SINGAPORE: Transport Minister Chee Hong Tat dismissed a suggestion by Workers’ Party MP Gerald Giam to link fare adjustments to train service reliability, arguing that public transport service levels and disruptions should remain separate from fare setting.

On 15 October, Minister Chee delivered a Ministerial Statement addressing the recent six-day disruption of the East-West Line train service.

He explained that the Public Transport Council (PTC) had previously examined the feasibility of connecting fare reviews to service levels and disruptions but ultimately chose not to pursue this approach, as other measures are already in place to ensure service standards are met.

He noted that the Land Transport Authority (LTA) investigates service disruptions, identifies accountability, and imposes penalties if necessary.

Operators that fail to meet reliability targets also forfeit payments under the government’s incentive schemes.

Responding to Giam’s question on whether service levels could be considered in the PTC’s fare review exercise, Chee clarified that the annual fare review is designed to ensure fares keep up with changes in operating costs, maintaining the financial sustainability of the transport system.

He pointed out that while the maximum allowable fare increase this year was 18.9%, PTC raised fares by only 6% to ensure affordability.

“If our fares are not adjusted to reflect rising operating costs, the persistent shortfall would have a chronic impact on service quality and reliability over time,” he added.

“Or if we want to continue topping up the shortfall via government subsidies, it means that taxpayers will have to foot a higher bill.”

In response to Mr Gerald Giam’s separate question regarding the operations and maintenance of first-generation Kawasaki Heavy Industries (KHI) trains, Minister Chee explained that an independent assessment in 2012 determined these trains have a total service life of 38 years.

He clarified that a train’s age alone does not determine its reliability, and trains can continue to operate safely within their service life.

Under the New Rail Financing Framework (NRFF) introduced in 2016, the Land Transport Authority (LTA) owns the assets, while operators are responsible for maintenance.

Minister Chee also highlighted that the LTA procured 106 new R151 trains in 2018 and 2020 to replace the older KHI trains, but delivery was delayed due to the COVID-19 pandemic.

By June 2023, 34 new R151 trains had been delivered to SMRT, with full replacement of the KHI trains scheduled for completion by the end of 2026.

Mr Giam questioned how fare increases would ensure tangible improvements in service reliability

In a supplementary question, Mr Gerald Giam highlighted that the Minister had declined his suggestion to link fare adjustments to service reliability.

He then challenged the Minister, asking how commuters could be assured that fare increases would lead to tangible improvements in service reliability.

“For example how much of the fair revenue increase is allocated specifically towards improving service reliability?” Mr Giam asked.

In response, Minister Chee acknowledged Mr Giam’s concerns but emphasised that different tools are used to achieve various objectives, such as tracking performance and incentivizing operators to maintain high service standards through penalties and rewards.

He reiterated that if operators miss service benchmarks or face lapses, they are subject to investigations and penalties.

Mr Chee argued that incorporating service reliability into fare adjustments could have negative consequences.

For example, holding back on fare increases, which are necessary to cover rising operating costs, could lead to a chronic shortfall, potentially affecting service quality and reliability in the long run.

He also pointed out that relying on government subsidies to cover the shortfall would mean asking taxpayers to foot the bill.

Mr Giam also questioned why the older trains, which have higher maintenance costs and failure rates, were not replaced earlier and inquired about any factors delaying the replacement process, such as new trains delivered but not immediately put into service.

Mr Chee reiterated that the replacement of first-generation trains had been delayed due to the COVID-19 pandemic, but assured that these trains would still be replaced before reaching their 38-year service life.

He emphasized that while the government is trying to catch up on delays, safety must remain a priority, and thorough testing of new trains is required before they are put into service.

Non-Constituency Member of Parliament (NCMP) Leong Mun Wai expressed his surprise and concern following the government’s intervention to block the proposed acquisition of NTUC Income’s majority shares by German insurer Allianz.

The deal, announced on 17 July 2024, would have allowed Allianz to acquire a 51% majority stake in the Singapore-based insurer.

However, concerns about NTUC Income’s ability to uphold its social mission triggered a public outcry, with prominent voices speaking out against the transaction.

In his 14 October 2024 statement to Parliament, Edwin Tong, Singapore’s Minister for Culture, Community, and Youth, explained that the government found the deal “not in the public interest.”

The Ministry of Culture, Community, and Youth (MCCY) had specific concerns regarding its impact on NTUC Income and the broader cooperative movement in Singapore.

One of MCCY’s primary issues was the capital reduction proposed in the transaction, which contradicted earlier representations made during NTUC Income’s 2022 corporatisation.

Minister Tong noted that when NTUC Income transitioned from a co-op to a corporate entity, it carried over S$2 billion in surplus with the understanding that it would bolster its financial strength.

The proposed capital extraction contradicted this objective, casting doubt on NTUC Income’s long-term ability to fulfil its social role.

