TR EMERITUS

From our Correspondent The Singapore Democratic Party (SDP) has written to Sheng Siong to arrange for a meeting to discuss the acquisition of wet markets. SDP claimed that though Sheng Siong has indicated that it will not raise the rental of the stalls, its plans for the markets are still murky which is causing great ire to the stallholders. Sheng Siong's plans to convert the wet markets into air-conditioned supermarkets was not well received on the ground by both the stallholders and buyers who prefer to purchase their groceries from wet markets which were once ubiquitous throughout Singapore. HDB stepped in to intervene last week with an announcement that the wet markets do not qualify for the criteria set for conversion. SDP had been actively pursuing the case on behalf of Bukit Panjang residents. They just conducted a walkabout in the ward last Sunday. Its Chairman Gandhi Ambalam wrote two letters to the MP of Bukit Panjang Dr Teo Ho Pin imploring him to state his opposition explicitly to Sheng Siong's plan. Dr Teo gave a curt reply to SDP through the state media remarking that they "should do their homework" first before shooting their mouths off. Dr Teo claimed that the wet market was his "baby" and he had been discussing with the residents, stallholders and grassroots leaders in the last few weeks to resolve the matter. It is unsure if SDP's latest gesture will go down well with the residents of Bukit Panjang since HDB has already reassured them that the wet market will stay. During the 2006 general elections, Dr Teo won the seat with a thumping 77 per cent of the valid votes. We reproduce Mr Gandhi's letter to Sheng Siong below:   Ms Tan Ching Fern Sheng Siong Supermarket Pte Ltd (Head Office) Corporate Matters 3000 Marsiling Road Singapore 739108 Dear Ms Tan, As you may know, the Singapore Democratic Party is concerned about the impending takeover by Sheng Siong of several wet markets around Singapore, including the Fajar Market in Bukit Panjang. We welcome the news that the markets will not be converted into supermarkets and that the rentals of the stalls will not be increased. However, press reports indicate that Sheng Siong is not ruling out turning the premises into an air-conditioned facility as well as a 24-hour operation after the acquisition. Given this situation, we fear that operational costs will increase and that this increase will be passed on to the shoppers. Singaporeans, especially workers, are already saddled with a high cost of living that has outstripped wages. This being the case it is understandable that they are concerned that the acquisition of the markets by your company will lead to a greater financial burden for them. In this regard the SDP would like to meet with Sheng Siong officials to hear from you directly about the matter and to see if the interests of all parties can be addressed. As this matter is one of public interest, we may post this letter on our website. Thank you and we look forward to meeting with you. Sincerely, Gandhi Ambalam Chairman Singapore Democratic Party   Source: SDP  Read More →

