\n<\/p>\n
Any intervention will have to navigate a hard political reality given how about 76 per cent of Singapore residents live in HDB flats. Tapping public funds on private facilities that most taxpayers have no access to would be difficult to justify.<\/p>\n
There is, however, a narrow but genuine case for public funding support in two categories \u2013 lift and escalator safety features, and barrier-free accessibility improvements in older developments.<\/p>\n
When an older condominium lacks step-free access or its lifts fall short of current safety standards, the consequences extend beyond the private owners, particularly in an ageing society. The government\u2019s review of the Accessibility Fund, including a possible expansion to cover active ageing and dementia-friendly installations, reflects this broader public dimension.<\/p>\n
Beyond co-funding, another approach is government-facilitated low-interest financing for strictly defined essential works relating to safety and habitability.<\/p>\n
But financing alone will not solve the problem. Section 38 of the Building (Strata Management) Act allows an MCST to borrow money, yet the same MCST must still secure internal approvals to service that debt. A government-backed loan scheme could therefore fail in the very estates that need it most.<\/p>\n
That is the real governance bottleneck. Where an independent assessment certifies works as necessary for safety, accessibility or habitability, the law should allow both the works and the related borrowing to be approved by a lower threshold.<\/p>\n
If the motion still fails after proper notice and a second vote, the MCST ought to be able to apply to the Strata Titles Board or the Commissioner of Buildings for an order authorising the borrowing limited to the certified works.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n