“If not for the ministerial exemption in 2023, NTUC Income’s accumulated surplus of some S$2 billion would have gone to the Co-operative Societies Liquidation Account (CSLA) to benefit Singapore’s co-op movement,” said Tong, adding that MCCY saw no concrete plans to safeguard this sum for social purposes in the current deal.

NCMP Leong voiced his shock over the disclosure of the capital extraction plan, a key aspect of the deal that had not been made public.

The Progress Singapore Party NCMP called for greater transparency in financial transactions, saying, “This information should be available to all Singaporeans.”

He added, “For months, we believed the provided information was complete, only to discover the capital extraction plan now. This is a crucial condition in any financial deal, and it was not disclosed to the public when we discussed the deal.”

Mr Leong pressed for accountability, asking who was responsible for withholding this critical information and whether the government would take steps to address the oversight.

He stressed the importance of transparency, particularly in transactions involving organisations with social missions, like NTUC Income.

Mr. Chee Hong Tat, Second Minister for Finance and Deputy Chairman of the Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS) Board of Directors, emphasised that the proposed capital reduction was initiated by Allianz and had yet to receive approval from MAS.

He noted that it is standard practice for regulators to evaluate all aspects of a proposal before reaching a conclusion.

Mr. Chee reassured Parliament that discussions and concerns regarding the capital reduction had been communicated transparently. He referenced Minister Tong’s earlier speech, which outlined the key considerations behind the government’s concerns, particularly regarding the potential impact on NTUC Income’s social mission.

In response to Mr. Leong, Minister Tong urged him not to mischaracterise the situation and reiterated that the government had been transparent in its assessment of the transaction.

Government’s Response and Minister Tong’s Position

Minister Tong said the government’s decision to block the transaction was unrelated to Allianz’s standing as a buyer but focused on the structure of the deal.

The government was concerned about the lack of safeguards ensuring that NTUC Income could continue fulfilling its social mission. While NTUC Enterprise had committed to maintaining this mission, the MCCY remained unconvinced that such commitments were backed by legally binding provisions.

Minister Tong also revealed that after the transaction, NTUC Enterprise would have become a minority shareholder, with limited influence on NTUC Income’s future direction, holding fewer board seats and losing its ability to appoint the chairman. Though these factors alone did not trigger government opposition, combined with the capital extraction and lack of structural protections, they posed a significant risk.

Minister Tong confirmed that while the government would not allow the current deal to proceed, it remained open to future proposals involving Allianz or other partners if the concerns raised were addressed.

“The government’s view is not that NTUC Income should not seek partnerships or external capital; rather, we must ensure that any deal preserves NTUC Income’s ability to fulfil its social mission and does not undermine the cooperative movement as a whole,” Tong stated.

MAS’s Role and Response from Finance Ministry

During the same Parliamentary session, Tanjong Pagar GRC MP Joan Pereira questioned why the Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS) had not shared Allianz’s capital extraction plan with MCCY earlier, given its significance to the Income-Allianz transaction. This raised further concerns about coordination between government agencies overseeing critical financial transactions.

Responding to Pereira’s query, Minister Chee explained that MAS had received the capital extraction proposal in mid-July 2024. At that time, MAS was primarily focused on Allianz’s financial strength and ensuring protection for NTUC Income’s policyholders. MAS did not immediately see the relevance of the capital reduction to MCCY’s earlier decision to grant NTUC Income an exemption during its corporatisation.

It was only after the 6 August 2024 Parliamentary session that MAS identified potential implications for MCCY’s oversight of NTUC Income. Minister Chee added that regulatory information gathered by MAS is typically shared with other government agencies only when necessary. The decision to inform MCCY was made once the broader implications became clear.

Public Outcry and Concerns

The controversy surrounding the deal largely revolved around concerns that Allianz, as a multinational corporation, would not be aligned with NTUC Income’s mission to serve the needs of lower-income Singaporeans.

NTUC Income was established with a clear mandate to provide affordable insurance options, especially for those in the labour movement and the lower-income segments of society.

Several prominent voices spoke out against the transaction.

Former NTUC Income CEO Tan Kin Lian expressed concerns about the potential shift in NTUC Income’s priorities, stating that the proposed deal could undermine its original purpose.

Similarly, ambassador-at-large Tommy Koh and former Group CEO of NTUC Enterprise Tan Suee Chieh voiced their opposition.

Mr Tan Suee Chieh went as far as to call the deal a “breach of good faith” and urged government regulators to intervene.

The key fear was that Allianz’s corporate objectives, which are driven by profit motives typical of global insurers, would lead to a reduction in NTUC Income’s commitment to affordable and accessible insurance for Singapore’s working class.

There were worries that under Allianz’s ownership, insurance premiums could increase, pricing out low-income individuals who depend on NTUC Income’s services.

NTUC Income, Singapore’s one and only insurance co-operative, was corporatised in 2022 into Income Insurance Limited “to achieve operational flexibility and gain access to strategic growth options to compete on an equal footing with other insurers locally and regionally”.

Shareholders were assured at the 2022 annual general meeting that NTUC Enterprise will continue to be the majority shareholder of the new company post-corporatisation.