawker centre.
It added that it will continue to actively meet tenants over the next few days to gather tenants' feedback and views on all outstanding concerns, and that its staff are proactive in engaging tenants on the ground every day.
The main objective of the tray-return initiative is to lower cleaning fees for tenants, as the higher tray-return rates have enabled cost savings in the number of cleaners used, the statement said.
"At $1,100, Jurong West Hawker Centre's cleaning fees are one of the lowest among social enterprise hawker centres."
The statement also clarified that the tray-return initiative is not co-funded by Hawker Management and the tenants, in response to a media query suggesting the 20-cent fee was split between them.
When ST visited the hawker centre at 6pm yesterday, only 19 of the 34 stalls were open, and there were about 70 patrons.
Hawker Suraya Bunga, 46, who was not at the meeting, but whose stall was represented in the petition, said: "Me and my boss have not heard from the operator. I hope they do something because the cost from this tray-return system alone can be more than $800 a month."
Ideas to address unhappiness include raising food prices, making customers pay deposit
By Benson Ang, The Straits Times, 17 Oct 2018
Modifications to a tray-return system that has stirred unhappiness at Jurong West Hawker Centre were floated during a meeting yesterday between some hawkers and the centre's operator.
These included a possible 20-cent increase in food prices at the centre, and having customers pay a 20-cent deposit when they buy food and get the money back when they return the tray.
A hawker, who declined to be named, told The Straits Times (ST) about the discussions at the meeting based on what she heard from those who attended it.
Unhappiness has been brewing among the Jurong West Hawker Centre tenants over the policy to charge a 20-cent fee for every tray issued to them.
ST understands that when the patrons return the tray, they would receive 20 cents as an incentive.
A petition to remove the fee, signed by 12 hawkers, was submitted in August.
The petition said that the tray-return system created numerous arguments between the hawkers and customers, and claimed that Jurong West Hawker Centre was the only hawker centre in Singapore where stallholders were being charged for the trays.
In a statement yesterday, Hawker Management, which operates the hawker centre, said it had a meeting with six tenants yesterday. They were among 12 hawkers who submitted the petition.
Hawker Management - a subsidiary of food centre operator Koufu - described the meeting as cordial and effective, and said both the operator and the tenants recognise that all parties are aligned in their objective to drive improvements to the hawker centre.
It added that it will continue to actively meet tenants over the next few days to gather tenants' feedback and views on all outstanding concerns, and that its staff are proactive in engaging tenants on the ground every day.
The main objective of the tray-return initiative is to lower cleaning fees for tenants, as the higher tray-return rates have enabled cost savings in the number of cleaners used, the statement said.
"At $1,100, Jurong West Hawker Centre's cleaning fees are one of the lowest among social enterprise hawker centres."
The statement also clarified that the tray-return initiative is not co-funded by Hawker Management and the tenants, in response to a media query suggesting the 20-cent fee was split between them.
When ST visited the hawker centre at 6pm yesterday, only 19 of the 34 stalls were open, and there were about 70 patrons.
Hawker Suraya Bunga, 46, who was not at the meeting, but whose stall was represented in the petition, said: "Me and my boss have not heard from the operator. I hope they do something because the cost from this tray-return system alone can be more than $800 a month."
* Hawker centre operator must ensure open, fair competition; Koufu upfront about contracts: NEA
By Benson Ang, Lifestyle Correspondent, The Straits Times, 18 Oct 2018
The National Environment Agency (NEA) said it requires the operator of Jurong West Hawker Centre to ensure there is open and fair competition, as well as a transparent, value-for-money system, when procuring cleaning services for the centre.
It also pointed out how the operator's parent company Koufu has been upfront about its relationship with GreatSolutions, which provides cleaning services. The directors of the companies are brothers.
NEA was replying to a query after the relationship was highlighted by some netizens last weekend.
In a Koufu initial public offering prospectus dated July 11 this year, it was stated that it obtains dishwashing, cleaning, landscaping and vector control services from GreatSolutions for several of its food centres.
NEA noted that the document made it clear that GreatSolutions was an "interested person".
The document went on to state that Koufu will enter into contracts for the provision of such services, or electrical services, by the mandated interested persons only if it is "satisfied that the rates or prices from (them) are not higher than the most competitive quote provided by other third-party service providers for comparable services".
According to the prospectus, such contracts will be entered into only after obtaining competing quotes from at least two unrelated third-party service providers, and taking into account other relevant factors.
Koufu's chief executive is Mr Pang Lim. His younger brother, Mr Pang Pok, is director of GreatSolutions. Both men are in their 60s.
Koufu also listed another company, Brightlink Electrical, as an interested party. It provides electrical services to Koufu's food and beverage outlets and is partly owned by another brother, Mr Pang Pong San.
