By Choo Zheng Xi, Editor-at-Large
In Singaporean political lore, Dr Seet Ai Mee of the ruling People’s Action Party (PAP) is widely held to have lost her seat to Mr Ling How Doong of the Singapore Democratic Party (SDP) in 1991 after being caught on camera wiping her hand after shaking hands with a fishmonger. If a picture could speak a thousand words, this was a picture of how detached the PAP was from the Singaporeans they were elected to represent.
In 2010, three Members of Parliament (MPs), two of them Ministers, have snubbed stallholders across five wet markets by allowing monopolistic business behavior to run them out of business. Supermarket chain Sheng Siong intends to increase stall rentals by 30%, citing increased property tax, maintenance fees, and bank interest rates as a reason.
The dishonor roll: Manpower Minister Gan Kim Yong, MP for Choa Chu Kang, Minister for Community Development, Youth and Sports Dr Vivian Balakrishnan, MP for Holland-Bukit Timah GRC which includes the Bukit Batok area, and Dr Teo Ho Pin, MP for Bukit Panjang.
Headlining the dishonor roll, Dr Teo wrote a terse letter to the SDP last year blandly noting that his constituents prefer a wet market, and that he had “conveyed their concerns to the HDB”.
What wet market will be left when stallholders move out after having their livelihoods crushed by the extortionate increase? What wet market will be left when Sheng Siong’s staggering 30% rental increase has already driven out some stallholders and put the future of the rest in jeopardy?
The MPs involved have already been showed up as grossly negligent by refusing to vigorously represent their constituents’ interest to the Housing Development Board (HDB).
They have also failed to mitigate the impact of that purchase, failing to negotiate with Sheng Siong to hold off on rental hikes.
A good MP would make these efforts, rallying the community to meet with the HDB, showing the bureaucrats who their policies are affecting. A good MP would have used his platform in Parliament to grill the Minister for National Development. A good MP would have complained to the Competitions Commission of Singapore about Sheng Siong’s monopolistic behavior. A good MP would take his electoral mandate seriously.
By sitting on their hands and writing tokenistic correspondence, the MPs in question have been showed up as worse than useless.
In contrast, the SDP highlighted the issue early on, hitting the ground to speak to affected stallholders who were apprehensive about the takeover. They have now been proven 100% correct.
The SDP’s Assistant Secretary-General Mr John Tan has recently asked Dr Teo two simple questions: “Are you going to do anything to help resolve the matter?” and “Do you support the raising of the rental?”
Dr Teo and the PAP ignore these questions at great political risk.
Avarice and apathy
Contrary to their protestations that property tax and maintenance fees are really to blame, Sheng Siong has made no efforts to negotiate more gradual rental increases with stallholders. Their actions stink of an abuse of their market position, and elected officials can only sit back and shrug their shoulders.
Even if Sheng Siong is being honest about identifying increased property tax and bank interest rates as the cause of rental hikes, this fits into a broader narrative of a runaway cost of living that is undermining the purchasing power and standard of living of ordinary Singaporeans.
Minister for National Development Mr Mah Bow Tan has come under fire from even the non-partisan Real Estate Developers’ Association of Singapore (Redas) for runaway property prices. Singaporeans are treated to news stories of public housing fetching record prices on the resale market at a regular clip.
The Sheng Siong debacle is the latest feather of failure in Mr Mah’s cap.
For the MPs involved, the writing is on the wall: if you can lose a seat by snubbing a fishmonger, don’t expect to get away unscathed after spitting in the face of five wet-markets full of residents.
_______________________________
TOC is planning further action to be announced at a later date to address the increased rental costs at affected wet markets. If you would like to contribute to our efforts in either a reportorial, legal, or advocacy capacity, please write to us at theonlinecitizen@gmail.com with your name and contact number, thank you.
_____________________________________________________
HELP keep the voice of TOC alive!
If you like this article, please consider a small donation to help theonlinecitizen.com stay alive. Please note that we can only accept donations from Singaporeans. Thank you for your assistance.Do you have a flair for writing? Volunteer with us. Email us your full name and contact details to theonlinecitizen@gmail.com
I will not support Sheng Siong anymore. F**K them and vote out all the useless 3 X MPs .
