At the budget debate in March this year, I informed Parliament that we would involve the public when we prepare the new Concept Plan for 2001. This morning, I am pleased to launch the start of this consultative process.

The Concept Plan is a long-term, strategic plan which maps out the physical development of Singapore. The last Concept Plan was finalised in 1991. Since then, the world has changed, and so has Singapore.

Globalisation and information technology have revolutionised the world for every individual, business and organisation. We have experienced the power of the Internet, its ability to cut through all borders and spread ideas at astounding speed. Advanced technologies, like info-communications and bio-technologies, are shaping the new Knowledge-Based Economy. Singapore has to plug into this changing world. Our businesses need to constantly innovate and re-invent themselves to stay in the game. We have to embrace this new Knowledge-Based Economy and compete with other cities to attract the best talents from around the world.

These changes pose new challenges for us in the way we develop Singapore. For example, with the Internet, will there be a shift to online shopping and telecommuting? If so, do we still need so much commercial space? How do we attract high-tech, value-adding businesses to operate here? How do we develop a city that will attract and retain talent? Thus, for Singapore’s future success, it is necessary to review the Concept Plan to keep pace with the changing needs. We are targeting to complete this review and have the new Concept Plan ready by the end of 2001.

The Concept Plan takes a long-term perspective of about 40-50 years. The starting point for planners in their review is the size of the population. Planners will base the Concept Plan 2001 on a long-term population size of 5.5 million. This includes citizens, permanent residents as well as employment-pass and work-permit holders. Why 5.5 million? This is not a target figure, nor is it an optimal population size. It is a reasonable growth estimate from today’s population of 4.0 million, in order to sustain Singapore’s economic growth and provide a critical mass for developing a vibrant city.

But, 40-50 years is a long time. Frankly, it is impossible to know what life will be like so far down the road. The future is full of surprising twists and turns. And if we consider the rapid advances in technology, life will be even more unpredictable. Hence, even as we try to anticipate how we intend to allocate the limited land to satisfy the various needs of a vibrant city state like ours, we must make sure that the planning process is flexible. That is why we review the Concept Plan every 10 years.

In the current review of the Concept Plan, the planners need to know what kind of Singapore we all want to live, work and play in. And what it would take to meet our future needs and to fulfil the rising aspirations, especially of our young.

According to the S21 survey, many of you want to be actively involved and to have your say in national policies and issues. This is not surprising, as Singaporeans today are better educated, better informed and more traveled. This is also an encouraging sign because for Singaporeans to be proud to call Singapore home, you must have a sense of ownership, of having made a contribution. The Concept Plan review offers such an opportunity. By having a hand in shaping the Concept Plan, you are helping to shape your own future.

This is why public consultation and feedback are essential to the 2001 Concept Plan. We want to seek your views even before putting the plans on the drawing board. Nonetheless, to make this consultation process more meaningful, some preliminary work has already been done. URA and other relevant government agencies have studied Singapore’s various needs and the land constraints we will face.

Our planners have also identified two major planning dilemmas in the current review. These dilemmas are broad enough to cover most aspects of how Singapore would be developed in the future.

The first dilemma has to do with the question of balancing competing land needs. If Singapore wants to be economically robust and to meet the needs of our future population, we must consider how we can expand industries, the financial and commercial sectors, and yet, keep enough land for housing, for parks and open spaces, and for recreation.

Juggling our limited land to meet all these demands is a very tough balancing act. If we wish to strike a judicious balance, we must be prepared to make difficult choices. To illustrate this, let me paint one extreme scenario of what could happen.

Assume that we decide that our nation’s housing aspirations must take precedence over industry and open spaces. So, we set aside the land required to fully provide for our housing aspirations. We can enjoy bigger, better homes and there will be abundant low-density housing and private housing to satisfy our aspirations. But, in the long-term, how will this affect our economic development? First, industrial land might have to be sacrificed, resulting in industrial land prices rocketing. High value-adding but land-intensive industries, like the life sciences and pharmaceuticals, might find it cheaper to operate elsewhere.

