HDB: Most cruel heartless policy change ever?

By Leong Sze Hian

I refer to the article “Rental Relief: Two-year rent freeze for low-income earners whose monthly wages cross the $800 threshold” (Straits Times, Jun 20).

So good – waive 2 years?

It states that “Instead, their rents will stay unchanged for two years. They will get another two-year waiver should their household income still remain low compared to the rent increase they face. This will be decided by the Housing Board on a case-by-case basis.”

Most cruel heartless policy change?

In my analysis and articles on HDB (I think  I have written over 100) over the last decade plus or so, this “HDB rental increase” policy change implemented on 1 March 2007, is in my view, the most “heartless” and “cruel”  HDB policy change ever implemented.

Can you imagine what life is like for a family’s household income to be just over $800? To change the policy to increase those families whose household income cross the $800 benchmark, from $26 to $33 rental, to $90 to $123 – is beyond human reasoning.

Was Parliament sleeping?

What was the HDB thinking in November 2006, when it announced this policy change? What were our Ministers and MPs thinking at that time, when they allowed such a cruel heartless policy change to be effected?

Over 80,000 letters of appeal? 

What is this “will be decided by the Housing Board on a case-by-case basis” nonsense? How many of the 5,500 letters of appeal that MPs wrote to the HDB, from just 1 GRC in 2012 – were approved? If just 1 GRC wrote 5,500 letters of appeal to HDB in 1 year, how many letters did all the GRCs send to the HDB? (“5,500 letters of appeal on HDB in 2012 in 1 GRC?“, Jan 17)

What about all those HDB rental increase victims who can’t go to the MPS session (same night every week) because they are on a permanent work shift which clashes with the MPS night, or those who have mobility problems, or those who are not savvy enough to know that they can appeal to their MPs, etc?

In this regard, since “There were 1,869 tenants who have crossed the $800 income mark. Mr Khaw said in his blog, and 1,004 of them have been granted a waiver on appeal” – what about the other 865 tenants who were not “granted a waiver on appeal” – they got rejected or what? Or they didn’t appeal or what? Or they can afford the increase even though they earned only $801 to $1,500 or what?

Case-by-case basis?

In this connection, I used to write to the newspaper forums on HDB matters (I think I have been quoted over 500 times in the newspaper forums) – and the HDB’s replies in the early years almost always invariably will say that Singaporeans can always appeal the the HDB on a case-by-case basis.

So, one fine day, I got fed-up and wrote to a newspaper forum to ask the HDB to give the statistics as to how many appeals they receive and how many did they approve in a year? – I don’t think I ever got an answer!

On a side note (just to quash a rumour that I have been banned by the newspaper forums) – its just that I have stopped writing letters to the forums because the online blogs’ editors have asked me to try to put out my analysis and commentary whenever the news breaks (note: newspaper forums can take as long as 5 days to publish your letter) – if possible by the same day evening – so, I can’t write to the forums as they only accept unpublished writings.

Sleeping in the last 2 years?

As to “The propect of such a rise may also inadvertently   discourage some tenants from “working hard to improve their incomes”, he added, noting that it was Emeritus Senior Minister Goh Chok Tong who had alerted him to the phenomenon two years ago” – why did it take so long (2 years) – what were you doing these 2 years, whilst hundreds of tenants suffered the financial pains of a rental hike of as much as 273 % ($123 divided by $33)?

In this connection, I used to get calls or SMS on HDB payment problems practically every week during my 3 year plus stint as a Chinese Radio talkshow host (about 1 hour show weekly) – and my suggestion in addition to seeing their MP, was to ask their employer if they could pay the salary increase in kind (milk powder or something) so that they may not end up having a negative net cashflow when their pay increase (for example employer increase $50 (last year’s NWC recommendation for workers earning less than $1,000) from $760 t0 $810 – HDB rental increase by $90 from $33 to $123 = net $40 decrease in cashflow – make sense or not?).

Parliament sleeping?

With regard to “She (MP Lily Neo) sees three to five cases a week of residents pleading for a waiver of their rent hike at her Meet-the-People Session” – is this not indicative of how useless or ineffective our MPs in Parliament have been all these years, when as I understand it practically every year, MPs bring up the problems of their residents affected by this cruel heartless HDB rental increase policy change – and the policy is still there – now so kind – only delay 2 years or more than 2 years still on a case-by-case basis!

What was Parliament thinking (where was (and is) your conscience then and now?), when you allowed this cruel heartless policy change to go unchallenged in Parliament in November 2006.

Very very sad, sigh?

Don’t the Ministers, MPs, MND and the HDB realise that this cruel heartless policy is adding another huge burden to these low-income families who’s real income growth in the last 5 years or so,  I believe, was negative?

Back in time to Nov 2006?

In this connection, allow me to reproduce a letter I wrote then (November 2006) on this issue:

“17 Nov 2006