Current Affairs
PSP disappointed as PM Wong overlooks root issues in Singapore’s public housing policies
![](https://theonlinecitizen.s3.ap-northeast-2.amazonaws.com/uploads/2024/08/19143731/PSP-Housing-GCCaEd.jpeg)
SINGAPORE: In response to Prime Minister Lawrence Wong’s announcement during his first National Day Rally speech addressing housing concerns among Singaporeans, the Progress Singapore Party (PSP) expressed disappointment that the Government has yet again failed to tackle the root issues of public housing policies, which the PSP believes require a fundamental rethink.
During the NDR speech on Sunday (18 August), PM Wong announced additional support for lower-income couples seeking to purchase their first homes.
Currently, under the Central Provident Fund (CPF) Housing Grant, first-time families can receive up to S$80,000 (US$60,700) to assist with the purchase of new or resale flats.
He mentioned that the grant will be increased, “especially for the lower-income groups,” with further details to be provided soon by National Development Minister Desmond Lee.
“This is my assurance to all young Singaporeans: Once you start work and wish to settle down, we will make sure that there is an HDB flat that is within your budget in every region,” PM Wong stated.
“We will always keep public housing in Singapore affordable for you.”
In response, the PSP noted in a Monday statement that increasing CPF housing grants is merely a continuation of existing policies without addressing the fundamental issues within public housing.
The PSP once again urged the Government to consider implementing the Affordable Homes Scheme and Millennial Apartments Scheme as alternatives to ensure that public housing remains accessible to Singaporeans without jeopardizing their retirement.
These two schemes were proposed by PSP Non-Constituency Members of Parliament Leong Mun Wai and Hazel Poa in a motion tabled in February last year.
The PSP believed that Singapore’s public housing policy needs a reset, while the Government’s counter-motion, filed by MND Minister Lee, suggested that there is no need to review the current housing policies.
Separately, the PSP welcomed the benefits for the involuntarily unemployed that PM Wong announced.
“As I said during my Budget speech in February 2024, retrenchments are becoming increasingly common and temporary financial support would be greatly beneficial to retrenched workers seeking a new job, ” said PSP Secretary-General Hazel Poa.
While the PSP was glad that the Government was now ready to implement a scheme to aid the involuntarily unemployed, Ms Poa pointed out that, based on the current details available for the SkillsFuture Jobseeker Support Scheme, more could be done for lower- and middle-income workers.
She added that the PSP looked forward to debating this in Parliament.
The PSP was heartened that the new PM places great emphasis on addressing the nation’s low Total Fertility Rate, particularly through the new 10-week Shared Parental Leave scheme for infant care, with government payments of up to S$2,500 per week, effective from 1 April 2026.
The PSP noted that this was a much-needed change to promote the sharing of parental duties.
Ms Poa recalled that during the debate on Singapore Women’s Development in Parliament in 2022, she had called for parental leave to be shared equally by default, with flexibility to reallocate leave between both parents based on mutual agreement.
She noted that this announcement was a welcome step in that direction, but emphasized that more still needed to be done to encourage couples to have children.
Nevertheless, Ms Poa affirmed that the PSP would continue to engage the Government in Parliament to ensure that it acted in the best interests of Singaporeans.
PAP Minister Rejected PSP’s Public Housing Proposal in 2023
PSP’s Affordable Homes Scheme, based on a deferred land cost idea first proposed by PSP member Dr Tan Meng Wah, allows Singaporeans to buy a new flat at construction cost plus a notional location premium.
The land cost would only be paid when the flat is sold in the resale market after the Minimum Occupation Period.
Should a Singaporean stay in the same flat his entire life, he will only pay the user price. This user-price concept was first suggested by Mr Yeoh Lam Keong, the former Chief Economist of GIC.
The PSP’s proposed Millennial Apartments Scheme involves the government maintaining a large stock of quality rental flats in prime locations near the Central Business District. These flats are intended for young families or groups of singles and would be leased out for 2 to 5 years.
The scheme aims to bring young Singaporeans together, providing single individuals with more opportunities to socialize and perhaps marry. Meanwhile, those who are already married will have more time for their families due to the proximity to their workplaces.