Hawker Management, which operates Jurong West Hawker Centre, said it sources for competitive quotes for all procurement of goods and services, adding: "All such transactions are subject to a rigorous review process and entered into on an arm's length basis."
According to previous reports, the Pang brothers started their first coffee shop in Yishun in 1991. Their late father ran various businesses and their mother was identified as a school janitor. The couple had seven children.
Separately, NEA also said it was present at a discussion which Hawker Management held with six tenants on Tuesday. The hawkers were among 12 who submitted a petition in August against having to pay customers 20 cents each time a tray is returned.
Hawker Management described the meeting as cordial and effective. The NEA spokesman said: "NEA continues to monitor the situation closely, and to support both sides to try and work out an amicable solution as soon as possible."
Parliament: Hawker centre operators have to make charges known to stallholders, says Amy Khor
By Seow Bei Yi, The Straits Times, 1 Oct 2018
Operators of hawker centres have to inform potential stallholders of rental and operating charges before signing any agreement with them, said Senior Minister of State for the Environment and Water Resources Amy Khor.
"They are not permitted to vary these charges over the term of the tenancy," she said in Parliament on Monday (Oct 1).
She was responding to Non-Constituency MP Daniel Goh, who had asked if social enterprises managing hawker centres are audited to prevent the use of hidden fees and charges.
Operators have to be transparent about costs, said Dr Khor. This includes optional ones for value-added services like coin-changing, which are also subject to the National Environment Agency's (NEA) approval.
"These measures limit the potential profits, if any, of operators and ensure that rentals are affordable for stallholders," she said.
"Today, the stall rentals, together with operating costs at our new hawker centres, are significantly lower than those in comparable foodcourts and coffee shops," she added.
Dr Khor's remarks came after Makansutra founder and food consultant KF Seetoh took issue with the new hawker centre operating model, under which social enterprises were appointed to run these centres on a not-for-profit basis.
Mr Seetoh said it will be an uphill task to achieve social objectives when hawkers struggle to pay high operating costs under the social enterprises.
In a recent post on his website, he had flagged the additional costs hawkers have to pay on top of rent, with some hawkers apparently paying $4,000 a month - which is double their monthly rent - to the operators.
Currently, seven out of 114 hawker centres are new centres managed by social enterprises and cooperatives: Fei Siong Social Enterprise, NTUC Foodfare, Timbre+Hawkers, Hawker Management by Koufu and OTMH by Kopitiam. Thirteen more hawker centres will be built by 2027.
"We recognise that there have been concerns over costs to stallholders," Dr Khor told the House on Monday. "NEA ensures that rentals charged and essential services that contribute to operating costs are reasonable."
For example, a key tender evaluation criterion when evaluating bids from potential operators is the rental and operating costs that the operators will charge stallholders, she said.
"Operators who propose lower rentals and operating costs will be considered more favourably, and they are not permitted to vary these charges over the term of the tenancy," she added.
Asked by Associate Professor Goh if NEA was aware of extra costs previously flagged by hawkers at the Ci Yuan Hawker Centre in Hougang, Dr Khor said operators have since clarified that the $600 quality control management fee and $50 coin exchange fee levied on hawkers are optional, and that some have chosen not to take these services up.
Asked by Mr Zainal Sapari (Pasir Ris-Punggol GRC) if the authorities would consider lowering rentals for a period, until hawkers' businesses pick up enough to be sustainable, Dr Khor added that there are no plans to offer subsidies at the moment.
She noted that the turnover rate for hawker centres run by social enterprises is comparable to that for other hawker centres, and that the authorities are keeping a close watch on the situation.
"It takes time for a new hawker centre to establish itself. The Government will continue to refine and improve the management model, so as to provide affordable food in a hygienic environment while allowing hawkers to make a decent livelihood," she said.
By Seow Bei Yi, The Straits Times, 1 Oct 2018
Operators of hawker centres have to inform potential stallholders of rental and operating charges before signing any agreement with them, said Senior Minister of State for the Environment and Water Resources Amy Khor.
"They are not permitted to vary these charges over the term of the tenancy," she said in Parliament on Monday (Oct 1).
She was responding to Non-Constituency MP Daniel Goh, who had asked if social enterprises managing hawker centres are audited to prevent the use of hidden fees and charges.
Operators have to be transparent about costs, said Dr Khor. This includes optional ones for value-added services like coin-changing, which are also subject to the National Environment Agency's (NEA) approval.
"These measures limit the potential profits, if any, of operators and ensure that rentals are affordable for stallholders," she said.