OPINION Despite widespread sentiments on the ground that HDB flats are being priced out of reach to the average Singapore worker, the government and HDB are adamant that they remain affordable based on an unknown affordability benchmark of 30 per cent of monthly income used to service the mortage loans. Let us give them the benefit of the doubt and force ourselves to believe that they are right: HDB flats are affordable. The question is: can we make HDB flats MORE affordable to ordinary Singaporeans? After all, shouldn't public housing be cheap and easily affordable to the masses? The emphasis shouldn't be just one affordability alone, but whether if it is EASILY affordable. Instead of defining housing affordability as a percentage of the household monthly income which is used to service the mortage loans, we can use a different index like the "Median Multiple" which is the median house price divided by median household income to assess housing affordability. While HDB's benchmark does not take not of the wide range of household incomes among HDB flat owners (a household with a higher than average income will surely find HDB flats affordable as 30% of their income will far exceed the benchmark), the Median Multiple will cancel out these differences at both ends of the spectrum. The Median Multiple which is used to formulate the "Demographia Housing Affordability Rating Categories" is widely used for evaluating urban markets, for example being recommended by the World Bank and the United Nations. It is an easily understood indicator of the structural health of residential markets and facilitates meaningful housing affordability comparisons. Demographia Housing Affordability Rating Categories: Rating                                      Median Multiple Severely Unaffordable:      5.1 and over Seriously Unaffordable:       4.1 to 5.0 Moderately Unaffordable:  3.1 to 4.0 Affordable:                                3.o or less (read report here) If HDB adopt the Demographic Housing Affordabilty Rating of 3.0 to set the prices of new HDB flats, the prices of HDB's latest launch, Punggol Residences will cost around $201,600 using the 2008 annual median income of employed households living in 4-room flats of $67,200 (Source: Singstat page 5) If we were to make it more affordable by reducing the rating to 2.5, it should cost only $168,000. [The prices of Punggol Residences, the latest launch by HDB range from $264,000 to $322,000 for four-room flats and from $344,000 to $409,000 for the five-room flats. (Source: HDB Infoweb)] HDB is still using the $8,000 cap to qualify for housing subsidy which was first introduced in 1994. This figure has largely become obsolete and irrelevant due to drastic change in economic circumstances. This cap should be scrapped altogether and housing subsidy given to each Singaporean household to be assessed on an individual basis. For example, if the annual household income is only $48,000, the minimum price for an affordable HDB flat set at a rating of 3.0 is $144,000. A subsidy of ($201,600 - $144,000) = $57,600 should be given. For those earning less than the monthly median household income of $3,230, they should be allowed to purchase only 3-room HDB flats (priced at around $116,280) and not more expensive 4- and 5-room flats to avoid over-stretching themselves.  The reduction in the prices of new flats built by HDB using the "Median Multiple" as an index of affordability will exert a downward pressure on the prices of resale flats thereby bringing down the prices on a whole.   HDB should also take proactive steps to cool the over-heating of the resale market to prevent a property bubble from forming. As HDB flats are supposedly low-cost public housing, they cannot be left entirely to free market forces unlike private property. The Cash-Over-Valuation (COV) should be done away with thereby reducing the impetus on the part of the seller to jack the prices up to exorbitant levels while permitting buyers to purchase the flats at a reasonable price. As owners of HDB flats built in the 1980s and 1990s would have already made a hefty profit of $100,000 on more based on current valuation, it makes sense to cap the maximum selling price of each category of HDB flats based on size to increase affordability. An additional levy amounting to 10% of the flat's selling price should be imposed on PRs purchasing resale flats to prevent them from profiteering in the future in the event they decided to leave Singapore. The money accured can go towards increasing the housing subsidies for citizens. Perhaps the best way for HDB to assauge the concerns and scepticism of Singaporeans that they are not being "over-charged" for public housing is to come clean with the people on the cost price of each unit built inclusive of the cost of land and building. Till today, the real figures remain a mystery to Singaporeans. Is it fair for HDB to sell a new four-room flat at Punggol for $293,000 if its actual cost price is only let's say $200,000? The ball is in the government's court to ensure that HDB stay true to its original mission and vision of providing quality and cheap public housing to every Singapore citizen which is not merely affordable, but EASILY affordable such that the people do not have to deplete their CPF accounts in order to finance the astronomical 30-year mortage loans and will have adequate disposable income to enjoy a standard of living commensurate with a first world country besides saving enough to meet one retirement needs.   Other articles in the series: >> HDB flats will be “severely unaffordable using the Median Multiple as a benchmark for housing affordability” >> Drawbacks of HDB using STIR benchmark of 30 percent to assess housing affordability >> Part 1: Singaporeans do not own their HDB flats >> Part 2: HDB flats are not affordable to most Singaporeans >> Part 3: Rising prices of HDB flats do not lead to wealth creation   EDITORS’ NOTE: If you like our work and would like to support us, please transfer your donations via paypal to our account ([email protected]). Any amount will be greatly appreciated! Alternatively, you can also help boost our advertising revenue by clicking on the ads displayed. Thank you! Join our tweet at: http://www.twitter.com/temasekreview  Read More →

Author: Tremewan, Chris.   Title: The political economy of social control in Singapore / Christopher Tremewan ; foreword by Peter Carey.  Publication Details: New York : St. Martin’s Press ; Basingstoke : Macmillan, in association with St Antony’s College, 1994.   Summary Singapore’s rapid economic growth has attracted much admiration. But can this success be sufficiently explained by canny exploitation of a niche in the global free market? This book shows that there is a complex relationship between economic strategy, social control and political conflict in Singapore. It does this by looking at the regulatory functions of major state institutions.   Public housing increases state control and forces people into wage labour even while supplying a high standard of accommodation. Singaporeans are sorted, stratified and fragmented by the education system. Racism and patriarchal relations, seen in language, population planning and eugenics policies, are integral to education. Elections and parliament in Singapore are mechanisms for forcing submission, converting submission into consent and confining politics to parliamentary politics. The legal system functions to criminalise politics and politicise crime. The findings of all the chapters are drawn together to show how the system of social control has developed in phases in response to the changing nature of political resistance.   EDITORS' NOTE: Readers who have read this book may like to write us a book review on it. Please email us at [email protected]  Read More →