Connect with us

Politics

Kenneth Jeyaretnam issued a second POFMA correction direction over Ridout Road rentals by Minsters Shanmugam and Balakrishnan

Reform Party leader Kenneth Jeyaretnam received a second POFMA correction notice over posts allegedly falsely claiming Ministers Shanmugam and Balakrishnan rented Ridout Road properties below market value.

This follows a similar correction earlier related to false information about the renovation contracts of the same properties.

Published

on

SINGAPORE: Reform Party leader Kenneth Jeyaretnam was issued a second correction direction on 2 August under the Protection from Online Falsehoods and Manipulation Act (POFMA) regarding the rental of the state-owned Ridout Road bungalows by Ministers K Shanmugam and Vivian Balakrishnan.

The directive, issued by the Minister for Culture, Community and Youth, and Second Minister for Law Edwin Tong, indicated that Mr Jeyaretnam made an untrue statement in his posts on his Facebook and LinkedIn pages.

It asserted that the Singapore Land Authority (SLA) charged the ministers rent below market value for the properties at 26 Ridout Road and 31 Ridout Road. The correction notice requires Mr Jeyaretnam to state that the Facebook and LinkedIn posts contain a false statement of fact.

This follows a previous correction notice issued on 16 July to Mr Jeyaretnam relating to an article on his website, The Ricebowl Singapore. The article falsely stated that the SLA awarded the contract for the renovation of the aforementioned properties to home interior and renovation company Livspace because its CEO is the son of Mr Shanmugam. Mr Jeyaretnam had complied with the previous correction notice.

The POFMA office issued several clarifications on the false statement. According to Senior Minister Teo Chee Hean’s review, the rental paid by both ministers was at fair market value. There was no evidence to suggest the ministers received favourable rental rates due to their positions.

The rents for both properties were not less than the Guide Rents for the properties, which are calculated for all state properties available for rent. The Guide Rents are determined by professional valuers from the SLA’s independent valuation team or those appointed by third-party managing agents.

The SLA valuer determined the Guide Rent for 26 Ridout Road and the adjacent land. At the time of evaluation, the valuer was unaware of the prospective tenant’s identity and only found out that it was Mr Shanmugam after the matter was reported in the media. The valuer followed established market practices, and the rent per unit floor area for 26 Ridout Road was the third highest among the other Black and White bungalows in Ridout Road Estate rented out in 2018.

Furthermore, SLA and Mr Shanmugam reached an agreement to include the adjacent land within the property boundary of 26 Ridout Road, making it clear that the responsibility for maintaining it would fall on the tenant. Minister Shanmugam incurred the cost of maintaining the adjacent land, which would otherwise have been borne by the SLA.

The controversy surrounding the rentals began in early May when it came to light that the two ministers were renting these iconic properties managed by the SLA. Mr Jeyaretnam stoked public interest by suggesting the ministers might be enjoying rents below fair market value, as SLA is a statutory board overseen by the Minister for Law.

However, investigations by the Corrupt Practices Investigation Bureau (CPIB) and Senior Minister Teo Chee Hean found no evidence of criminal wrongdoing or preferential treatment given to the ministers.

In a Parliamentary sitting on the matter in July, Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong firmly expressed his unwavering confidence in Ministers Shanmugam and Balakrishnan.

The Prime Minister stood to defend the process of rental in Parliament on Monday, stating that as long as the rental process is conducted properly and all procedures are adhered to, there is no wrongdoing.

Mr Pritam Singh, the leader of the opposition and Secretary General of the Workers’ Party, queried PM Lee on the scope of the CPIB’s investigation.

Mr Singh wanted to clarify whether the CPIB was directed to examine the ministers’ adherence to the code of conduct.

PM Lee responded that the CPIB was instructed to probe any potential criminal or corruption offences, necessitating a thorough investigation of all facts related to the case.

He added that though the code of conduct wasn’t the focus, it was indirectly examined due to the overlap with the issues at hand.

He then noted the role of SM Teo’s review in complementing the CPIB’s investigation, by further establishing the policies, backgrounds, and overall operation of the system.

Subsequently, Mr Singh raised the issue of ministers requesting personal use information from civil servants.

