Ridout Road Bungalows Rental Saga

[Spidey10]

On 6/1/2023 at 8:43 AM, SGMCF328 said:

A good read.

The author, Harpreet Singh Nehal is a Senior Counsel. A graduate of National University of Singapore, Harvard Law School and a former Justices’ Law Clerk, he was previously a partner of Drew & Napier and later of the UK Magic Circle law firm, Clifford Chance. In 2019, he established his own boutique litigation firm, Audent Chambers, where he is managing partner. He is also a member of Harvard Law School’s Leadership Council of Asia.

Strengthening the Singapore system: the Ridout saga and conflicts of interest

Source: https://www.jom.media/strengthening-the-singapore-system-the-ridout-saga-and-conflicts-of-interest/

Incorruptibility is a bedrock principle upon which Singapore is built. We have every reason to be proud of this legacy. Inevitably, there are going to be times in our national life when circumstances will test our commitment to this foundational value. But such times also offer an important opportunity to strengthen our system. This is one of those seasons.

Over the past few months, several matters have caused some unease among Singaporeans. These include senior Keppel executives being given stern warnings in lieu of prosecution for their involvement in a massive, decade-long bribery scheme in Brazil; and the decision by Tin Pei Ling, a member of parliament (MP) with the ruling People’s Action Party (PAP), to accept a senior public affairs and policy role with Grab, while simultaneously being chairperson of a seemingly associated Government Parliamentary Committee. Tin later gave up that role after significant public disquiet.

Most recently came news that Home Affairs and Law Minister K Shanmugam and Foreign Affairs Minister Vivian Balakrishnan had leased bungalows on Ridout Road from the Singapore Land Authority (SLA), a government statutory board falling under the former’s oversight. Three days ago, Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong announced that a review into this matter will be conducted by Senior Minister (SM) Teo Chee Hean (who’s also Coordinating Minister for National Security).

Clearly, the optics of a minister entering a transaction with an agency under his oversight are less than favourable. It has, however, been suggested by some that where a rental or other similar opportunity is open to the world at large, there can be no serious objection with cabinet ministers (or their family members) participating in their capacity as private citizens. The matter needs to be approached with some nuance.

First, a Ministerial Code of Conduct has been promulgated to avoid actual or apparent conflicts of interests. Absent an independent agency or formal mechanism through which any potential conflict of interest by a minister has to be cleared, there is a good argument to be made that there must be scrupulous observance of the Code. It’s not even a matter of actual wrongdoing—as long as a transaction involving a minister can create the perception of special treatment, it must be avoided.

Second, even if it is felt that that is too strict a position, any government transactions involving ministers (or their family members) must be subject to important caveats: there must be robust processes in place to deal with any actual or apparent conflicts of interest, and these must be scrupulously observed; full and frank disclosure is made that the counterparty is a minister (or their family member); there is no misuse of confidential, non-public information; the minister receives no favourable treatment; the government agency reaches its decision independently and impartially; and the resulting transaction is done on objectively verifiable and fair commercial terms. The safeguard cannot merely involve notification to a senior cabinet colleague. It needs to be much more robust and transparent.

Third, given the realities of modern life and the expansive reach of the government and government-linked companies in practically every aspect of Singaporean life, we can expect there to be yet more instances of dealings between ministers and MPs (and members of their families) with government agencies and regulators, whether in relation to business, appointments, jobs, licences, or approvals. However robust our processes for addressing possible conflicts of interest in such dealings, delicate and perhaps even blunt, uncomfortable questions will inevitably arise. We must embrace, not disparage, such questions.

The questions, and proper responses to them, are essential in demonstrating our commitment to ensuring that any arrangements involving senior government officials (or their family members) are completely above board. Probing questions also provide us with a valuable opportunity to consider whether existing safeguards and practices are good enough. At heart, when Singaporeans ask uncomfortable questions, it is because we care for our country and wish to see it grow stronger.

As I wrote in my recent commentary on the Keppel bribery scandal: “...[d]oubts which strike at the foundation of our commitment to incorruptibility and the rule of law must never be allowed to take root.” It is the responsibility of every concerned citizen to press the necessary questions, and for the government to rigorously and fairly attend to them to dispel even the slightest perception of anything less than fair play or transparent dealings.

With these observations in mind, the ultimate credibility and effectiveness of the government’s review into the Ridout Road leases will turn on two points.