"Today, the stall rentals, together with operating costs at our new hawker centres, are significantly lower than those in comparable foodcourts and coffee shops," she added.
Dr Khor's remarks came after Makansutra founder and food consultant KF Seetoh took issue with the new hawker centre operating model, under which social enterprises were appointed to run these centres on a not-for-profit basis.
Mr Seetoh said it will be an uphill task to achieve social objectives when hawkers struggle to pay high operating costs under the social enterprises.
In a recent post on his website, he had flagged the additional costs hawkers have to pay on top of rent, with some hawkers apparently paying $4,000 a month - which is double their monthly rent - to the operators.
Currently, seven out of 114 hawker centres are new centres managed by social enterprises and cooperatives: Fei Siong Social Enterprise, NTUC Foodfare, Timbre+Hawkers, Hawker Management by Koufu and OTMH by Kopitiam. Thirteen more hawker centres will be built by 2027.
"We recognise that there have been concerns over costs to stallholders," Dr Khor told the House on Monday. "NEA ensures that rentals charged and essential services that contribute to operating costs are reasonable."
For example, a key tender evaluation criterion when evaluating bids from potential operators is the rental and operating costs that the operators will charge stallholders, she said.
"Operators who propose lower rentals and operating costs will be considered more favourably, and they are not permitted to vary these charges over the term of the tenancy," she added.
Asked by Associate Professor Goh if NEA was aware of extra costs previously flagged by hawkers at the Ci Yuan Hawker Centre in Hougang, Dr Khor said operators have since clarified that the $600 quality control management fee and $50 coin exchange fee levied on hawkers are optional, and that some have chosen not to take these services up.
Asked by Mr Zainal Sapari (Pasir Ris-Punggol GRC) if the authorities would consider lowering rentals for a period, until hawkers' businesses pick up enough to be sustainable, Dr Khor added that there are no plans to offer subsidies at the moment.
She noted that the turnover rate for hawker centres run by social enterprises is comparable to that for other hawker centres, and that the authorities are keeping a close watch on the situation.
"It takes time for a new hawker centre to establish itself. The Government will continue to refine and improve the management model, so as to provide affordable food in a hygienic environment while allowing hawkers to make a decent livelihood," she said.
'Social enterprise' management model for hawker centres may need fine-tuning: Amy Khor
'Not-for-profit social enterprise' model under review amid worry over costs paid to agents
By Joyce Lim, Senior Correspondent, The Straits Times, 8 Sep 2018
The current alternative management model for hawker centres would have to be fine-tuned over time to achieve its social objectives, said Dr Amy Khor.
The Senior Minister of State for the Environment and Water Resources was responding to the issue of whether the next 13 hawker centres to be built by 2027 will adopt this alternative model.
The Government had introduced this model, better known as "not-for-profit social enterprise" three years ago, with the aim of keeping food prices low and making the hawker trade sustainable.
Dr Khor, who was visiting the Hawker Centre@Our Tampines Hub yesterday, said: "We are evaluating and we will make tweaks to the models. We will then decide what will be an appropriate model when the next new hawker centre comes up.
"One of the very key tender evaluation criteria that we have, when we evaluate the bids that come in, is the rental and operating costs that managing agents will charge stallholders.
"Those that propose lower rentals and operating costs are the ones that will be considered more favourably. Indeed we are very mindful that we need to ensure the hawkers can make a decent livelihood," she added.
Makansutra founder and food consultant KF Seetoh had taken issue with the new model and said it will be an uphill task to achieve those social objectives when hawkers struggle to pay high operating costs under privately run social enterprises.
In a recent post published on his website, Mr Seetoh flagged the additional costs hawkers have to pay on top of rent.
Such costs add up and some hawkers are apparently paying $4,000 a month, which is double their monthly rent, to the private operators.
Mr Seetoh said he was shocked that hawkers are made to pay for coin-changing service, washing of crockery, as well as collection and return of trays.
Currently, only seven out of 114 hawker centres are new centres managed by private social enterprises and cooperatives - Fei Siong Social Enterprise, NTUC Foodfare, Timbre+Hawkers, Hawker Management by Koufu and OTMH by Kopitiam.
Thirteen more hawker centres will be built by 2027.
As the alternative management model is still in its infancy stage, it is too early to tell if the next 13 hawker centres will be run under the same model.
Dr Khor said: "It is a constantly evolving process. What we are doing is always look at ways to better manage our hawker centres even as we also continue to look at ways to improve and upgrade our hawker centres in terms of physical structure and amenities... So I think we have to consider both the hardware and software."
She stressed that the managing agents are not allowed to increase rental or operating costs during the lease period.
But when asked if additional costs like advertising should be made optional to hawkers, Dr Khor said: "The fundamental areas are already in the tender.