“It is quite incongruous in the eyes of many for a minister to be asking a civil servant for details which pertain to information for personal use. I think this is the crux of the issue and when people intersected with the ministerial code of conduct and your letter of prudence, does the Prime Minister not agree that this is an issue that has been flagged out and that there is a better way to address a problem of a similar nature when it crops up?” said Mr Singh, querying if there could be a better way to handle similar situations in the future.

In response, PM Lee noted that the issue of ministers instructing civil servants wasn’t public knowledge until it was disclosed in the report.

“My view is he (Mr Shanmugam) could have done it a different way. He could have done it this way. He has given the House the reasons why he did it this way. I think those are cogent reasons, which I accept.” said PM Lee.

Continue Reading
Click to comment
Subscribe
Notify of
0 Comments
Newest
Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Politics

Dr Tan Cheng Bock questions S$335 million Founders’ Memorial cost, citing Lee Kuan Yew’s stance

Dr Tan Cheng Bock has raised concerns over the S$335 million cost of Singapore’s Founders’ Memorial, citing Lee Kuan Yew’s opposition to monuments and suggesting the funds could be better used for healthcare. The memorial, slated for completion by 2028, faces rising costs, with the estimated cost not including operating or land costs.

Published

on

On 14 September, Dr Tan Cheng Bock, former People’s Action Party (PAP) MP and founder of the Progress Singapore Party, publicly expressed concerns over the estimated S$335 million cost for the Founders’ Memorial.

In a detailed Facebook post, he questioned the necessity of such an extravagant expenditure and referred to the late Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew’s known opposition to monuments in his honour.

Dr Tan highlighted a poignant moment from Lee Kuan Yew’s eulogy, delivered by his grandson, Li Shengwu, on 29 March 2015.

Li recalled how, when it was once suggested that a monument be built for him, Lee Kuan Yew had responded, “Remember Ozymandias.” This reference was to a sonnet by Percy Bysshe Shelley about Ramses II, in which a traveler encounters the ruins of a once-grand statue in the desert. The statue bore the inscription: “My name is Ozymandias, King of Kings; look on my works, ye mighty, and despair!” But nothing else remained of the empire.

Li Shengwu reflected that his grandfather’s remark underscored his belief that if Singapore failed, a monument would be useless, and if it thrived, a monument would be unnecessary.

“His legacy is not cold stone, but a living nation. We could no more forget him than we could forget the sky,” Li said, adding that Lee Kuan Yew’s enduring contribution lay in the strong institutions he built, which persist beyond the individual and ensure Singapore’s stability.

In his post, Dr Tan echoed these sentiments, questioning whether spending S$335 million on a memorial aligned with the founding leaders’ values.

He suggested that the funds might be better spent addressing pressing national issues, particularly healthcare, as Singapore’s population continues to age. Dr Tan, who served for decades as a practising doctor, called for investments in a home care system, noting that such a move would reduce the strain on hospitals while improving the well-being of the elderly.

The estimated S$335 million figure was revealed during a Parliamentary session on 9 September 2023, in response to a question posed by Louis Chua, a Workers’ Party MP for Sengkang GRC. Minister for Culture, Community and Youth Edwin Tong provided the cost breakdown, explaining that the figure covers construction, the fit-out of exhibition galleries, a viewing gallery, an outdoor amphitheatre, family spaces, amenities, and a five-hectare outdoor garden.

Mr Tong added that the final operating costs for the memorial are still being worked out alongside the development of operational plans.

Notably, Mr Tong’s disclosure did not include land costs.

Lee Hsien Yang, son of the late Lee Kuan Yew, also responded to Dr Tan’s post, pointing out that the five-hectare site in Bay East Garden could significantly increase the overall cost.

He noted that a nearby plot of land at Marina Gardens Crescent, measuring about 1.5 hectares, was tendered earlier in 2023 but rejected for a bid of S$984 per square foot, deemed too low by the Urban Redevelopment Authority (URA). Based on this price, the value of the land for the Founders’ Memorial could exceed S$500 million, pushing the overall cost of the project even higher.