First, full disclosure of all material facts. Suffice to say, the review should cover the following:

• What processes the government has in place to deal with any actual or apparent conflicts of interest and how they were followed in this case;
• What were the reason(s) the Minister for Home Affairs and Law submitted his bid via an agent and did the SLA know that the minister was the ultimate principal behind the bid? If so, how, and when did the SLA come to know this? If not, how was the SLA to effectively abide by any protocols to avoid possible conflicts of interest without this information?;
• Did the SLA take independent advice from the Attorney General’s Chambers on the processes it should put in place to ensure a level playing field existed and to address any possible conflicts of interest? If not, what steps did the SLA take to properly address this?;
• Apart from not disclosing the guide rent, what steps did the SLA take to ensure that the ministers were not in any advantageous position over the world at large in relation to the rentals of both bungalows?;
• What is the recent history of the tenancies of both properties and under what circumstances did the previous tenants come to leave each property?;
• Why did both properties remain vacant for such an extended period before the leases to the ministers were granted? What steps did the SLA take to rent out the properties in that time?;
• The full costs of the renovations to each property and who bore them;
• The period for which each property was advertised and whether that period was adequate to secure properly competitive bids;
• The rent payable for each property, how that was derived and how it compares with market rent;
• The lease renewal terms for each property; and
• Were there any non-standard tenancy terms negotiated with either minister and, if so, what were those terms?

Ideally, the review should also disclose copies of both tenancy agreements, as well as all key written communications between the SLA and the ministers (or their agents) leading up to the entry and renewals of the leases, including the renovations. The Singaporean public appreciates the issues, and knows when the government’s responses are fair, in as much as it knows when there are shortcomings. The more detailed, thorough and wide-ranging the review report, the greater its ultimate credibility.

Second, the perceived independence of the review. There is nothing more powerful to address concerns of possible conflicts of interest than oversight or review by a respected, independent, external third party who is given full access and who then reports the findings publicly.

This is where the planned review will face some challenges.

To give credit where it is due, the May 24th statement from the Prime Minister’s Office records that both the affected ministers had requested “a review that is independent of the ministries and agencies they supervise”. The government has also appointed SM Teo, one of the most senior cabinet ministers, to lead the review. There is no question of SM Teo’s seniority and standing and the fact that he is independent of the relevant ministries and agencies involved in this case.

At the same time, SM Teo is from the same party as the two ministers, and is also their cabinet colleague, in the same executive branch of government. Given this, and the importance and political sensitivity of the matter under review, it is not unreasonable for an objective observer to take the view that there ought to be a greater degree of separation between the individual heading this review and the ministers involved. Here, there would have been much to commend the appointment of any of our Supreme Court judges, current or retired, to lead this review. It is still early enough in the review process for the government to adjust course and do so.

Singapore’s national culture of incorruptibility is a precious legacy we have inherited. It needs to be carefully nurtured and preserved by each successive generation. Uncomfortable as questions or commentaries may be about the Ridout Road leases, they present us an opportunity to reinforce our commitment to this core national value.

add one more point - both KS and VB should be suspended from their official duties pending the completion of the review! You know those FBI/CIA movies where the accused are relief of their duties for the time being until they are cleared...that should show there are independency/impartiality in the system..

[13177]

On 6/1/2023 at 7:21 AM, Fcw75 said:

Faster divert attention. Their playbook is really 老套。

https://www.channelnewsasia.com/singapore/cpib-investigates-seatrium-keppel-corruption-brazil-3528141?cid=internal_sharetool_iphone_01062023_cna

老套 and yet it is effective, and people are buying it. 🙄

[Fcw75]

On 6/1/2023 at 9:01 AM, Spidey10 said:

add one more point - both KS and VB should be suspended from their official duties pending the completion of the review! You know those FBI/CIA movies where the accused are relief of their duties for the time being until they are cleared...that should show there are independency/impartiality in the system..

Errrr….🙄

At the same time, SM Teo is from the same party as the two ministers, and is also their cabinet colleague, in the same executive branch of government.

Someone said this wor:

Edited June 1, 2023 by Fcw75

[Mkl22]

On 6/1/2023 at 7:21 AM, Fcw75 said:

Faster divert attention. Their playbook is really 老套。

https://www.channelnewsasia.com/singapore/cpib-investigates-seatrium-keppel-corruption-brazil-3528141?cid=internal_sharetool_iphone_01062023_cna

Aiyoh we are becoming like our neighbors up north. 
everytime there is a political issue the old man there will tekan us over water. But since we are a small red dot got no other country to tekan, we can only tekan the opposition. Probably the reesah khan saga might restart again? Or got any new pattern? 