"We also need to give some leeway for innovation in order to again explore different ways to enhance the management model. So there may be some optional costs like coin exchange. These are optional, these are services that the managing agents may want to offer but they will inform us of such optional services."
Last month, Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong said Singapore will bid for a listing of its hawker culture on UNESCO's list of intangible cultural heritage.
###### Parliament: Model of hawker centres run by social enterprises sound, will be adjusted, says Environment and Water Resources Minister Masagos Zulkifli
It will be adjusted to ensure hawkers' welfare and better serve patrons, says Masagos
By Benson Ang, The Straits Times, 20 Nov 2018
The model by which seven new hawker centres are run by social enterprises is generally sound in spite of issues with its implementation, Environment and Water Resources Minister Masagos Zulkifli said.
He told Parliament yesterday that his ministry has heard the feedback from Singaporeans, and will continue with the scheme, but adjust it to better serve patrons and look after hawkers' well-being.
"As with any trials and experiments, we cannot always get it right the first time," he said.
"Give the model time to adapt, adjust and optimise the outcomes we seek to achieve," the minister said.
These outcomes include affordable good food, a decent living for local hawkers that is sustainable, and preserving hawker centres.
Mr Masagos and Senior Minister of State Amy Khor fielded 19 questions from MPs on these socially conscious enterprise hawker centres (SEHCs), which have recently come under public criticism for imposing unnecessary rules and an extra layer of costs on hawkers. The National Environment Agency (NEA), which regulates hawker centres, has also stepped in to address these concerns.
Dr Khor told MPs the agency will rebalance its approach and exercise greater oversight to safeguard hawkers, saying: "We set some key parameters, let the market work, and when we get feedback or issues are raised, we will move to address them swiftly and decisively, as we have done in the past month or so."
Mr Masagos said new operating models were needed to sustain the hawker trade after the Government resumed building hawker centres in 2011, after a hiatus of nearly 30 years, to stabilise prices of cooked food.
"This is why we are trialling the SEHC model for our new hawker centres," he said, explaining that SEHC operators bring new ideas and inject innovation that hawkers or the Government cannot.
They are able to curate food stalls for quality and variety. They can bring in famous food recipes, and are better placed to run programmes to draw younger hawkers and help sustain the trade. They also innovate to improve footfall and enhance the vibrancy of the centres, he said.
And as operators with competencies in food and beverage (F&B) and management, they can help hawkers weather the competition from other F&B alternatives and adapt to technological disruptions, better than the hawkers can on their own, Mr Masagos said.
NEA Update On Review Of Contractual Terms Between Socially-Conscious Enterprises And Hawkers -9 Nov 2018
'Not-for-profit social enterprise' model under review amid worry over costs paid to agents
By Joyce Lim, Senior Correspondent, The Straits Times, 8 Sep 2018
The current alternative management model for hawker centres would have to be fine-tuned over time to achieve its social objectives, said Dr Amy Khor.
The Senior Minister of State for the Environment and Water Resources was responding to the issue of whether the next 13 hawker centres to be built by 2027 will adopt this alternative model.
The Government had introduced this model, better known as "not-for-profit social enterprise" three years ago, with the aim of keeping food prices low and making the hawker trade sustainable.
Dr Khor, who was visiting the Hawker Centre@Our Tampines Hub yesterday, said: "We are evaluating and we will make tweaks to the models. We will then decide what will be an appropriate model when the next new hawker centre comes up.
"One of the very key tender evaluation criteria that we have, when we evaluate the bids that come in, is the rental and operating costs that managing agents will charge stallholders.
"Those that propose lower rentals and operating costs are the ones that will be considered more favourably. Indeed we are very mindful that we need to ensure the hawkers can make a decent livelihood," she added.
Makansutra founder and food consultant KF Seetoh had taken issue with the new model and said it will be an uphill task to achieve those social objectives when hawkers struggle to pay high operating costs under privately run social enterprises.
In a recent post published on his website, Mr Seetoh flagged the additional costs hawkers have to pay on top of rent.
Such costs add up and some hawkers are apparently paying $4,000 a month, which is double their monthly rent, to the private operators.
Mr Seetoh said he was shocked that hawkers are made to pay for coin-changing service, washing of crockery, as well as collection and return of trays.
Currently, only seven out of 114 hawker centres are new centres managed by private social enterprises and cooperatives - Fei Siong Social Enterprise, NTUC Foodfare, Timbre+Hawkers, Hawker Management by Koufu and OTMH by Kopitiam.
Thirteen more hawker centres will be built by 2027.
As the alternative management model is still in its infancy stage, it is too early to tell if the next 13 hawker centres will be run under the same model.
