新加坡国家发展部高级政务部长沈颖：每年平均收到约85万份函关于组屋的咨询投诉

　　2024年4月3日，新加坡外交部兼国家发展部高级政务部长沈颖，答复议员连荣华有关所有HDB计划的上诉率数据的议题。

　　沈颖

　　新加坡外交部兼国家发展部高级政务部长

　　连荣华

　　武吉班让区议员

　　以下内容为新加坡眼根据国会英文资料翻译整理：

　　连荣华议员询问国家发展部长：

　　过去五年每年（a）新加坡建屋发展局（HDB）收到的申诉数量是多少；

　　（b）有多少申诉成功；以及

　　（c）HDB是否定期审查其方案和政策以减少申诉案件负担。

　　国家发展部高级政务部长 沈颖女士（代表国家发展部长）：先生，从2019年到2023年，新加坡建屋发展局（HDB）每年平均收到约854,000份函件，其中包括来自公众的申诉、反馈和咨询。申诉占其中的一部分，平均每年约有177,000份申诉。这些申诉涉及一系列问题，如购买HDB公寓的资格、HDB住房贷款和住房津贴、住房维护问题、公共租赁住房和停车违规等。

　　HDB在评估申诉时考虑到每个案件的独特情况，并且每个申诉的结果将取决于其个别优点。国家发展部（MND）和HDB定期审查我们的住房政策和方案，以确保我们满足新加坡家庭不断发展的需求和愿望，并实现国家目标。

　　议长：连荣华议员。

　　武吉班让区的连荣华议员：先生，作为国会议员，我们代表居民向HDB发送了大量的申诉。对我来说，特别是，我认为这些申诉占我发送的总申诉量的一半。因此，问题是HDB作为一个组织，在处理申诉方面是否花费了不成比例的时间，这些时间本可以用在其他地方，例如解决其他问题。

　　另一方面，居民不得不等待几周甚至几个月才能收到HDB的回复。对于想要购买公寓的人，要从父母的公寓中搬出，可能需要几周甚至几个月的时间才能提出申诉。

　　因此，我可以问问高级政务部长，是否存在这样一种情况，即方案结构过于严格，缺乏灵活性，导致申诉数量过多，以及HDB是否应该审查这些方案以减少申诉。对于新的方案，是否可能设计这些方案以减少申诉的可能性。

　　沈颖女士：我感谢议员对HDB工作量的关注，的确，我们不断寻找方法来简化我们官员的工作量，使他们的时间更有效地为新加坡人服务。

　　我相信议员的关注点在于与住房相关的申诉，所以我应该补充说，在我刚才与他分享的数字中，包括与停车违规相关的申诉，大约占申诉量的40%。与住房相关的申诉将占其余的大部分。我们将定期审查我们的方案，以确保它们满足新加坡人不断发展的需求。

　　话虽如此，有时我们确实收到实际上已经有非常明确条款的申诉吁。我将举一个例子，即居民或公众成员申诉要求新加坡预购组屋（BTO）公寓。我认为这对本院的成员来说是非常熟悉的。我们已经有了一个非常清晰的BTO申请条款；有一个抽签制度。

　　尽管如此，仍然会有一些公众成员认为他们应该优先获得一套公寓，甚至直接分配一套公寓。尽管我们已经有了一个现成的框架，如果这样的申诉到来，我们会认真审查并回复。因此，这构成了一部分申诉量。还有一些情况，即个人申诉者的情况发生了变化，例如他们的财务情况。事实上，我相信刚才陈立峰议员提出的问题就与此有关。对于值得考虑的情况，我们将审查这些申诉，并相应地提供答复。

　　因此，我认为除了那些已经有条款并且公众知道但他们仍然要申诉的情况，或者由于情况变化，我们确实需要上诉程序，以确保结果对市民是公平的。尽管如此，我们仍会继续尽可能检讨和精简我们的计划。

　　以下是英文质询内容：

　　Mr Liang Eng Hwaasked the Minister for National Development for each year in the last five years (a) what is the number of appeals that HDB has received under all its schemes; (b) how many appeals have been successful; and (c) whether HDB reviews its schemes and policies periodically to reduce the appeal case load.