Rejecting the proposals presented by PSP’s Non-Consituency Member of Parliament Leong Mun Wai, MND Minister Desmond Lee during 9 February 2023 Parliamentary sitting stated that the proposals “do not address today’s problems and certainly do not address tomorrow’s problems”.
The Minister then urged the Parliament to reject PSP’s motion and its proposals, to dismiss the Workers’ Party’s attempts at politicking, and to support the current policy with public housing, thus maintaining every Singaporean’s stake in housing.
The post PSP disappointed as PM Wong overlooks root issues in Singapore’s public housing policies appeared first on Gutzy Asia.
![](https://theonlinecitizen.s3.ap-northeast-2.amazonaws.com/uploads/2023/03/26202010/TOC_newlogo_small.webp)
Current Affairs
Reforming Singapore’s defamation laws: Preventing legal weapons against free speech
Opinion: The tragic suicide of Geno Ong, linked to the financial stress from a defamation lawsuit, raises a critical issue: Singapore’s defamation laws need reform. These laws must not be weaponized to silence individuals.
![](https://theonlinecitizen.s3.ap-northeast-2.amazonaws.com/uploads/2020/09/27020206/SupremeCourtBuilding-Singapore-20070210.jpg)
by Alexandar Chia
This week, we hear the tragic story of the suicide of Geno Ong, with Ong citing the financial stress from the defamation lawsuit against her by Raymond Ng and Iris Koh.
Regardless of who’s right and who’s wrong, this Koh/Ng vs Ong affair raises a wider question at play – the issue of Singapore’s defamation laws and how it needs to be tightened.
Why is this needed? This is because defamation suits cannot be weaponised the way they have been in Singapore law. It cannot be used to threaten people into “shutting up”.
Article 14(2)(a) of the Constitution may permit laws to be passed to restrict free speech in the area of defamation, but it does not remove the fact that Article 14(1)(a) is still law, and it permits freedom of speech.
As such, although Article 14(2)(a) allows restrictions to be placed on freedom of speech with regard to the issue of defamation, it must not be to the extent where Article 14(1)(a)’s rights and liberties are not curtailed completely or heavily infringed on.
Sadly, that is the case with regard to precedence in defamation suits.
Let’s have a look at the defamation suit then-PM Goh Chok Tong filed against Dr Chee Soon Juan after GE 2001 for questions Dr Chee asked publicly about a $17 billion loan made to Suharto.
If we look at point 12 of the above link, in the “lawyer’s letter” sent to Dr Chee, Goh’s case of himself being defamed centred on lines Dr Chee used in his question, such as “you can run but you can’t hide”, and “did he not tell you about the $17 billion loan”?
In the West, such lines of questioning are easily understood at worse as hyperbolically figurative expressions with the gist of the meaning behind such questioning on why the loan to Suharto was made.
Unfortunately, Singapore’s defamation laws saw Dr Chee’s actions of imputing ill motives on Goh, when in the West, it is expected of incumbents to take the kind of questions Dr Chee asked, and such questions asked of incumbent office holders are not uncommon.
And the law permits pretty flimsy reasons such as “withdrawal of allegations” to be used as a deciding factor if a statement is defamatory or not – this is as per points 66-69 of the judgement.
This is not to imply or impute ill intent on Singapore courts. Rather, it shows how defamation laws in Singapore needs to be tightened, to ensure that a possible future scenario where it is weaponised as a “shut-up tool”, occurs.
These are how I suggest it is to be done –
- The law has to make mandatory, that for a case to go into a full lawsuit, there has to be a 3-round exchange of talking points and two attempts at legal mediation.
- Summary judgment should be banned from defamation suits, unless if one party fails to adduce evidence or a defence.
- A statement is to be proven false, hence, defamatory, if there is strictly material along with circumstantial evidence showing that the statement is false. Apologies and related should not be used as main determinants, given how many of these statements are made in the heat of the moment, from the natural feelings of threat and intimidation from a defamation suit.
- A question should only be considered defamatory if it has been repeated, after material facts of evidence are produced showing, beyond reasonable doubt, that the message behind the question, is “not so”, and if there is a directly mentioned subject in the question. For example, if an Opposition MP, Mr A, was found to be poisoned with a banned substance, and I ask openly on how Mr A got access to that substance, given that its banned, I can’t be found to have “defamed the government” with the question as 1) the government was not mentioned directly and 2) if the government has not produced material evidence that they indeed had no role in the poisoning affair, if they were directly mentioned.
