Connect with us

Politics

Murali Pillai boldly denies making allegations against Leong Mun Wai during parliamentary confrontation

In a heated parliamentary exchange, People’s Action Party’s MP Murali Pillai vehemently denied his earlier statement that Progress Singapore Party’s Leong Mun Wai had advocated ‘some form of low rent control’. This led to a contentious back-and-forth, despite recorded proceedings seemingly contradicting Mr Murali’s denial.

Published

on

SINGAPORE – The Lease Agreements for Retail Premises Bill debate on Thursday (3 Aug) sparked a heated exchange between Members of Parliament (MPs) from the People’s Action Party (PAP) and the Progress Singapore Party (PSP).

During the discussion, PSP’s Non-Constituency MP, Leong Mun Wai, sought clarification from PAP’s MP, Murali Pillai, regarding Pillai’s assertion that Leong had proposed “some form of low rent control” in his speech. The Bill, which was subsequently passed, is designed to facilitate fairer lease negotiations between landlords and tenants of retail premises.

However, Mr Murali denied making such an accusation, clarifying that Leong had “sought low rents on behalf of SMEs.”

In his speech, Mr Leong expressed concern about the emergence of a “rentier economy” in Singapore’s commercial property market.

While he acknowledged the new law’s attempt to balance power between landlords and tenants, Leong argued it still allows landlords to capitalize on a rent structure advantageous for them, irrespective of economic circumstances.

Mr Murali, in his speech, alluded to Leong’s comments, asserting that Leong’s suggestion reminded him of the Rent Control Act, an obsolete legislation that deterred landlords from enhancing their premises, leading to the degradation of buildings.

“The honourable NCMP Mr Leong advocated some form of low rent control, and I’ve been in legal practice long enough to remember the spectre of the Rent Control Act in those days. Because of the Act, landlords were disincentivized to invest in their premises, leading to dilapidated buildings. Ultimately, Singapore suffers as our small nation requires high utility of our land.”

Following Mr Murali’s speech, Mr Leong stood to challenge this assertion, stating he did not advocate for rent control.

Despite Mr Murali having said that as documented by the live stream, he continued to deny his statement, while Mr Leong continued to insist that the inference was unfair and sought further assurances.

Mr Leong said, “And it’s something that is quite rare, actually, that I agree with the direction of the government…but I didn’t say that I’m asking for lower rent. I’m just saying that in general, we should not encourage too much property speculation, you know, and we should not encourage a rent-seeking economy society.”

Mr Leong added, “So you should not interpret what I said in my speech to that conclusion. It is very unfair for the inference that you make. Can you clarify that?”

While Mr Murali continued to deny that he had made the claim, Mr Leong pursued the matter, saying, “I don’t like the inference that he has made. That I’m trying to recommend pushing down the rent and towards the direction of rent control and as a result, it will affect the desire, the motivation of the landlords in Singapore to make further investments in property and all that.”

“I think this is too much of an inference and I’m trying to quote. What I say for example, in jobs, the government is trying to label me as xenophobic. When I talk about lower housing prices, the government says I’m trying to raid the reserves. This is the same pattern of what the member Murali is trying to do here.”

As Mr Leong made his comment, he hit the rostrum.

Mr Murali continued to deny, saying that he did not make any specific insinuation about rent control to him.

“I was just picking up a point that he made in the course of his speech that where he advocated that in light of rent-seeking behaviours of landlords, there should be efforts to make sure that tenants get to rent.”

Stating that Mr Murali said, “I fail to see how I’m accused of taking his case or rather his speech out of context. But in any event, the record would prove what I said.”

Seah Kian Peng, the newly-appointed Speaker, intervened in the exchange, informing both MPs that their statements would be clearly recorded in the Hansard.

However, Leong posed a challenge to the MP for Bukit Batok SMC, asking him if he would apologize if the records showed that he had not advocated for a lower rent. In doing so, he once again struck the rostrum.

Mr Murali dismissed the challenge, stating, “You know, whatever we say is recorded in Hansard, and we stand by what we said. Our conduct in all these matters flows from there. So I’m not going to make any commitment.”