Dr Khor said: "It is a constantly evolving process. What we are doing is always look at ways to better manage our hawker centres even as we also continue to look at ways to improve and upgrade our hawker centres in terms of physical structure and amenities... So I think we have to consider both the hardware and software."
She stressed that the managing agents are not allowed to increase rental or operating costs during the lease period.
But when asked if additional costs like advertising should be made optional to hawkers, Dr Khor said: "The fundamental areas are already in the tender.
"We also need to give some leeway for innovation in order to again explore different ways to enhance the management model. So there may be some optional costs like coin exchange. These are optional, these are services that the managing agents may want to offer but they will inform us of such optional services."
Last month, Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong said Singapore will bid for a listing of its hawker culture on UNESCO's list of intangible cultural heritage.
###### Parliament: Model of hawker centres run by social enterprises sound, will be adjusted, says Environment and Water Resources Minister Masagos Zulkifli
It will be adjusted to ensure hawkers' welfare and better serve patrons, says Masagos
By Benson Ang, The Straits Times, 20 Nov 2018
The model by which seven new hawker centres are run by social enterprises is generally sound in spite of issues with its implementation, Environment and Water Resources Minister Masagos Zulkifli said.
He told Parliament yesterday that his ministry has heard the feedback from Singaporeans, and will continue with the scheme, but adjust it to better serve patrons and look after hawkers' well-being.
"As with any trials and experiments, we cannot always get it right the first time," he said.
"Give the model time to adapt, adjust and optimise the outcomes we seek to achieve," the minister said.
These outcomes include affordable good food, a decent living for local hawkers that is sustainable, and preserving hawker centres.
Mr Masagos and Senior Minister of State Amy Khor fielded 19 questions from MPs on these socially conscious enterprise hawker centres (SEHCs), which have recently come under public criticism for imposing unnecessary rules and an extra layer of costs on hawkers. The National Environment Agency (NEA), which regulates hawker centres, has also stepped in to address these concerns.
Dr Khor told MPs the agency will rebalance its approach and exercise greater oversight to safeguard hawkers, saying: "We set some key parameters, let the market work, and when we get feedback or issues are raised, we will move to address them swiftly and decisively, as we have done in the past month or so."
Mr Masagos said new operating models were needed to sustain the hawker trade after the Government resumed building hawker centres in 2011, after a hiatus of nearly 30 years, to stabilise prices of cooked food.
"This is why we are trialling the SEHC model for our new hawker centres," he said, explaining that SEHC operators bring new ideas and inject innovation that hawkers or the Government cannot.
They are able to curate food stalls for quality and variety. They can bring in famous food recipes, and are better placed to run programmes to draw younger hawkers and help sustain the trade. They also innovate to improve footfall and enhance the vibrancy of the centres, he said.
And as operators with competencies in food and beverage (F&B) and management, they can help hawkers weather the competition from other F&B alternatives and adapt to technological disruptions, better than the hawkers can on their own, Mr Masagos said.
While he was heartened by the recent public debate on how existing hawker centres managed by the NEA appear better run than SEHCs, he said: "It is not enough to keep doing things the same way."
He noted that on the whole, SEHCs have achieved good outcomes: Food prices are affordable and comparable with existing centres, operators have curated stalls for quality and variety and kept their centres open during breakfast, lunch and dinner, unlike at older centres.
Hawkers are also doing well, he said, citing the new Bukit Panjang and Ci Yuan hawker centres, where 96 per cent and 97 per cent of them renewed their contracts respectively.
"The market mechanism is working, and the Government should not intervene unnecessarily, in mandating low or no rental," he said.
Hawkers are entrepreneurs after all, he added.
"We want to reward successful hawkers to sustain the trade and preserve our beloved hawker heritage. It is natural to have some level of churn as better hawkers replace those who are less suited for the trade," he said.
"It is inappropriate for the Government to subsidise a hawker on the basis that business is poor. This would be unfair to a better-performing hawker who thrives on healthy competition," he said.
He noted that on the whole, SEHCs have achieved good outcomes: Food prices are affordable and comparable with existing centres, operators have curated stalls for quality and variety and kept their centres open during breakfast, lunch and dinner, unlike at older centres.
Hawkers are also doing well, he said, citing the new Bukit Panjang and Ci Yuan hawker centres, where 96 per cent and 97 per cent of them renewed their contracts respectively.
"The market mechanism is working, and the Government should not intervene unnecessarily, in mandating low or no rental," he said.
Hawkers are entrepreneurs after all, he added.
"We want to reward successful hawkers to sustain the trade and preserve our beloved hawker heritage. It is natural to have some level of churn as better hawkers replace those who are less suited for the trade," he said.