[Spidey10]

On 6/1/2023 at 9:03 AM, Fcw75 said:

Errrr….🙄

At the same time, SM Teo is from the same party as the two ministers, and is also their cabinet colleague, in the same executive branch of government.

Someone said this wor:

ignore him...

you know, I know, we all know....

ownself CKT ownself ......learn from a bro here..

[Fcw75]

On 6/1/2023 at 9:05 AM, Mkl22 said:

Aiyoh we are becoming like our neighbors up north. 
everytime there is a political issue the old man there will tekan us over water. But since we are a small red dot got no other country to tekan, we can only tekan the opposition. Probably the reesah khan saga might restart again? Or got any new pattern? 

Yes, probably the WP saga.

In its statement on Wednesday, CPIB said it "investigates without fear" and would not hesitate to take action against any parties involved in corrupt activities.

Hahaha…really hor? CPIB under who ah?

[Spidey10]

On 6/1/2023 at 9:05 AM, Mkl22 said:

Aiyoh we are becoming like our neighbors up north. 
everytime there is a political issue the old man there will tekan us over water. But since we are a small red dot got no other country to tekan, we can only tekan the opposition. Probably the reesah khan saga might restart again? Or got any new pattern? 

yah ah....so many years we differentiate between our taiko neighbor up north...actually is there any difference? 

[Spidey10]

On 6/1/2023 at 9:02 AM, 13177 said:

老套 and yet it is effective, and people are buying it. 🙄

found someone who is going to take the fall....or a scapegoat...

[inlinesix]

This is a shit show.

Nothing will happens.

Not many market for offshore digging rig now.

It is either more ppl loss their job or close both eyes.

[SuPerBoRed]

what's there to stir? its an open bidding system.. everyone can rent from SLA ... if someone come and show proof they offered a higher bid and they still didnt get it .. then got grounds? 

[Victor68]

On 6/1/2023 at 9:45 AM, SuPerBoRed said:

what's there to stir? its an open bidding system.. everyone can rent from SLA ... if someone come and show proof they offered a higher bid and they still didnt get it .. then got grounds? 

Open means we should already know what was the rent paid, no need to wait for July, correct? 

[SGMCF328]

On 6/1/2023 at 9:45 AM, SuPerBoRed said:

what's there to stir? its an open bidding system.. everyone can rent from SLA ... if someone come and show proof they offered a higher bid and they still didnt get it .. then got grounds? 

I had the same thought as you when I first read about this saga. But as more and more information are shared online - with photos, screenshots and news article, especially the rather extensive makeover of the 2 Ridout units, I am starting to wonder if there's any infringement to existing regulations for say conserved building and preserved trees.

Changes at 26 Ridout Road (2018 to 2022)

Changes at 31 Ridout Road (2012 to 2022)

And the the response by SLA on 12 May mentioned these:

26 Ridout Road had been vacant for more than 4 years since December 2013 before it was tenanted to Mr K Shanmugam in June 2018. Mr Shanmugam was the only bidder for this property. His offer, made through an agent, was higher than the Guide Rent, which was not disclosed to him. Mr Shanmugam notified a senior Cabinet colleague that he was making a bid for the property. Mr Shanmugam renewed the tenancy for this property in June 2021 for another 3 years.

Source: https://www.sla.gov.sg/articles/highlights/2023/response-to-media-queries-regarding-kenneth-jeyaretnam-s-social-media-posts-on-the-rental-of-no-26-and-31-ridout-road

As Singapore Land Authority (SLA) falls under Ministry of Law, which K. Shamungam take the helm of, questions such as who set the guide rent, who approve them, and how to ensure that it was not disclosed to him become crucial. This is akin to insider trading in a business organization, where the director bought or sold company shares prior to announcement which have an impact on the share price. 

[inlinesix]

On 6/1/2023 at 4:15 PM, SGMCF328 said:

As Singapore Land Authority (SLA) falls under Ministry of Law, which K. Shamungam take the helm of, questions such as who set the guide rent, who approve them, and how to ensure that it was not disclosed to him become crucial. This is akin to insider trading in a business organization, where the director bought or sold company shares prior to announcement which have an impact on the share price. 

