So, a second POFMA has been issued to me in respect of my blog article, “As Huge Tracts of Land Are Given Away At Peanut Rents to Ministers, Singaporeans Should Be Asking Why There Are No Resources to Tackle the Time Bomb Lurking in Our (Lack of a) Healthcare System”

I am obliged to now post a Correction Notice (CN) at the top of my Facebook and LinkedIn page but luckily I have also earned bonus loyalty points in the exclusive POFMA club. I will be appealing.

No facts supplied

As I have said repeatedly, POFMA is asymmetric because only the Government can issue CNs. I have previously called for CNs to be issued to Heng Swee Keat and Tin Pei Ling for false statements of fact about the amounts spent on Singaporeans in the Budget. It’s also repressive because the Government refuses to supply the actual counter-information even when issuing a CN. This was illustrated when Heng Swee Keat issued CNs to defend the PM’s wife and stop people from speculating about her salary after a Taiwanese news channel revealed that she was paid US$100 million a year. The government did not at any point say what her salary, as a matter of fact, was.

We want facts. It’s natural. Trust in the ‘ownself check ownself’ system has completely dissipated..

The purpose of POFMA now is to intimidate citizens and scare them away from asking such fundamental questions. Questions that I’m continually asking and receive no answers to such as:

“What is the true size of the reserves and why after putting up with austerity policies for decades do Singaporeans receive so little from their Government compared to citizens of countries with debts and few assets?

POFMA’s main objective is to keep the PAP and its Ministers in power, enjoying enormous salaries and using the bloated state sector and the sovereign wealth funds built up through the people’s sacrifices to employ their spouses and relatives on frequently secret but undoubtedly high compensation packages.

The Singapore that we used to so proudly boast of as a meritocracy is no more. Singapore operates for a select few while ordinary Singaporeans run the hamster wheel, afraid to get off in case their family perishes.

Splitting Hairs

I stand by my comments in the article. This time “factually’ got it wrong. They’re splitting hairs. No two economists ever have the same opinion and we’re not going to agree over what I say “should” be achieved in rental income and what I consider to be the “peanut “rents actually achieved. Note my use of the word “should” “The difference between what the land should have yielded on the open market and the rents Shanmugam and Balakrishnan are paying would alone have paid for a couple of treatments for babies born with SMA a year or paid for dialysis for at least 100 patients a year.“

Ironically I got that estimation wrong. On re-examination I believe the difference would pay for treatment for 5 babies born with SMA a year or 250 dialysis patients. I didn’t receive a POFMA for that!

Please read my blog again. Let me know if the meaning is unclear. I think I was and I am, being crystal clear.

SLA is a failure.

It has managed the land and properties on behalf of our people so badly that were it to be funds I was managing on behalf of an investor I would be fired. It needs stripping down from the CEO appointed by Shanmugam to the group of valuers doing such a shoddy job.

If I were managing SLA would I achieve higher rents by several quantums?- Yes

In a nutshell I am stating my belief that the land is being badly managed by SLA. So badly that in my opinion it constitutes a failure to safeguard the reserves. No matter how it has historically been valued, I am saying how it “should be valued”. If you employ, time and time again, the same valuers who historically undervalue it, then you are going to continue to get a guide rent that is low in comparison. More than this we need to have a robust debate on how the land and property could be better used for the community so that everyone gets a bite of the cake.

Selective Facts

To support their assertions the SLA produced figures for other properties which it spent large sums on renovating. However all these properties involved asbestos removal which wasn’t necessary at 26 and 31 Ridout Road. Asbestos is highly carcinogenic and its removal is particularly costly and hazardous. Usually it involves tearing down most of the original building and rebuilding.

Are Shanmugam, Teo Chee Hean and the SLA trying to pull the wool over your eyes by comparing oranges with bananas?- Yes

A Better Yield

Together the Ministers are paying a little over $550,000 p.a. for about 410,000 square feet of land. I will ignore MinLaw’s claims that rentals are based on Gross Floor Area (GFA) as this enables them to confuse with rentals on properties sitting on much smaller plots of land. In November 2022 a 53,000 sq foot plot in Holland Rise was offered for sale at $106 million or $2,000 per sq foot. Ridout is closer to Orchard Road and the CBD. If we apply that valuation to 26 and 31 we arrive at a total value of $820 million. Putting that on a 4% rental yield means that the land should be capable of yielding roughly $33 million a year. Even on a 2% yield it should be capable of yielding $16.5 million a year.

Shanmugam’s Ministry tries to argue that these were conservation properties and that Shanmugam and Balakrishnan were paying guide rents set by market valuers.

Has SLA explained why the properties were left vacant for so long or why the previous tenants left and what costs their leases forced them to bear? No

So many gaps in the information. So many questions still not answered. Singaporean are suffering while. Shanmugam plays whack-a-mole using POFMA.

At this point I am starting to get seriously concerned that in fact Shan and Vivien are holding the reins and they are running the country, not the PM because the POFMAs directed at me are about protecting them.

Next GE we need to issue this bunch a Correction Notice at the ballot box. Let’s remove their massive majority and get 30+ % of seats occupied by the opposition.

Published by kjeyaretnam

I'm a Singaporean economist who became an opposition activist. I blog to provide an alternative to the porkies that the Pinkies tell. It just so happens that my alternative is the truth. That's why I've never been sued in any civil or criminal court no matter how hard hitting my criticism. I'm quoted and interviewed and asked to speak across the world but largely censored in Singapore in an effort to silence my political opinions. The left hate me because they think I split their vote and because I eschew their outmoded economic models. Models that don't work. The Right and the Conservatives hate me because I'm a liberal. I'm not sure what the middle think of me. I don't think there are more than a handful of people in the middle, here in Singapore. I'm a Singaporean born and bred, dual heritage, my parents Singaporean established here before the State of Singapore was created. I'm not Eurasian. I read economics at Cambridge and could be broadly described as from the Keynesian school but I believe in interventions. I was formerly a successful hedge fund manager. After economics and politics my greatest interests are history, film and Makan. I run but I run so I can eat like a Singaporean. View all posts by kjeyaretnam