- Damages should be tiered, with these tiers coded into the Defamation Act – the highest quantum of damages (i.e. those of a six-figured nature) is only to be reserved if the subject of defamation lost any form of office, revenue or position, or directly quantifiable public standing, or was subjected to criminal action, because of the act of defamation. If none of such occur, the maximum amount of damages a plaintiff in a defamation can claim is a 4-figure amount capped at $2000. This will prevent rich and powerful figures from using defamation suits and 6-figure damages to intimidate their questioners and detractors.
- All defendants of defamation suit should be allowed full access to legal aid schemes.
Again, this piece does not suggest bad-faith malpractice by the courts in Singapore. Rather, it is to suggest how to tighten up defamation laws to avoid it being used as the silencing hatchet.
Current Affairs
Man arrested for alleged housebreaking and theft of mobile phones in Yishun
A 23-year-old man was arrested for allegedly breaking into a Yishun Ring Road rental flat and stealing eight mobile phones worth S$3,400 from five tenants. The Singapore Police responded swiftly on 1 September, identifying and apprehending the suspect on the same day. The man has been charged with housebreaking, which carries a potential 10-year jail term.
![](https://theonlinecitizen.s3.ap-northeast-2.amazonaws.com/uploads/2024/09/03132151/PHONE3.jpg)
SINGAPORE: A 23-year-old man has been arrested for allegedly breaking into a rental flat along Yishun Ring Road and stealing eight mobile phones from five tenants.
The incident occurred in the early hours on Sunday (1 September), according to a statement from the Singapore Police Force.
The authorities reported that they received a call for assistance at around 5 a.m. on that day.
Officers from the Woodlands Police Division quickly responded and, through ground enquiries and police camera footage, were able to identify and apprehend the suspect on the same day.
The stolen mobile phones, with an estimated total value of approximately S$3,400, were recovered hidden under a nearby bin.
The suspect was charged in court on Monday with housebreaking with the intent to commit theft.
If convicted, he could face a jail term of up to 10 years and a fine.
In light of this incident, the police have advised property owners to take precautions to prevent similar crimes.
They recommend securing all doors, windows, and other openings with good quality grilles and padlocks when leaving premises unattended, even for short periods.
The installation of burglar alarms, motion sensor lights, and CCTV cameras to cover access points is also advised. Additionally, residents are urged to avoid keeping large sums of cash and valuables in their homes.
The investigation is ongoing.
Last month, police disclosed that a recent uptick in housebreaking incidents in private residential estates across Singapore has been traced to foreign syndicates, primarily involving Chinese nationals.
Preliminary investigations indicate that these syndicates operate in small groups, targeting homes by scaling perimeter walls or fences.
The suspects are believed to be transient travelers who enter Singapore on Social Visit Passes, typically just a day or two before committing the crimes.
Before this recent surge in break-ins, housebreaking cases were on the decline, with 59 reported in the first half of this year compared to 70 during the same period last year.
However, between 1 June and 4 August 2024, there were 10 reported housebreaking incidents, predominantly in private estates around the Rail Corridor and Bukit Timah Road.
The SPF has intensified efforts to engage residents near high-risk areas by distributing crime prevention advisories, erecting alert signs, and training them to patrol their neighborhoods, leading to an increase in reports of suspicious activity.
-
Singapore4 days ago
Singapore woman’s suicide amidst legal battle raises concerns over legal system
-
Diplomacy7 days ago
India PM Narendra Modi meets with PM Lawrence Wong; Four MoUs signed
-
Opinion1 week ago
Singaporean voters and the ‘Battered Wife Syndrome’
-
Parliament2 days ago
Minister Shanmugam rejects request for detailed information on visa-free visitor offences: Cites bilateral considerations
-
Parliament3 days ago
PAP MPs attack WP Gerald Giam in Parliament over NTUC independence from ruling party
-
Politics6 days ago
PAP adopts SDP policies after criticizing them: Dr Chee urges Singaporeans to see through tactics
-
Food1 week ago
NTU stall food prices questioned after parent pays S$6.30 for meal
-
Civil Society1 week ago
CIVICUS Monitor labels Singapore as ‘repressed’ for crackdown on civic freedoms