An alternative route is to sacrifice our open space and urbanise more undeveloped areas. But, less ‘green’ breathing space will also inevitably affect Singaporeans’ lifestyles.

Deciding how to trade-off one need to meet another is only one of the problems we would have to grapple with. Now, for the second dilemma.

Home is where one has a secure job, a roof over one’s head, a good quality of life. But, beyond that, home must also give a sense of identity, of history and of belonging. So, while Singapore develops and modernises, we must not lose sight of those elements that give Singaporeans a sense of belonging – be they unique landmarks, popular places or natural features.

Yet, if we retain every landmark or streetscape, this could limit development in the existing city. As a result, we may not be able to meet all the land demands of a growing population. But again, if we swing to the other extreme and redevelop everything without any regard for significant landmarks, then where is the identity, the sense of place as we move around the city?

In the first place, what constitutes ‘identity’ of place to Singaporeans? And to visitors? The question will be put to you, the public, as will the question on how to tread the thin line between conserving our built heritage and natural features and developing buildings and sites so as to house the growing population.

At the end of the day, we all want a ‘win-win’ situation which can satisfy all demands, if not fully then at least partially, but how do we go about achieving that? What criteria should we use to decide what should be retained? And how much should we retain?

As you can see, we have a challenging journey ahead of us. The Government does not always have all the answers. There is a world of diverse ideas, insights and experiences which you – coming from various sectors and all walks of life – possess. Consultation will enable us to tap into all these ideas and feedback, which will be useful in developing and implementing sound policies. It will also promote a shared understanding of issues faced by policy-makers.

I would therefore like to extend a public invitation to everyone who can contribute ideas and views to participate in thinking through these dilemmas and arrive at a shared vision and plan for the future.

To reach out to the widest group of people, and to reap good views and suggestions, URA will provide a number of different channels, namely:

- focus group discussions;

- Internet feedback, letters;

- a public forum; and finally

- a public exhibition.

First, focus groups. URA has formed two focus groups, each to address one of the dilemmas I have cited. Each group comprises almost 30 individuals representing members of the public, interest groups, professionals and experts in the relevant fields. As the group members are from different sectors of society, they will be able to analyse the dilemmas from every angle, presenting fresh insights and alternative ideas.

There are those from the younger generation, for instance, who will speak for the aspirations of our youths and their vision of the ideal Singapore of the future. We also have the IT professionals, architects and planners, academics, businessmen, grassroots leaders and HDB residents, to name a few.

Leading each focus group are its two co-chairmen. Associate Professor Vivian Balakrishnan, CEO of SGH, will steer the first focus group together with established local architect Mr Tham Tuck Cheong. NMP Mr Simon Tay will co-chair the second group with well-known developer Mr Philip Ng.

The focus groups will mull over the dilemmas for the next two to three months. They will actively seek opinions from the ground, debate among themselves, deliberate on the issues and brainstorm for ideas before submitting draft reports of their findings, which will be presented to the public at a forum by the end of this year.

I am very heartened to see so many of you readily accepting the invitation to be part of the focus groups. I look forward to your valuable contribution in the coming discussions.

Next, Internet feedback. URA has opened a dedicated channel for feedback on the Concept Plan review on its Internet website at www.ura.gov.sg. This will make it even more convenient for everyone to share their views and give feedback. Anyone with ideas on how we can solve the dilemmas can simply e-mail your feedback to this site. The focus groups will consider your views and suggestions to shape Singapore’s future. Of course, letters and faxes are also welcomed.

Inevitably, there will be differing views and ideas from the feedback. When we consider the differing views, many of our decisions would involve trade-offs. Tough decisions would still have to be made, decisions that cannot fully satisfy all parties and meet everyone’s needs. Ultimately, our decisions must be guided by our core values, with national interests foremost in mind.

Finally, let me stress again that plans for Singapore’s future cannot be made by the Government and its planners alone. To shape a better Singapore for ourselves and our children, everyone must pitch in and contribute actively and positively. If we can all put aside our personal interests to focus on the collective, common good of the nation, of our people, then Singapore’s future is in good hands. I look forward to your positive and meaningful contribution to the review of Concept Plan 2001.

Thank you.