The Founders’ Memorial, initially slated for completion in 2025 to coincide with Singapore’s 60th birthday, is now expected to open by the end of 2028. The project was delayed due to extensive infrastructural work at its Bay East Garden location and disruptions caused by the Covid-19 pandemic. The twin two-storey buildings, designed by Kengo Kuma & Associates and Singapore’s K2LD Architects, will house an integrated gallery and public gardens, intended to serve as a space for reflection on Singapore’s past and inspiration for the future.

While Minister Tong emphasized that the memorial aims to capture the spirit of the nation and foster unity, Dr Tan urged that the focus should remain on practical solutions for Singapore’s future. He argued that a simpler, more humble memorial would be more in line with the founding leaders’ values, allowing the remainder of the funds to be redirected toward initiatives that benefit the nation’s aging population.

Continue Reading

Labour

Jamus Lim argues why Jobseeker Support Scheme is the PAP’s version of unemployment insurance

In a Facebook post, Workers’ Party MP Jamus Lim rejected PAP’s claim that the JSS isn’t unemployment insurance. He explained WP’s redundancy insurance plan, emphasizing shared responsibility between employers, employees, and the government. While noting concerns about dependency, he argued these fears are exaggerated, stressing a balanced support approach.

Published

on

SINGAPORE: Associate Professor Jamus Lim, Workers’ Party Member of Parliament for Sengkang GRC, has offered his take on the SkillsFuture Jobseeker Support Scheme (JSS), which he describes as the People’s Action Party’s (PAP) equivalent of unemployment insurance.

The JSS, unveiled with more details during Prime Minister Lawrence Wong’s National Day Rally speech on 18 August, has sparked comparisons with the Workers’ Party’s own long-standing proposal for redundancy insurance (RI), first introduced in its 2006 manifesto.

In a 12 September Facebook post, Assoc Prof Lim emphasised that the WP had been advocating for a redundancy insurance scheme for almost two decades, providing substantial details on it in their 2016 policy paper.

“We’ve been thinking about the issue for a while now,” Lim stated, adding that the WP’s proposal has been part of global best practices for advanced economies for nearly a century.

Assoc Prof Lim dismissed the PAP’s argument that the JSS is not unemployment insurance.

He pointed out that the differences the PAP cites—such as JSS being tied to job-seeking conditions and funded from general revenue rather than payroll taxes—are inconsequential.

“Tax revenue is fungible, so it all comes from the people anyway,” Assoc Prof Lim explained.

He argued that funding the scheme from general revenue might even make it less equitable, as it could potentially shift the burden onto non-workers to subsidise workers.

The Workers’ Party’s version of redundancy insurance, Assoc Prof Lim highlighted, envisioned a shared responsibility between employers, employees, and the government to ensure fairness and sustainability.

“We do believe in tripartism,” he remarked, underscoring that society should bear the responsibility for protecting its workers.

One of the central points in Assoc Prof Lim’s critique was that tying financial support to job-seeking efforts is standard in unemployment schemes globally, including in Singapore.

Assoc Prof Lim Addresses Concerns of Dependency, Calling Them Overblown

He acknowledged concerns that such a scheme might lead to dependency, but deemed these fears exaggerated.

“Most people, even in the West, do find value and meaning in some form of work,” he noted.

In discussing the design of unemployment insurance systems, Assoc Prof Lim pointed to the importance of balancing the duration of support with the amount provided.

While too long a tenure or too large a payout could discourage a return to the workforce and allow skills to erode, too little would leave workers struggling to cover household expenses during critical periods.

The WP’s redundancy insurance proposal included a payout of 40% of the last drawn income for up to six months, which Lim described as a “solid-but-not-excessively-generous” sum.

Although this amount is lower than what is typically found in advanced economies, and the duration is shorter than the OECD average of one year, he highlighted that it reflects Singapore’s shorter unemployment spells of around two months.

Assoc Prof Lim also suggested the introduction of greater flexibility in accessing redundancy insurance funds.

By allowing the unemployed to “front-load” their payouts, households would have more breathing room to adjust their expenses during difficult transitions.

With the JSS set to be debated in Parliament, Assoc Prof Lim reaffirmed the Workers’ Party’s commitment to advocating for expanded safety nets for Singapore’s workers.

“Whether you call it JSS or RI or something else, expanding the safety net for our workers is something that the Workers’ Party will always be fighting for,” he concluded.

Continue Reading

Trending