This is all about the livlihood of the people, not just that of the stall holders. Having been put at the mercy of big business and not having any avenue to seek help from, the stall holders are left with two options.
Either increase the prices of their merchandise and risk losing their customers, or, throw in the towel and fold up.
Chances are they will be forced to just close shop. And this is what Sheng Siong expect them to do, no doubt about it If every stall holder has a family of four to feed the misery is multiplied by that number. Residents would also be inconvenienced in many ways.
In the meantime we hear nothing from the respective MPs – no sound, no picture. This is what we call accountability, PAP style!
They just came in and made another killing, just like the recent foreign workers levy increased, first they reasoned that foreign workers are good for SMEs to stay competitive and when all the SMEs switches to hire more and more FW, they came in and made the killing. What is new with these bunch of useless four legged papies. I suggest all affected parties including those in SMEs grt ready to throw them out before they cleaned up all the $$$ out from your pockets.
tiredsingaporean,
You are right. First, create a problem by opening the door wide to all kinds of foreigners. Then introduce or increase levies, or raise fees and say “we are calibrating the inflow” – while at the same time make money out of it.
It’s ingenious – but only if they think S’poreans are stupid.
In the end, the problem remains. But the govt gets richer from these levies and fees.
Question is, will the residents wake up and take their fates into their own hands?
From humble beginnings, they have now forgotten their roots and become very arrogant. If all those poor wet market stallholders close shop, I too will have nothing to do with Shen Siong.
What can we say much about the governing principal of the ruling party? Everything must make profits, and with very strong valid reasoning. Just look at durai from NKF, account book almost perfect. The attorney only managed to nail him with some minor stuff. Just one of the example in singapore. Sheng Siong is only a apprentice in this trade.
come to think about it, they are now in to make a complete wipe out of all those folks livelihood by using sheng shiong as an alibi. Don’t you folks see the whole setup?
ACtually, the worst of the lot has got to be Teo HP. Call himself a “DR” and yet mouth full of broken english. What a shame.
The most pertinent questions are: What benefits to the local residents for the government to allow Shen Siong to buy over these wet markets? Why make changes that increase the burdens of the lower-income people without any apparent benefits? As for the stall-holders, these people are struggling to make a living? Their family members are depending on them for a decent life, why make their lives even more difficult?
Why a government that is supposed to help the people achieve better living conditions continues to add unnecessary burdens to these helpless people? If it is to generate more income and profits, then it is being done at the expense of the lower-income sector of our population. It is a very unwise thing to do.
If the PAP government continues to think of nothing except increasing its coffer, its future will be doomed!
my friends, there is nothing wrong with what sheng siong did. it is a purely profit seeking company. just like companies which are seeking to hire foreign workers instead of more expensive locals. the true burden of blame must be placed SQUARELY on the authorities for ALLOWING these things to happen.
So glad to live in Bukit Panjang! My first time voting, and my vote will never go to the pappies.
@Orange and Apples
Just because SS is doing this for profit doesn’t mean we can’t blame them for being greedy. As consumers who will be negatively affected by their actions, we have a right to complain and fight back for our own interests. A free market doesn’t mean that consumers are expected to stand like idiots waiting to be exploited by big business.
Orange and Apples,
When you said ‘there is nothing wrong with what sheng siong did. it is a purely profit seeking company’, do you mean that all business are not required to be socially responsible?
The government being one thing but don’t forget Sheng Siong makes her profits from the general public and they do not need to bother about social responsibility?
In any country beside the communist, businesses have a moral responsibility to the society in general and not to mention the top man of Sheng Siong is a Sinkie and not a FT. That guy rised from a small fry like the stall holders that he now demand extortionate fees. If he is still a stall holder and somebody else do the same to him, you think he feels it is fair?
Yes, he now had the upper hand and can do what he wants, but please don’t say that it is nothing wrong to be PURLY profit seeking company because it is morally wrong!
We may not know if karma has it effect and that Sheng Shiong bosses would fail in his business and become a stall holder again.
Most residents prefer to have Sheng Shiong than a wet market. That was why the MPs in those areas did not pursue the issue further.