"It is inappropriate for the Government to subsidise a hawker on the basis that business is poor. This would be unfair to a better-performing hawker who thrives on healthy competition," he said.
Six MPs pressed Mr Masagos and Dr Khor for further answers, including Ms Lee Bee Wah (Nee Soon GRC) who asked why the NEA could not just run hawker centres itself, and Mr Liang Eng Hwa (Holland-Bukit Timah GRC) who asked whether the social enterprise model was the only way to go.
Dr Khor reminded members that the new model "is really in its infancy", and still evolving.
She added: "We're open to any model because the idea is to benefit Singaporeans, to benefit hawkers."
Parliament: Three areas MEWR wants to improve for new hawker centres
Support to manage costs and oversight of hawkers' welfare among them
By Cheryl Teh, The Straits Times, 20 Nov 2018
Senior Minister of State for the Environment and Water Resources Amy Khor yesterday outlined three areas her ministry would focus on in the coming months, to improve the socially conscious enterprise hawker centre (SEHC) model implemented at seven new hawker centres.
These are: give better support to the stallholders to manage costs, have greater oversight by regulator the National Environment Agency (NEA) to safeguard hawkers' well-being, and have structured channels set up by the SEHC operators for hawkers to give feedback.
Dr Khor also said in Parliament that a ground-up work group, comprising hawkers and other experts, will be set up soon to look at how to support newcomers to the trade and sustain Singapore's hawker culture.
It is a treasured culture that Singapore plans to nominate next year for inscription on the Unesco Representative List of the Intangible Cultural Heritage of Humanity.
Meanwhile, the controversy at SEHCs prompted questions from 13 MPs yesterday, including Mr Gan Thiam Poh (Ang Mo Kio GRC) and Ms Lee Bee Wah (Nee Soon GRC).
Replying, Dr Khor admitted it is difficult to get the SEHC model right from the start, but assured MPs the relevant ministries are working on fixing the issues.
She called for understanding as she explained the issues that had erupted in recent months.
"As with any trial, it is difficult to get the SEHC model right from the start, especially since we have not built new hawker centres for almost 30 years, " she said.
There are seven new hawker centres managed by five social-enterprise entities: Hawker Management by Koufu, Fei Siong Social Enterprise, NTUC Foodfare, Timbre+Hawkers and OTMH by Kopitiam.
The Housing Board and NEA oversee most of Singapore's other hawker centres.
The Government began building hawker centres in 2011 after a hiatus of nearly 30 years to help stabilise cooked food prices against the emerging dominance of coffee shops and foodcourts.
Under the SEHC model, dishwashing is centralised and an automated tray-return system has been introduced. These features are to overcome manpower shortages and help ensure a cleaner environment. But problems arose, with some hawkers alleging high rents, exorbitant dishwashing costs, and long working hours.
Several steps have been taken in the past weeks to address these problems.
Said Dr Khor: "We are not done with the stock-take of the model, and will continue to refine it to better serve Singaporeans."
To help ease costs for hawkers, measures are in place "to ensure rents are fair and not speculative", she said.
She noted that contrary to popular opinion, the median rent of SEHC stalls is about $2,000 a month.
They are nowhere near the rents at private F&B outlets, which can range from $4,000 to $13,000 a month before other operating costs," she said. "As for existing hawker centres, no stallholder is paying astronomical rentals."
Also, SEHC operators are not allowed to raise rents or operating costs during the tenancy period.
In fact, excluding rent, operating costs at both such centres are comparable, she noted.
Service and conservancy charges at SEHCs range from $110 to $350 a month, while those at existing hawker centres range from $130 to $450 a month.
Similarly, charges for table cleaning at SEHCs range from $300 to $550 monthly, while those at existing centres are from $200 to $830.
As for the second area of focus, several new rules have been announced as the NEA rebalances its soft-touch approach towards operators to exercise greater oversight of hawkers' well-being.
These include letting hawkers operate five days a week from Jan 1 next year and terminating their tenancies with no more than two months' notice to the operators.
Security deposits held by the operator will be no more than two months' rent and they will bear all the legal fees related to the tenancy.
The final focus is for SEHC operators to set up structured feedback channels for hawkers. All have done so and held at least one meeting with their stallholders.
"I am hopeful that such structured and regular meetings will help encourage communication, resolve day-to-day issues, and reduce misunderstandings," she said.
Support to manage costs and oversight of hawkers' welfare among them
By Cheryl Teh, The Straits Times, 20 Nov 2018
Senior Minister of State for the Environment and Water Resources Amy Khor yesterday outlined three areas her ministry would focus on in the coming months, to improve the socially conscious enterprise hawker centre (SEHC) model implemented at seven new hawker centres.
