Despite the SLA’s response, unanswered questions about the Ridout Road rentals continue to fuel public debate.
SINGAPORE: The revelation that Cabinet Ministers K Shanmugam and Vivian Balakrishnan were living in state-owned black-and-white houses at Ridout Road raised eyebrows and sparked significant public discussion when it was first highlighted by Kenneth Jeyaretnam on his blog in May 2023. The discovery of these ministers residing in such luxurious, state-owned colonial homes at a time when most Singaporeans struggle with space constraints has fueled public discontent, adding to concerns over equity and transparency.
The black-and-white houses, built during colonial times and known for their architectural uniqueness, are coveted properties in Singapore. Managed by the Singapore Land Authority (SLA), most of these homes are state-owned and available only through public tenders. However, the optics of high-ranking government officials living in large, sprawling estates while the general public copes with smaller living spaces led to widespread questions.
In response to the rising questions and public scrutiny, the SLA issued a statement on 12 May 2023, attempting to clarify the situation. However, many of the details provided raised further concerns, leaving the public with more questions than answers.
Fact 1: Long Vacancy of 26 and 31 Ridout Road
SLA disclosed that the properties at 26 and 31 Ridout Road were vacant for several years before being tenanted. The 26 Ridout Road unit had been vacant for over four years, and 31 Ridout Road had been empty for more than six years.
Why were these properties left vacant for such extended periods?
Was this a strategic decision by SLA or due to the difficulty in finding suitable tenants?
What efforts were made by SLA to rent out these properties?
Vacant properties represent lost revenue for the government, especially in a city as land-scarce as Singapore. For public assets to remain idle for years raises concerns about the efficiency and management of state-owned properties.
Fact 2: Low Response to 2018 Tender for 26 Ridout Road
The tender for 26 Ridout Road in 2018 only attracted one bid.
What steps did SLA take to publicize and promote this property for tender?
Were the terms for this particular tender different from other black-and-white house tenders?
Why was the response to the 2018 tender so poor, despite black-and-white houses typically being in demand?
This unusual outcome begs questions about the transparency and fairness of the tender process. The lack of interest in such a prime property is puzzling and warrants a thorough explanation.
Fact 3: The Sole Bidder Was the Law Minister
The sole bid for 26 Ridout Road was placed by Law Minister K Shanmugam himself.
Did Mr Shanmugam, in his capacity as the Law Minister, have prior knowledge of the property’s availability?
If so, was there any conflict of interest or potential bias in the bidding process?
Did Mr Shanmugam gain any advantage in the bidding process due to his ministerial position?
These concerns regarding access to information and potential conflicts of interest further complicate the situation and raise doubts about the fairness of the bidding process.
Fact 4: Mr Shanmugam Used an Agent to Make the Offer
Mr Shanmugam made his offer for 26 Ridout Road through an agent, rather than directly.
Why was an agent used for the bidding process?
Did Mr Shanmugam conceal his identity during the bidding, or was it clear that he was the prospective tenant?
Was this standard practice for bidding on state-owned properties?
The use of an agent introduces a layer of opacity that raises further concerns about transparency, particularly in the case of a public official bidding for a state-owned property.
Fact 5: Mr Shanmugam Notified a Senior Cabinet Colleague About His Bid
Mr Shanmugam informed a senior Cabinet colleague about his bid for 26 Ridout Road.
Why was this notification made to just one colleague?
Should this information have been disclosed to the entire Cabinet for transparency?
This selective disclosure raises questions about the internal communication processes within the Cabinet and whether all necessary steps were taken to ensure transparency in the matter.
Fact 6: Dr Vivian’s Tenancy of 31 Ridout Road Commenced 11 Months After His Bid
Dr Vivian’s tenancy of 31 Ridout Road began 11 months after he submitted his bid.
Why was there such a significant delay in the commencement of the tenancy?
Was this delay imposed by SLA, or was it requested by Dr Vivian?
How was the loss of rental income during this delay accounted for?
The unusual delay in the start of Dr Vivian’s tenancy further complicates the narrative and raises questions about the efficiency of the tender and tenancy processes.
SLA’s response to these inquiries provides more questions than answers. The lack of clarity around these facts has only intensified public scrutiny and led to greater calls for transparency. As of July 2023, SLA has promised to release more details, and the public eagerly awaits further clarification on these troubling issues.
