from: Workers’ Party/

This release seeks to enlighten the public about what transpired in the weeks after the May General Election, which has led to the current controversy about use of public spaces by residents of Aljunied GRC to organise events.

Background Facts
On 21 June 2011, the interim Secretary of Aljunied-Hougang Town Council (AHTC) received an email from the Housing and Development Board (HDB) entitled: “Sites Excluded from the Management of Aljunied-Hougang Town Council”. The email attached a list of sites to be excluded from AHTC management, including 26 sites commonly used for community activities which had previously been managed by the former Aljunied Town Council. No background nor rationale was given for the decision.

Upon further and repeated enquiries from AHTC, HDB revealed on 13 July 2011 that these sites had been leased to the People’s Association (PA), in 2 tranches – on 27 May 2011 and 13 June 2011. The AHTC had thus been informed retrospectively of this decision, which to our knowledge has not been published anywhere.

A check on the sites, which were part of the common property managed by the former Aljunied Town Council but now leased to PA, showed that many of them are strategically located, being hard courts or amphitheatres highly suitable for organising social activities. We were puzzled about the intention behind the move, which occurred before the new management took over the estate. We are left to conclude that the decision by the HDB to shift management of these common properties from the Town Council to the PA was precipitated by the victory of the Workers’ Party in Aljunied GRC in the General Elections.

In order not to subject residents to unnecessary inconvenience and confusion, I sought a meeting with the HDB for clarification, and on 13 July 2011 conveyed to the HDB AHTC’s willingness to discuss the matter further with the PA, to explore joint use of the excluded sites. HDB then followed up with the PA. In an email to me dated 15 Aug 2011, the PA indicated that “booking by WP will not be allowed”, which we assume includes bookings for activities organised by WP MPs for residents.

Effect of HDB’s Decision as Landowner
During the weeks in July / early August leading to the lunar Seventh Month festivities, residents of Paya Lebar Division gave feedback that they were informed by the PA grassroots organisations to apply for the use of the said sites to the Paya Lebar Citizens Consultative Committee (CCC) instead of to the Town Council as was the previous practice. We also received feedback that those who had applied to the CCC for the permits were told verbally that they could not invite the elected WP MP or they would risk their applications being turned down in subsequent years.

Residents have told us that they are confused by the new requirements of the CCC and annoyed by the intense politicking by the PA grassroots organizations. They felt torn and in an emotional dilemma.

Political Implications
It appears to us that the unilateral decision by the HDB to lease these sites to the PA and to have them excluded from common property under the management of AHTC without any consultation with the AHTC or its elected members is politically motivated and an abuse of power.

First, the HDB as part of the government machinery is abusing its power as land owner of common property in HDB estates to help PA to achieve the political objectives of a) preventing elected MPs from holding activities at the excluded sites which are strategically located and convenient to residents; and b) curtailing the ground presence of the elected MPs, by warning the residents that their applications for events at those sites may not be approved in subsequent years if WP MPs were invited.

Secondly, the PA, a statutory board funded by tax payers’ money and chaired by the Prime Minister, appears to capitalize on its close connection with the government to serve the political interests of the ruling party. The PA is leveraging on HDB to enable PAP candidates who lost at the last elections to re-emerge at community events as “advisors” to PA grassroots organizations. The move to let PA control the sites previously managed by the Town Council would give PAP candidates a ground advantage and permanent presence, in advance preparation for the next elections.

The PM has just called for political harmony and national solidarity in Singapore, and said that “we must have a harmonious political system where we make important decisions in the best interests of Singapore and Singaporeans.”

Regrettably, there appears to be a dissonance between the language of national unity employed by the Prime Minister and the actions of the HDB and PA in Aljunied GRC.



Notify of
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
You May Also Like


今年三月国大医院的精神科医师苏宣昌,因未核实来电者身份,就分享病人隐私信息,被新加坡医药理事会罚款5万元。 对此,高等法院推翻了其定罪,最终医理会向法院申请撤销判决。而卫生部(MOH)周三(22日)向医疗界发出通告,若要致电向对方传达医疗相关信息,必须以保护病人资讯为主,谨慎传达资讯。 《8视界》报导,日前高等法院撤销了精神科医师苏宣昌的裁决,认为苏宣昌是考量病人利益才做出相关抉择,因此没有触犯医生伦理守则。苏宣昌向病人以外透露相关医疗信息一事,引起医疗界的讨论。 四年前,苏宣昌确诊一名女病人有多种精神疾病,而在病人确诊两个月后,苏宣昌接到自称是“丈夫“的男子要求苏宣昌写下病人的医疗信息,让其“妻子”能接受自杀评估风险。苏宣昌当下在未经查证下答应,并由诊所职员交给该名男子。 其后才证实,该名男子是女病人的兄弟,而且将其写下的信息资料成女病人向他施暴的佐证,以此申请保护令,因此苏宣昌被纪律审裁庭裁定为严重疏忽行为,有违伦理守则,之后由医药理事会便提出上诉,遭罚五万元,此事被许多医疗界工作人员和公众认为,处分过于严苛。 医理会随后也向高院上诉,要求调低有关罚款,同时也提出上诉,要求撤销对苏宣昌的裁决。最终裁定撤回判决。 避免类似事件重演,卫生部颁布七项原则 《今日报》报导,为避免类似事件再度发生,卫生部颁布了七项相关指南,以让医疗人员能够在致电时作为参考标准: 在接获要求透露病人相关医疗信息时,必须平衡与尊重病人的最佳利益,与其医疗信息的机密原则 除非有“正当且迫切的需要,否则应该坚持按照适当的途径与程序 在核实个人身份上,医疗机构应要求:描述三个病人的特征、拨电者与病人的关系,以及回拨给病人所指定的亲近关系确定 只有部分相关信息能够透露…

930g of heroin, worth S$65,000 seized at Woodlands Checkpoint: CNB

930 g of heroin was seized by Immigration & Checkpoints Authority (ICA)…

MPs’ Offices at Void Decks: Workers’ Party responds

The Workers’ Party has concluded that it would be a financial burden to build offices for its MPS sessions at HDB void decks.

忧杜佛森林可能被开发 民主党青年团表示关切

民主党青年团对杜佛森林(Dover Forest)可能被开发,表示关切。 民主党青年团周一(18日)在脸书上发文,强调反对开发武吉巴督森林(Bukit Batok Hillside Park)与金文泰树林(Clementi Forest)的开发。 早前,国家发展部透过书面答复工人党后港议员的质询,承认金文泰森林早在23年前就列为“住宅用地(视乎详细规划)(Residential (Subject to Detailed Planning))。…