These are: give better support to the stallholders to manage costs, have greater oversight by regulator the National Environment Agency (NEA) to safeguard hawkers' well-being, and have structured channels set up by the SEHC operators for hawkers to give feedback.
Dr Khor also said in Parliament that a ground-up work group, comprising hawkers and other experts, will be set up soon to look at how to support newcomers to the trade and sustain Singapore's hawker culture.
It is a treasured culture that Singapore plans to nominate next year for inscription on the Unesco Representative List of the Intangible Cultural Heritage of Humanity.
Meanwhile, the controversy at SEHCs prompted questions from 13 MPs yesterday, including Mr Gan Thiam Poh (Ang Mo Kio GRC) and Ms Lee Bee Wah (Nee Soon GRC).
Replying, Dr Khor admitted it is difficult to get the SEHC model right from the start, but assured MPs the relevant ministries are working on fixing the issues.
She called for understanding as she explained the issues that had erupted in recent months.
"As with any trial, it is difficult to get the SEHC model right from the start, especially since we have not built new hawker centres for almost 30 years, " she said.
There are seven new hawker centres managed by five social-enterprise entities: Hawker Management by Koufu, Fei Siong Social Enterprise, NTUC Foodfare, Timbre+Hawkers and OTMH by Kopitiam.
The Housing Board and NEA oversee most of Singapore's other hawker centres.
The Government began building hawker centres in 2011 after a hiatus of nearly 30 years to help stabilise cooked food prices against the emerging dominance of coffee shops and foodcourts.
Under the SEHC model, dishwashing is centralised and an automated tray-return system has been introduced. These features are to overcome manpower shortages and help ensure a cleaner environment. But problems arose, with some hawkers alleging high rents, exorbitant dishwashing costs, and long working hours.
Several steps have been taken in the past weeks to address these problems.
Said Dr Khor: "We are not done with the stock-take of the model, and will continue to refine it to better serve Singaporeans."
To help ease costs for hawkers, measures are in place "to ensure rents are fair and not speculative", she said.
She noted that contrary to popular opinion, the median rent of SEHC stalls is about $2,000 a month.
They are nowhere near the rents at private F&B outlets, which can range from $4,000 to $13,000 a month before other operating costs," she said. "As for existing hawker centres, no stallholder is paying astronomical rentals."
Also, SEHC operators are not allowed to raise rents or operating costs during the tenancy period.
In fact, excluding rent, operating costs at both such centres are comparable, she noted.
Service and conservancy charges at SEHCs range from $110 to $350 a month, while those at existing hawker centres range from $130 to $450 a month.
Similarly, charges for table cleaning at SEHCs range from $300 to $550 monthly, while those at existing centres are from $200 to $830.
As for the second area of focus, several new rules have been announced as the NEA rebalances its soft-touch approach towards operators to exercise greater oversight of hawkers' well-being.
These include letting hawkers operate five days a week from Jan 1 next year and terminating their tenancies with no more than two months' notice to the operators.
Security deposits held by the operator will be no more than two months' rent and they will bear all the legal fees related to the tenancy.
The final focus is for SEHC operators to set up structured feedback channels for hawkers. All have done so and held at least one meeting with their stallholders.
"I am hopeful that such structured and regular meetings will help encourage communication, resolve day-to-day issues, and reduce misunderstandings," she said.
Govt open to any model that achieves social objectives: Dr Amy Khor
By Benson Ang, The Straits Times, 20 Nov 2018
The Government is open to any model of operating new hawker centres, as long as it is able to achieve the social objectives set out for these centres, Dr Amy Khor told the House.
These are: providing affordable food options, moderating food prices, ensuring that hawkers make a decent living, and building communities.
The Senior Minister of State for the Environment and Water Resources was responding to a follow-up question from Mr Liang Eng Hwa (Holland-Bukit Timah GRC) who asked if the National Environment Agency (NEA) was open to other operating models.
But, Dr Khor said: "We need to note also that whatever model we may adopt, there will always be challenges even as there may be benefits. Whatever model we adopt, we will need to give it time to settle down."
The model of socially conscious enterprise hawker centres (SEHCs) is a good example, she added.
"It's really in its infancy. It's still evolving. And we always had the intention that we will continue to monitor, evaluate and refine and improve the model," she said.
She noted that the current model has resulted in "many positive outcomes" for both patrons as well as hawkers. "We don't want to undo those achievements, and we will see how we can better calibrate and make adjustments to the model."
"But as I've said, I think we're open to any model because the idea really is to benefit patrons, to benefit Singaporeans, to benefit hawkers," she added.