Regarding Sheng Shiong’s 30% rental increment, many residents are concerned whether it is high enough to discourage all wet market stall-holders to give up their stalls. Personally, I would think a rental increase of 100% or 500% is more likely to achieve the objective. Can you imagine Sheng Shiong’s headache if 3 or 5 stalls choose to accept the 30% rental increase while the rest choose to leave? The whole area cannot be converted to supermarket just because 3 or 5 idiots are willing to pay a 30% higher rental!
Yes! Down with MP, we should all stop washing our hands!
//my views
////Can you imagine Sheng Shiong’s headache if 3 or 5 stalls choose to accept the 30% rental //increase while the rest choose to leave?
then you should be asking how come they can afford the rent increase?
//my views
//Personally, I would think a rental increase of 100% or 500% is more likely to achieve the objective.
yeah, 500% is a good number and pass the social cost of displacing the stalls owners’ livelihood to Society at the price of 1million times.
//my views
//Most residents prefer to have Sheng Shiong than a wet market.
How did you know that?
Yes MPs are becoming more and more complacent and idle. Perhaps the example of Wong Kan Seng getting away so easily from blame when Mas Selamat escaped is giving them some ideas.
These are LAPDOGS of LKY. I wouldnt call them MPs.
My Views,
if only 3 to 5 stalls accept the 30% increase, sheng siong will not have any headache. SS just need to try all ways and means to force these 5 remaining stalls to leave. As you said in your other posting “what is the big deal”, sacrificing a small group of people for the greater benefit of a bigger grouup of people is worth it. In your own words No big deal, right?
They’ll still win one lah. Nowadays who wants wet market. You just wait and see, haha.
And behind all of this, there are of course those nasty rumours of a relationship between the Sheng Siong family and PM Lee’s family. Strangely although the PAP prides itself on transparency, there has been no clarification of any sort.
I guess its people of Bukit Panjang should fight for the rights. If they want or do not want SS on thier decision. If thr is no opposition, i believe SS is easily got its way thr.
My Views,
Words cannot describe your blind loyalty…….
I don’t see why SS is at fault here. If the takeover was bad for society, a government regulatory body should have stepped in. Then, SS will automatically be penalized for misjudging their investment. The whole corporate social responsibility thing is what companies do to manage their takings. It is just another cost for them to shore up their branding. It will be naive to assume that they really care about society.
Seng Siong is just another re-run of NTUC.
Both getting into this act of monopoly.
NTUC started of as any co-operative s;for the blue-collar by the blue-collar for the blue-collar….to break the monopoly of the middle-men who profits by merely positioning themselves…And to pass on the savings to it’s members who are blue -collar workers.
Today NTUC is the biggest employer in town.A monopoly by itself by it’s positioning .Worse,it employs foreigners at the expense of locals.
Seng Siong is taking exactly the same route…Strart of as the poor-man’s market selling cheaply…But like NTUC it’s getting into monopoly by cornering the wet-market business.Perhaps with PAP blessings.
There is no qualm or outcry for any enterprising outfit to grow.Or make profits.But why won’t Seng Siong do that at it’s own expense?….meaning why can’t Seng Siong build it’s own wet-markets or rent from the private property market?….like any of it’s competitors like Carrefour or Giand for instance?
Therein lies the problem.
And how could Seng Siong buy or lease wet-markets built on public funds meant for the public use since it’s not a non-profitable organization?
Does this suggest that Seng Siong enjoys the political patronage ?
To SS,
Just tell us what value do you add by getting in between HDB and the stall holders? You are a shame to productivity! The cost of maintenance and property tax have always been there - your excuses is totally ridiculous! You are sucking blood from the stall holders and customers without adding any value! You are worse than mosquitoes! WE HATE YOU!!!
MyViews
You must be seeing things from the top down, which explains your avatar name. Yeah, old folks living in HDB loves the supermarket, where they have to go from aisle to aisle looking for stuff, not the personal touch and the cordial banter of the stall holders, who needs that. God forbid they rather spend their last days pushing trolleys around, than ‘tompang’ their groceries at their favourite stall while they buy other stuff. Mingle with other residents and joke around, no they probably don’t need that that, they rather be queueing up in long lines at the counter.