In my previous job, every stuff especially Finance Staff will be told about the blackout period for the trading of Holding Co shares.

[Victor68]

On 6/1/2023 at 4:21 PM, inlinesix said:

In my previous job, every stuff especially Finance Staff will be told about the blackout period for the trading of Holding Co shares.

Yeah lah, he waited 4 years before he came across this vacancy mah. Then he tell his good friend the good news. 😆

[Meanmachine]

On 5/29/2023 at 7:09 AM, Spidey10 said:

I also read an article by a person who has tenanted these B&W houses before....can say a good descriptive of how the bidding went and SLA is very transparent in dealing in the bidding process. I am sure they will share all these and am sure (ownself check ownself) nothing will happen...all happy, no case and move on... 

However, i think there is a bigger issue here, if I am Pappies, and look deeper into this case....I mean not this case, but look at the reaction of the commenters and pple in general...it does not augur well for the sentiment of PAP team in general ...i mean something on the ground is not right...

they could have won the battle....but i think they might be losing the popularity war....i believ this is a bigger impact that the case here 

just my 2 cents 

    Indeed, Since the main story are focused on the 2 colonial plots, pretty sure it has more sour pickings over the rest, the time frame scheduled in July has given sufficient ground works and researches on past rentals transacted & the possibility of how it could be ended up if left unchecked, as it's a prime area mean't only for expats living in the past, this malpractices have crossed the line . . . it concerns us Citizens how the Governing bodies does thing and if thy can cover it up by sweeping under the carpet thy will, and please don't say thing like it a honest mistake, let's move on, if they are talking about relatively minister w/o portfolio then it's another story. The two senior ministers have set a poor example . . . really don't know what they were thinking . . . . I cannot agree that No such thing as No case and move on . . . we cannot allow these episode to white wash ourselves pretending all is ok and everything is well, our trust in them has been broken & the confidence has been tarnished . .  Of course the ground and tunnels are definitely moved by many of us as we had never before hear this kind of story.😪

[Volvobrick]

On 6/1/2023 at 4:15 PM, SGMCF328 said:

I had the same thought as you when I first read about this saga. But as more and more information are shared online - with photos, screenshots and news article, especially the rather extensive makeover of the 2 Ridout units, I am starting to wonder if there's any infringement to existing regulations for say conserved building and preserved trees.

Changes at 26 Ridout Road (2018 to 2022)

Changes at 31 Ridout Road (2012 to 2022)

And the the response by SLA on 12 May mentioned these:

26 Ridout Road had been vacant for more than 4 years since December 2013 before it was tenanted to Mr K Shanmugam in June 2018. Mr Shanmugam was the only bidder for this property. His offer, made through an agent, was higher than the Guide Rent, which was not disclosed to him. Mr Shanmugam notified a senior Cabinet colleague that he was making a bid for the property. Mr Shanmugam renewed the tenancy for this property in June 2021 for another 3 years.

Source: https://www.sla.gov.sg/articles/highlights/2023/response-to-media-queries-regarding-kenneth-jeyaretnam-s-social-media-posts-on-the-rental-of-no-26-and-31-ridout-road

As Singapore Land Authority (SLA) falls under Ministry of Law, which K. Shamungam take the helm of, questions such as who set the guide rent, who approve them, and how to ensure that it was not disclosed to him become crucial. This is akin to insider trading in a business organization, where the director bought or sold company shares prior to announcement which have an impact on the share price. 

Vacant for 4 years. Should sack the staff/agent in charge of renting out. How much efforts were put in? 

Or was renovations carried out during those 4 years? Like adding a big pool. 

So many questions, so little answers. 

Edited June 2, 2023 by Volvobrick

[Victor68]

In our tiny red dot, if we are wasting public funds for the enjoyment of individual, party concerned should be punished. Either we release it for public to enjoy or maximize the return. Why privilege individuals? 

[Freeder]

On 6/2/2023 at 12:47 PM, Volvobrick said:

Vacant for 4 years. Should sack the staff/agent in charge of renting out. How much efforts were put in? 

Or was renovations carried out during those 4 years? Like adding a big pool. 

So many questions, so little answers. 

Vacant for 4 fricking yrs at this prime area? 

The dept head should be fired ASAP and held accountable for the rental loss ..

What cigS are they smoking? Really ununununbelievable.. KNN.