　　The Senior Minister of State for National Development (Ms Sim Ann) (for the Minister for National Development): Sir, from 2019 to 2023, the Housing and Development Board (HDB) received an annual average of around 854,000 pieces ofcorrespondence, which include appeals, feedback and enquiries from members of the public. Appeals comprise a subset of these, averaging around 177,000 appeals per year. These appeals spanned a wide range of issues, such as eligibility for purchase of HDB flats, HDB housing loans and housing grants, housing maintenance issues, public rental housing and parking offences.

　　HDB takes into consideration the unique circumstances of each case when assessing appeals, and the outcome of each appeal will depend on their individual merits. The Ministry of National Development (MND) and HDB regularly review our housing policies and schemes to ensure that we cater to the evolving needs and aspirations of Singaporean households, and to meet national objectives.

　　Mr Speaker: Mr Liang.

　　Mr Liang Eng Hwa (Bukit Panjang):Sir, as Members of Parliament, we do send a large number of appeals to HDB, on behalf of residents. For me, in particular, I think they account for up to half the total appeals that I send. So, the question is whether, on one side for the HDB as an organisation, given the case load, are HDB staff spending a disproportionate amount of time handling appeals, which could have otherwise been spent, maybe on the ground, to solve other problems.

　　While on the other side, the residents are having to wait for weeks or months for HDB to respond. For someone who wants to buy a flat, to withdraw his or her name from a parent's flat, may take weeks or months, just to appeal.

　　So, can I ask the Senior Minister of State, is this a case where the schemes are structured just too tightly and are less flexible, resulting in high numbers of appeals, and whether should HDB review the schemes to reduce their appeals. For the newer schemes, whether it is possible to design these with the aim to reduce the likelihood of appeals.

　　Ms Sim Ann: I thank the Member for his concern about the workload in HDB and, indeed, we are constantly looking for ways to streamline our officers' workload, so that their time can be spent more productively in serving Singaporeans.

　　I believe the Member's interests will be in housing-related appeals, so I should add that in the numbers that I have shared with him just now, it includes appeals for parking related offences, which constitute approximately about 40% of the appeal load. Housing-related appeals would be the bulk of the remainder. And we will be reviewing our schemes quite regularly, to make sure that they meet the evolving needs of Singaporeans.

　　That said, sometimes we do receive appeals where actually there is already a very clear framework. I will give an example of residents or members of the public appealing to ask for priority allocation of a Build-To-Order (BTO) flat. I think this is quite familiar to Members of this House. We have a very clear framework for the application of BTO; there is a ballot.

　　Nonetheless, there will be members of the public who feel that they should get priority allocation of a flat or even direct allocation of a flat. And much as we already have a framework in place, if such an appeal comes, we will duly look at it and also reply. So, that constitutes some of the volume. There are also cases where, there are changing circumstances of the individual appellant, for instance, their financial circumstances. In fact, I believe, the question just now posed by Mr Dennis Tan relates to this. For deserving cases, we will look at these appeals and provide an answer accordingly.

　　So, I think outside of these cases where either, there is already a framework and the members of the public know it but they want to appeal nonetheless; or cases where because of changing circumstances, we do need the appeals process in order to ensure that the outcome is fair for the member of the public; we will, nonetheless, continue to review and streamline our schemes wherever possible.

　　HQ丨编辑

　　HQ丨编审

　　新加坡国会丨来源

　　新加坡国会丨图源

　　免责声明：

　　1.凡本公众号注明文章类型为“原创”的所有作品，版权属于看南洋和新加坡眼所有。其他媒体、网站或个人转载使用时必须注明：“文章来源：新加坡眼”。

　　2.凡本公众号注明文章类型为“转载”、“编译”的所有作品，均转载或编译自其他媒体，目的在于传递更多有价值资讯，并不代表本公众号赞同其观点和对其真实性负责。