Since we’ve rebranded ourselves from Uniquely Singapore to YourSingapore, we should get rid of all the things that is unique. Why don’t we get rid of Chinatown and Little India and make them air conditioned megamarts. Let’s get rid of all entrepreneurial spirit altogether and self independence and practice capitalism. In that way, all of is will benefit.
Where is our so-called “forecaster”??? You seem to have the habit of hiding yourself in time of crisis! Is this how you show your gratitude to the locals, who helped built Singapore??
Your choice of so-called “talent ministers”, including your prime minister son, have caused
a lot of hardships to the local Singaporeans.
They are useless, wasting taxpayers monies. Not only are they arrogant, but in many
ways, ”DEAF” to our cries for help and “DAFT’…………OH YEAH!…….VERY, VERY LAZY!!!
“Forecaster”, do you agree, they need to be “WHIPPED”???
I passed by Sheng Siong on Sat evening and the crowd was about half the usual.
70% of the customers were foreigners.
Keep up the pressure. It’s bearing fruits. Totally switch to the local convenient stall and support your Singaporean neighbour. If you really have to make a purchase at SS, keep it to the bearest minimal.
PAP has been scoring lot of own goals
lately without the opposition needing to do anything.
Soon or later, they will kick themselves out of our
political league.
I say keep them coming
We left Singapore because our small business was overtaken by the PAP Government that has the habit of monoolising every business in Singapore and crushng the small players with their unjustified underhand tactics. The ministers just dont know how to support the local business community and they never allow us to earn the few dollars in order to pay taxes and their million dollar salaries. Bloody useless ministers! Listen Singaporeans, it is time to vote them out for the better future of all Singaporeans! Merdeka!!!!!!
Just in any price increase such as recent school fee increases, all needy students are assured of help from the appropriate authority and they can apply for bursaries from the school or universities, nobody is to be left out without education.
In this instances, all stallholders who give up can look forward to CDCs and Spurs for assistance and retraining and if really they cannot find food on their table they call Vivian food delivery hotline for 3 meals a day for the whole family. They are taken care of , no stallholders and their family wil be left behind by our unique social safety nets.
//My views : Can you imagine Sheng Shiong’s headache if 3 or 5 stalls choose to accept the 30% rental increase while the rest choose to leave? The whole area cannot be converted to supermarket just because 3 or 5 idiots are willing to pay a 30% higher rental!//
Then I say that Sing Song is greedy AND stupid!
Btw, do you expect readers to sympathize with Sing Song and you?
Those who voted for the PAPIGS!!! U deserve it!!
Dear Zheng Xi,
In your article you seem to cast SS in very negative light, as that of a profiteer. However, please remember that business is business and that its sole purpose for being an entity is to make money for their shareholders.
The question you should be asking is WHY was SS allowed to buy the markets in the first place (which I supposed were built a long time ago as a public facility for residents in a HDB estate)? Why should our wet markets be allowed to be privatized and auctioned to the highest bidder with few strings attached? One sold to a purely commercial operator who reportedly paid $25 million, are there any other considerations for the operator other than to recoup the investment and make money? Are they breaking any laws? If not, then the question should come back to who set the rules that allowed privatizations in the first place.
There would be no Buyer if there wasn’t a willing Seller from day one. As for the Buyer, its mission has always been to make money - they’ve never B.S.-ed anyone.
But can u tell me what’s HDB’s mission?
Sheng Siong is a direct competitor to the small holders. Increasing rental to force out its competitors is certainly a predatory action. It is not a fair commercial deal. Smallholders play important social and economic functions in our community. It is an important avenue for making a living for a substantial group of people who are increasing being edge out cheap foreign workers. There is certainly a case for class action against HDB and Sheng Siong to prevent our community interests being trample upon.
All immediately stop patronising SS for biting those hands that feed and uplift it all these years and those 3 Members of Profilgacy be prepared for your Judgement Days which Heaven certainly will not be amused nor please or tolerate – meanwhile these gang of 4 can Sing Song or Seng Song hor – those who laugh first laugh last lor
WET markets are places where all ; especially those on the fringe of society can go and buy or have a decent pascket of cheap fried bee hoon, chwee kuey etc etc rather than expensive food at food courts like NTUC or supermarket types of set ups
.Self proclaimed First World but without its corresponding benevolent …….and empathy for the less previleged
30% is alot! You mean to say when they decided to sign on the dotted line with Ah Seong, no one even knows how to general an excel spreadsheet? I mean even a kid could do that. So how could operation cost go up by that much in less than one year?
