This is a review from a statistical perspective, wherever possible, of the book “Reflections on housing a nation”, launched on 22 March. (You can read it here for free and save yourself ten dollars. – Editor)


Leong Sze Hian/

In Part Four (“Buying a flat? Choose wisely”), the Minister for National Development wrote:

“Average household incomes have also increased almost four times over the same period, from $1,500 in 1987 to $5,700 in 2008”

We should be using the median income when we are talking about the affordability of HDB flats, instead of average household incomes.

In this connection, the median household income from work of Chinese, Malays, Indians and others grew by 6.6, 3.6, 4.6 and 4.3 per cent per annum, respectively, from 2000 to 2010.

Against this, the HDB Resale Price Index grew by about 6.7 per cent per annum, from 2001 to 2010.

So, perhaps for a lot of Singaporeans, their incomes may not have been able to catch up with the rising HDB prices, over the last nine years or so.

Since median income is half the population of households, particularly lower income households may have found the affordability of HDB flats an increasing issue, especially in the last four years, when HDB prices rose by about 66 per cent.

Private developers sell public housing?

“To provide greater choice and variety of higher income buyers, HDB allowed private developers to participate in public housing projects, first through the Executive Condominium (EC) Housing Scheme in the 1990s, and later through the Design, Build and Sell Scheme (DBSS) in the 2000s”

This fundamental departure in housing policy from the HDB’s original mission to provide affordable public housing to ordinary (lower income?) Singaporeans, may have been a major contributing factor to rising HDB flat prices.

This is because every EC or DBSS flat that is built at much higher prices than HDB flats, may push up overall HDB prices, as well as reducing supply on a relative basis, as there are trade-offs between building EC and DBSS versus HDB, in land scarce Singapore.

I understand that for about five years prior to 2010, there were almost no EC launches.

Why was this so?

Was it because the HDB refused to lower land prices, such that no developer found it viable to build ECs for about five years?

Wrong type of flats?

“With economic growth becoming more volatile in the late 1990s and 2000s, HDB resumed the building of three-room flats in 2001 and two-room flats in 2006.  These flats provided options for lower income households and those wanting to right-size their homes as they age”

This may have been poor planning by the HDB, in assuming that the demand would be for bigger flats.

Otherwise, how do you explain what I understand to be that two and three-room flats, have had the highest rate of increase in prices, in recent years?

In this regard, prices for three-room BTO flats at the latest Compassvale Ancilla in Sengkang, in March, start from a whopping $194,000!

———

End of Part 4

Also read Part 3 here

Mr Leong has beaten Mr Mah by publishing a book in 2008. It has no pictures but at 186 pages (with Chinese translation), is more value for money. You can buy it here!

 

Subscribe
Notify of
0 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
You May Also Like

Medishield – Why burden the elderly further?

Why raise premiums by $480 for elderly?

NSP: “EBRC again issued a disappointing report”

The National Solidarity Party (NSP) has strongly criticised the report released on…

爱狗人士揭小狗被安乐死 反遭饲主指恶意泄隐私报警

一名动物福利组织工作人员日前在脸书上透露,所送出去领养的小狗,因为饲主家庭迎来了小宝宝,怕宝宝被咬而将小狗送去人道毁灭,引起网民争议。然而,之后领养家庭却报警,指工作人员在脸书上恶意泄露个人隐私,工作人员被召到警局问话后,将有关的帖文撤下。 在Exclusively Mongrels Limited工作的Theng Wei Gan,于周三(5月3日)在脸书上帖文,表示他两年半前帮忙找到主人、身体健康的小狗,却被饲主送去人道毁灭,原因是饲主上个月迎来了新生宝宝,怕小狗会咬到宝宝。 Theng Wei Gan对小狗的命运抱不平,指小狗再过两个月就三岁了,而且饲主其实还有其他的选择,不一定要将狗狗送去人道毁灭。 “为什么你不在过去九个月请一名训狗师,为Loki(小狗)也为你们做好准备迎接宝宝的到来?……你们也可以把Loki还给我们,我们一定竭尽所能的为它找一个新家。” “选错主人”,他向小狗致歉,并认为饲主一家的行为无情,不配养狗。他也认为饲主夫妻有违“人道毁灭”的意义,因为安乐死本是为了结束痛苦而安排的人道手法,却不是用于夺命的判决。 据小狗饲主指出,小狗有咬人的先例,包括曾经咬过一名小女孩和饲主本身,因此害怕小宝宝会遭殃,在为小狗寻找下一个主人失败后,决定这样结束小狗的生命。…