“Mr Leong is entitled to his views, and I hope that he respects that I’m entitled to my views as well,” he said.

Following the exchange, Speaker Seah reminded MPs of the need for decorum in the House, emphasizing the importance of passionate speeches, but also advising MPs against physical displays of frustration, such as hitting the rostrum.

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

Comments

Redditors question support for PAP over perceived arrogance and authoritarian attitude

Despite Senior Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s warning that slimmer electoral margins would limit the government’s political space “to do the right things”, many Redditors questioned their support for the ruling PAP, criticising its perceived arrogance. They argued that SM Lee’s remarks show the party has ‘lost its ways’ and acts as if it alone can determine what is right. Others noted that the PAP’s supermajority allows for the passage of unfavourable policies without adequate scrutiny.

Published

on

In a recent speech, Senior Minister Lee Hsien Loong warned that “if electoral margins get slimmer, the government will have less political space to do the right things.”

Mr Lee, who served as Prime Minister for 20 years, highlighted the risks associated with increasingly competitive politics.

“It will become harder to disregard short-term considerations in decision-making. The political dynamics will become very different,” he stated during his speech at the Annual Public Service Leadership Ceremony 2024 on 17 September.

“Singaporeans must understand the dangers this creates, and so must the public service,” SM Lee stressed.

SM Lee pointed out that Singapore faces formidable internal and external challenges in the years ahead, with rising expectations and demands from citizens.

As growth becomes harder to achieve and politics becomes more fiercely contested, he warned, “Things can go wrong for Singapore too.”

He urged vigilance in preparing for an uncertain future, noting, “As the world changes, and as the generations change, we must do our best to renew our system – to ensure that it continues to work well for us, even as things change.”

Critique of PAP’s Arrogance and Disconnect from Singaporeans

The People’s Action Party (PAP) experienced a notable decline in its vote share during the 2020 General Election, securing 61.24% of the votes and winning 83 out of 93 seats, a drop from 69.9% in 2015.

A significant loss was in Sengkang GRC, where the PAP team, led by former Minister Ng Chee Meng, was defeated by the Workers’ Party (WP).

In discussions on Reddit, some users questioned why they should support the ruling PAP, criticising the party’s perceived arrogance.

They pointed out that SM Lee’s recent remarks illustrate that the party has strayed from effectively serving Singaporeans and seems to believe it has the sole authority to decide what is right.

Others highlighted that the PAP’s super-majority in Parliament enables the passage of unfavourable policies without sufficient scrutiny.

One comment acknowledged that while many older Singaporeans remain loyal to the PAP due to its past achievements, younger generations feel the party has failed to deliver similar results.

There is significant frustration that essentials like housing and the cost of living have become less affordable compared to previous generations.

The comment emphasised the importance of the 2011 election results, which they believe compelled the PAP to reassess its policies, especially concerning foreign labor and job security.

He suggested that to retain voter support, the PAP must continue to ensure a good material standard of living.

“Then, I ask you, vote PAP for what? They deserve to lose a supermajority. Or else why would they continue to deliver the same promises they delivered to our parents? What else would get a bunch of clueless bureaucrats to recognise their problems?”

Emphasising Government Accountability to the Public

Another Redditor argued that it is the government’s responsibility to be accountable to the people.

He further challenged SM Lee’s assertion about having less political space to do the right things, questioning his authority to define what is “right” for Singapore.

The comment criticised initiatives like the Founder’s Memorial and the NS Square, suggesting they may serve to boost the egos of a few rather than benefit the broader population. The Redditor also questioned the justification for GST hikes amid rising living costs.

“Policies should always be enacted to the benefit of the people, and it should always be the people who decide what is the best course of action for our country. No one should decide that other than us.”

The comment called for an end to narratives that present the PAP as the only party capable of rescuing Singapore from crises, stating that the country has moved past the existential challenges of its founding era and that innovative ideas can come from beyond a single political party.

Another comment echoed this sentiment, noting that by stating this, SM Lee seemingly expects Singaporeans to accept the PAP’s assumption that they—and by extension, the government and public service—will generally do the “right things.”

“What is conveniently overlooked is that the point of having elections is to have us examine for ourselves if we accept that very premise, and vote accordingly.”

