SINGAPORE – From potential and actual conflicts of interest to why the Singapore Land Authority (SLA) forks out money to upkeep black-and-white bungalows, MPs aired questions for close to six hours on Monday about Minister for Law and Home Affairs K. Shanmugam and Foreign Minister Vivian Balakrishnan renting Ridout Road properties.
Here are the key takeaways:
Declaration requirement for public servants
To prevent conflict of interest, public servants who have access to or are involved in government property leasing or valuation matters will soon have to make a declaration before they can rent such properties managed by their agencies.
These officers will have to declare that they have taken adequate steps to prevent any conflict of interest from arising before they can rent these properties.
Senior Minister Teo Chee Hean said the Public Service Division (PSD) will introduce a standard declaration requirement for this selected group of officers.
PSD will work with relevant ministries and statutory boards such as the Housing Board, JTC Corporation, National Environment Agency and Singapore Land Authority (SLA) to do so.
Why it matters:
Mr Teo emphasised the importance of a clean government and upholding integrity among those in public service – whether elected, or public officers.
The new declaration would mean the officers in organisations who have access to privileged information or who can influence the outcomes of decisions, will have to take this extra step of making a declaration before they can rent the government properties managed by their agencies.
These properties include commercial and residential state properties such as black-and-white bungalows, terraced units, factory or office spaces, business parks, and shops in neighbourhood centres, as well as hawker and market stalls.
Actual, potential and perceived conflicts of interest
Mr Teo said that in the case of 26 Ridout Road, a conflict of interest could have arisen if Mr Shanmugam had remained in the chain of command exercising authority over the renting out of this property.
However, Mr Shanmugam identified the potential conflict and removed himself from the chain of command and decision making process.
He said that he had asked the Deputy Secretary of the Ministry of Law (MinLaw) to send him a list of available properties so that there was total transparency.
Instead of asking SLA directly, Mr Shanmugam said the Deputy Secretary would have informed the Permanent Secretary, who would be able to report to the head of the Civil Service or the Prime Minister if he felt the need to.
Why it matters:
Several MPs questioned whether Mr Shanmugam asking his Deputy Secretary for a list of properties that were available for the public to rent represented a conflict of interest. SLA comes under the MinLaw.
The report by the Corrupt Practices Investigation Bureau (CPIB) found that Mr Shanmugam had recused himself from the rental process of the 26 Ridout Road property and found no evidence of corruption or criminal wrongdoing.
It also concluded that there was no disclosure of privileged information in the process of the rental transaction.
Why the ministers decided to rent
Mr Shanmugam wanted to move out from and sell his good-class bungalow in Astrid Hill and live in a rental property. This was after he was advised it would be wiser not to have most of one’s savings in one asset.
Mr Shanmugam said he looked at several rental properties, including black-and-white houses which he had long admired.
For Dr Balakrishnan, his family decided to rent 31 Ridout Road so that his extended family could live together while his grandchildren are still young.
Why it matters:
Both ministers gave statements in Parliament, explaining their reasons for renting state properties.
Dr Balakrishnan decided to rent 31 Ridout Road despite the property being in an “advanced state of disrepair” and did extensive repairs to make the house liveable.
He said his family has spent more than $200,000 on improvement works to the property, despite knowing that the money spent “cannot be recovered when the tenancy expires”.
Mr Shanmugam said that most of the rent paid for 26 Ridout Road – $26,500 – comes mostly from renting out his family home. However, there is a deficit which he makes up for by income he earned while he was a lawyer.
SLA’s investment on the upkeep of the houses
SLA invests a significant amount in upkeeping and maintaining conserved black-and-white bungalows, including 26 and 31 Ridout Road, said Second Minister for Law Edwin Tong.
In a ministerial statement to Parliament on Monday, Mr Tong chalked down the cost to complying with stringent conservation requirements for conserved properties, as well as ensuring they are fit for tenancy.
He added that the works done by SLA were in keeping with SLA’s general practices. The SLA engaged consultants with experience in dealing with heritage properties, to survey the property and identify the necessary improvement and maintenance works to be done for both properties.
Why it matters:
The authority incurred $375,000 in maintenance costs, and another $140,000 was spent on “sprucing-up works prior to the commencement of a tenancy” at the property, including painting, pest control and the removal of mould for 26 Ridout Road.
Meanwhile, extensive work on the roof of 31 Ridout Road and other heritage features cost around $452,000, and the sprucing-up work cost around $118,000, Mr Tong said.
Why SM Teo and CPIB helmed the review
Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong told Parliament that Mr Teo is his most senior minister in terms of years in Cabinet and experience.
He noted that some MPs had suggested on Monday that Mr Teo was not sufficiently independent to conduct the investigation, but PM Lee said he viewed it differently.
For corruption and wrongdoing, there is an independent process in place, such as the CPIB investigation and referral to the Attorney-General’s Chambers.
“But ethics and standards of propriety – those are the prime minister’s responsibility. I have to set the standards of what’s ethical, what’s proper,” he said.
“I cannot outsource them. For example, to appoint an ethics adviser to tell me what is proper or not proper. I have to know what is proper or not. Otherwise I shouldn’t be here.”
Why it matters:
Workers’ Party MPs Leon Perera (Aljunied GRC) and He Ting Ru (Sengkang GRC) questioned if there were other individuals who were considered to head the review and why an independent third party such as the Auditor-General’s Office or an independent judge could not have done so instead of SM Teo, who is a senior colleague of the ministers concerned.
Mr Teo was also aware of Mr Shanmugam wanting to rent an SLA property at the time.
According to the report, Mr Shanmugam told the then Deputy Secretary that he should approach then Senior Minister of State in MinLaw, Ms Indranee Rajah, on discussions related to the rental of the property should the matter have to be referred to the Minister.
He then informed SM Teo if the matter had to go beyond Ms Indranee, she would approach him.
There was no matter raised by SLA to MinLaw during the entire rental process.
If you have a few more minutes…
Mr Shanmugam’s son not involved in contract work
Mr Tong clarified that the suggestion that Mr Shanmugam’s son and his company, Livspace, were appointed to do contract work on 26 and 31 Ridout Road is “completely scurrilous and unwarranted”.
The works that a consultant recommended were awarded to a contractor through a tender and Livspace was not an appointed contractor. Neither did they have any transactions with SLA from the quick checks that SLA did since allegations began to surface online.
Mr Shanmugam said his son told him that his company does not have any contracts with SLA, nor did they do any work on the Ridout Road properties for SLA.
He said: “You want to come after me, you come after me. I’m perfectly capable of defending myself... But leave my family alone.”
