Food guru KF Seetoh from Makansutra wrote an open letter to Senior Minister of State Dr Amy Khor on Tuesday (9 Oct) imploring her to preserve Singapore’s public hawker centres. In essence, Mr Seetoh is against the government appointing a 3rd-party, the so-called “social enterprise” operator, to run publicly funded hawker centres.

In his letter, he told Dr Khor that hawker centres cannot be compared to private food courts. Mr Seetoh suggested that those Social Enterprise Hawker Centres (SEHCs) should be compared to the other 100 plus established NEA-run public hawkers centres instead.

“The difference is quite stark. Private food courts can charge and levy any amount they deem fit as it’s a private enterprise,” he noted.

In his letter, Mr Seetoh further shared more unfair practices adopted by some of the “social enterprise” operators against hawkers.

Dubious practices used by SEHC operators

Mr Seetoh highlighted the plight of a hawker operating a noodle stall at one of the SEHCs. After a year, the hawker decided to quit and give up their $4k a month stall as they could not sustain the business at the SEHC.

“To my horror, they are made to pay up the remaining years and months of rent and fees left in their contract, or till another tenant is found,” he said.

Also, note that the new tenant found is subjected to the approval of the operator. Since then, the hawker has moved out and started running his stall at a coffeeshop.

“They now have to pay up the monthly ‘penalty’ fees in the SEHC and also for rents (at) their new stall,” Mr Seetoh explained.

And, the one-sided contract also stated that the SEHC operator is entitled “at any time” and “from time to time” to increase service charges and monthly rental fees.

Mr Seetoh said, “This is rather ridiculous. Landlords do not charge tenants for standard contract offer letters in market practices. Worse, they say there’s even a clause that allow landlord to raise service and monthly fees anytime with given notice and that it is binding.”

Please Take Back Control of Public Hawker Centres, NEA

In his letter, Mr Seetoh appealed to the government to consider taking back control of the publicly owned hawker centres. He is of the opinion that the SEHC operators are not totally clear and mindful as to how hawker centres should be managed to public satisfaction.

“There are almost 30,000 hawker street food licenses in Singapore and only 6000 are sited in 114 public owned hawker centres. I urge NEA to run these 6000 like they always had, effectively and with minimal fuss, using even a market rate bidding system with minimal control on service and operation,” Mr Seetoh appealed.

“The NEA are trained to have Singapore Civil Service obligations when they run it. The private operators don’t. These 114 public owned Hawker Centres are created for, and powered by the people, which makes it such a great culture for the other 24,000 private stalls to emulate. Even our PM sees this as Unesco Intangible Award worthy.”

“These revenue hungry private operators can rightly do their commercial rental and operation model, on a mutually agreed buyer-seller agreements in the privately owned coffeeshops, food halls and markets, canteens, food courts etc.. but please keep them away from our public hawker centres,” he said.

“We have to preserve low operation cost so hawkers can comfortably offer cheaper meals for poorer customers in our midst who depend on it, preserve this food heritage and encourage a new breed of hawker to rise to the fore and address continuity and sustainability.”

In any case, with regard to the struggling noodle hawker who needs to pay a monthly “penalty” fee after abandoning his stall at the SEHC, Mr Seetoh has suggested to him to write to Dr Khor.

“I have suggested that this hawker write to you personally to share their struggles (and the likes of them) with you, so you can factor their concerns moving ahead as you craft even better policies for the public owned hawker centre operations in future,” Mr Seetoh appealed to Dr Khor.

However, it’s not known if Dr Khor would act on it to help the poor hawker, as she might just conveniently say it’s purely a commercial matter between the buyer and seller.

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

Only time will tell if the POFMA will dumb down sentiment

Not too long ago, opposition parties, the alternative media outlets and political…

EU Centre Singapore removed live tweets of Human Rights Seminar

European Union (EU) Centre Singapore removed the tweets of the seminar on…

DJ Lim Peifen refutes woman’s claim of double standard at Jewel Changi, says no “preferential treatment” given to her son

Local DJ Lim Peifen of Y.E.S. 93.3 took to her Facebook page…

非安全认证个人代步工具引火患 80名居民被迫撤离

今日清晨,盛港河谷径(Rivervale Walk)发生火灾事件,80名居民被迫撤离。 据民防部队发文告表示,盛港河谷径的第111号四楼的一个单位发生火灾,民防部队于清晨5点半左右接获通报,在抵达现场后共有80人从组屋被撤离。 当时仍有三个人被困在单位内,据民防部队描述,当时浓烟滚滚,而消防队员不得不闯入单位内营救他们。 在被救出后,医护人员也评估了三名伤者与两名邻居的情况,但五人都拒绝送往医院。民防部队也在事后拍摄相关照片,可见客厅已严重损毁,墙壁也被熏黑,而起个人代步工具也严重损毁。 初步调查显示,其发生火警缘由很可能与个人代步工具充电有关,而且该个人代步工具可能非经UL2272认证。 对此,民防部队也呼吁个人代步工具用户应该尽早处理非UL2272认证的代步工具。 去年开始,个人代步工具必须符合UL2272安全认证,其他代步工具一律被禁用,民众可以到指定地点将不符合规定的代步工具处置。