Ms Lee Bee Wah (Nee Soon GRC) had noted that many residents are asking what the definition of a "social enterprise" is, noticing that these are set up by big companies. "What is their motivation?" she asked. "Does this translate to lower cooked-food price?"
"What I understand is that hawkers are managed by the social enterprise hawker centre company and then NEA staff oversee the social enterprise company. What my residents have been asking is: Why can't we take away all these layers?" Ms Lee added.
Dr Khor said the phrase "social enterprise hawker centre" that the media has been using may be a bit of a misnomer. "We actually started by saying socially conscious operators," she said, adding that this refers to operators who know that if they tender for hawker centres and run them, there must be a social mission.
"We favour operators who actually offer lower rentals and... they cannot raise these rentals and operating cost through the term of the tenancy agreement," she said.
"There is also a requirement to plough back any operating surplus for social objectives," she added.
As for having a new model for hawker centres, she said it helped address such challenges as hawkers' ageing profile, manpower needs and patrons' evolving tastes.
Nominated MP Walter Theseira asked why hawkers, if they are self-employed, could be compelled by social enterprises or the Government to work certain hours. "The problem seems to be we are expecting the hawkers to bear some of the burdens of being an employee, but without the benefits of a guaranteed and stable income," he said.
Dr Khor said hawkers are small business entrepreneurs, and enter into agreements with operators.
"We're not compelling them. They actually enter into it voluntarily and knowingly," she added.
"Hawker centres are built to serve the community, and one of the needs... especially in newer housing estates, is to have access to food options for three key meals."
If they did not agree to such operating hours, she added, then the situation would be like that in some existing centres where stalls are closed or open only half a day. "It doesn't serve the needs of the community."
Related
By Benson Ang, The Straits Times, 20 Nov 2018
The Government is open to any model of operating new hawker centres, as long as it is able to achieve the social objectives set out for these centres, Dr Amy Khor told the House.
These are: providing affordable food options, moderating food prices, ensuring that hawkers make a decent living, and building communities.
The Senior Minister of State for the Environment and Water Resources was responding to a follow-up question from Mr Liang Eng Hwa (Holland-Bukit Timah GRC) who asked if the National Environment Agency (NEA) was open to other operating models.
But, Dr Khor said: "We need to note also that whatever model we may adopt, there will always be challenges even as there may be benefits. Whatever model we adopt, we will need to give it time to settle down."
The model of socially conscious enterprise hawker centres (SEHCs) is a good example, she added.
"It's really in its infancy. It's still evolving. And we always had the intention that we will continue to monitor, evaluate and refine and improve the model," she said.
She noted that the current model has resulted in "many positive outcomes" for both patrons as well as hawkers. "We don't want to undo those achievements, and we will see how we can better calibrate and make adjustments to the model."
"But as I've said, I think we're open to any model because the idea really is to benefit patrons, to benefit Singaporeans, to benefit hawkers," she added.
Ms Lee Bee Wah (Nee Soon GRC) had noted that many residents are asking what the definition of a "social enterprise" is, noticing that these are set up by big companies. "What is their motivation?" she asked. "Does this translate to lower cooked-food price?"
"What I understand is that hawkers are managed by the social enterprise hawker centre company and then NEA staff oversee the social enterprise company. What my residents have been asking is: Why can't we take away all these layers?" Ms Lee added.
Dr Khor said the phrase "social enterprise hawker centre" that the media has been using may be a bit of a misnomer. "We actually started by saying socially conscious operators," she said, adding that this refers to operators who know that if they tender for hawker centres and run them, there must be a social mission.
"We favour operators who actually offer lower rentals and... they cannot raise these rentals and operating cost through the term of the tenancy agreement," she said.
"There is also a requirement to plough back any operating surplus for social objectives," she added.
As for having a new model for hawker centres, she said it helped address such challenges as hawkers' ageing profile, manpower needs and patrons' evolving tastes.
Nominated MP Walter Theseira asked why hawkers, if they are self-employed, could be compelled by social enterprises or the Government to work certain hours. "The problem seems to be we are expecting the hawkers to bear some of the burdens of being an employee, but without the benefits of a guaranteed and stable income," he said.
Dr Khor said hawkers are small business entrepreneurs, and enter into agreements with operators.
"We're not compelling them. They actually enter into it voluntarily and knowingly," she added.
"Hawker centres are built to serve the community, and one of the needs... especially in newer housing estates, is to have access to food options for three key meals."
If they did not agree to such operating hours, she added, then the situation would be like that in some existing centres where stalls are closed or open only half a day. "It doesn't serve the needs of the community."
Related
NEA Update On Review Of Contractual Terms Between Socially-Conscious Enterprises And Hawkers -9 Nov 2018
No comments:
Post a Comment