A comment further argued that simply losing a supermajority does not equate to a lack of political space for the government to make the right decisions.

The Redditor express frustration with SM Lee’s rhetoric, suggesting that he is manipulating public perception to justify arbitrary changes to the constitution.

Concerns Over PAP’s Supermajority in Parliament

Another comment pointed out that the PAP’s supermajority in Parliament enables the passage of questionable and controversial policies, bypassing robust debate and discussion.

The comment highlighted the contentious constitutional amendments made in late 2016, which reserved the elected presidency for candidates from a specific racial group if no president from that group had served in the previous five terms.

A comment highlighted the contrast: in the past, the PAP enjoyed a wide electoral margin because citizens believed they governed effectively. Now, the PAP claims that without a substantial electoral margin, they cannot govern well.

Continue Reading

Comments

Tan Kiat How: Police called after resident ‘became aggressive’ at meet-the-people session

Senior Minister of State Tan Kiat How shared on TikTok that police were called to his meet-the-people session (MPS) in Bedok on Monday (17 Sept) evening after a resident ‘became a little more aggressive’, reportedly over a job issue. While the PAP MP emphasized the efforts made to assist residents, some netizens questioned the volunteers’ handling of the situation and urged more proactive measures from the MP.

Published

on

SINGAPORE: Police were called to a meet-the-people session (MPS) in Bedok after a resident became aggressive, causing a disturbance, according to Member of Parliament (MP) for East Coast GRC Tan Kiat How.

Mr Tan, who represents the Kampong Chai Chee ward, addressed the incident in a TikTok video posted on Monday (17 September).

In the video, Mr Tan, who is also Senior Minister of State for National Development, emphasised the need for mutual respect at these sessions, which are intended to be safe spaces for both residents and volunteers.

“It was unfortunate that the police had to be called to MPS today when a resident became a little more aggressive,” Mr Tan said, acknowledging the incident that occurred during the Monday MPS session at Block 408 Bedok North Avenue 2.

Mr Tan expressed empathy for the challenges faced by residents but urged individuals attending MPS to remain respectful towards volunteers.

“Sometimes you see such cases at MPS, where one of the residents get more aggressive and can be a little bit more violent,” he noted.

He added that while efforts are made to assist residents, certain matters are beyond their control.

“For example, we can’t write to a government agency to demand the agency to offer a job to a person … but we can facilitate and make sure that opportunities are available for our residents,” he explained.

@tankiathow

It was unfortunate that the police had to be called to #MPS today when a resident became a little more aggressive. We always do our best to help #KampongChaiChee residents, but some things are beyond our control. Let’s work towards mutual respect and ensure MPS remains a safe space for both residents and volunteers. #caringeastcoast

♬ Future – Official Sound Studio

Netizens Question Volunteers’ Handling of Situation and Call for Greater Action from MP

The incident drew numerous responses on TikTok, with some expressing support for Mr Tan and others sympathising with the unnamed resident.

One comment suggested that the individual may have been “desperate” for a solution to their issue, while another urged patience, noting that not all cases can be resolved immediately.

Separately, Mr Tan responded to one user by confirming that he had previously helped the resident’s parents.

Some questioned whether the issue arose from a lack of tact by certain volunteers in handling the situation, suggesting that they receive proper training to address residents’ concerns effectively.

In response, Mr Tan emphasized that his volunteers always do their best and that empathy is crucial in such situations.

Another user noted that empathy should be mutual, suggesting that while residents are trying their best, they may feel they have no other solutions, urging Mr Tan to show greater understanding.

One comment pointed out that something significant might have affected the resident, possibly leading them to drastic actions, and called for more proactive measures from the MP rather than just expressing empathy.

This is not the first time an MPS has been marked by aggression.

In 2018, Jurong GRC MP Tan Wu Meng was assaulted by a 32-year-old man, leaving him with injuries.

The assailant was arrested after rushing into the MPS area and attacking Dr Tan.

Similarly, in 2009, Ang Mo Kio GRC MP Seng Han Thong was attacked when a resident doused him with paint thinner and set him on fire. Mr Seng survived but required extensive medical treatment.

Continue Reading

Trending