SD
Simplify it as avarice and apathy as exemplified by them….
What we have here is a serious accounting black hole. If you’re telling me that operation cost can go up by 30%! Then it doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure out your daily groceries are also going to go up as well (not necessarily by the same %) but at the end of the day, the stallholders will have to past the buck to consumers – so if that is the case, how can these heartlander mom & pop operations even compete against Shing Seong, NTUC, Giant and Cold Storage.
Sounds like a great way to corner the market. That’s how the oil industry killed the electric car. Buy up all the patents and make it so expensive that no one in their right mind would ever build or buy an electric car and that way you get to sell more oil while the world boils happily. Nice one Ah Siong.
If we are dealing with an upright, honest and socially responsible business outfit. They would have sent a team and done a cost and feasebility study to determine the operational cost / usually this is projected to 5 years / they would have buffered for inflation, commodities etc and costed it into the buying price.
But in this case. These pirates knew that the price they paid couldn’t possibly sustain the operational cost of running these wet markets; so from day numero uno they already knew this 30% rise was in the game plan.
Oldest con job in the world.
The question is now is did the government have the foresight to provision a golden share in their concession to Ah Siong i.e right of veto under an special equity clause – so that they can overule Ah Siong?
SD
It’s amazing that these combined 3 $MILLIONS HEADS are unable to foresee that SS will simply jack up rents in order to drive out the tenants, thus morphing the wet market into supermarkets on the pretext of “lack of tenants”? Haven’t netizens been warning them on this before the sale of wet markets to SS ?
Boboshooter is right. Businesses are there to make money. This is why we need a Govt – to REGULATE. Unfortunately for Singpapore, we do not seem to have a Govt, we have instead, a bigger business entity sitting up there. Unless this set up is changed, everything, including policies, are going to be targetted at the business objective of making money.
i am really pity for those low income singaporeans in BP areas..
thier are so much low income house holder thrs…
How come the million $ min$ters so so stupid, cannot see SS tactics?
My Views
Mar 29, 2010 4:1
//That was why the MPs in those areas did not pursue the issue further.//
A very good template to answer any doubts on any matter if MPs choose not to pursue any issue further.
And how does the 30% increase in rental for the other wet-market stalls come into the picture of operating a supermarket with their own space requirement already mapped out long before bidding for the entire area. Unless, all along they have intended the space of the existing wet-market stalls for some other purpose – hence factoring this important fact into their own cost calculation.
Else, would anyone have continued to bid for a place of supermarket knowing full well the condition of having to keep the wet-market stalls intact and the impact of the some potential 30% rental increase. Nah, maybe they did not care much anyway and it was all along in their game plan. As for the MPs, does their existence really matter ?
Not only Sheng Siong.
Just had lunch at a food centre which recently had new management. Talked to one food seller. She said rental were up by 20% and her food prices were also up. And earlier I also noticed in another food centre, some empty stalls, and the food I had were changed, in that there was less ingredients, and not as tasty as just a few weeks back. I suspected rentals were up too, and stall holders are squeezed and thus are compromising on quality.
The free market and open competition is not suppose to work this way – it is suppose to lead to “efficient utilisation”. Here we have increasing prices and lowering quality, paying more for less, exchanging good scarce money for junk.
Only the land owners and the “management” of food centres profit. Stall holders and customers suffer. The former have reduced profit margins if they do nothing, and the latter are almost certainly always the losers.
Are we in a similar situation which led to the Communist Revolution, when land owners merely extracted maximal rent from their land at the expense of the peasants of the land, who are exploited maximally without fair returns for their labour at the same time?
Why is this happening?
I can only see that land prices and rental have gone awry, way beyond what is economically sound or justifiable, ie manipulated artificially. And I see this is also another reason why wages are always and continuously depressed, as rentals are way too high for any profitable business. And thus necessity for cheap foreign labour for any viable business.
Can some economist please shed light on what is happening here and what is the remedy?