UDMC CONTROLLED PREMISES AT SEMBAWANG NAVAL BASE (Eviction of tenants)

Mr Chiam See Tong asked the Minister for Law why tenants at the UDMC controlled premises at Naval Base, Sembawang are being evicted.

Prof. Jayakumar: A number of Government properties managed by Urban Development and Management Company Pte Ltd (UDMC) in the vicinity of Admiralty Road/Auckland Road/Falkland Road are required by MINDEF to house the staff of the US Logistics element who will be transferred from the Philippines to Singapore. These properties were formerly used by the New Zealand Defence Force personnel. They were rented out on short-term leases or month-to-month tenancy, pending new plans for the area.

The majority of the premises were rented out to foreigners. Out of 104 units affected, only 21 of them were occupied by Singaporeans on month-to-month terms. They were fully aware that their stay was only temporary until such time when the buildings were needed again by Government. While only one month's notice was required, UDMC in fact gave these tenants 2 1/2 months to 4 1/2 months' notice, in order to give them ample time to look for alternative accommodation.

Mr Chiam See Tong: Sir, these UDMC premises that will now be let out to foreign army personnel, are the rentals charged to these foreigners higher or lower than those charged to the local tenants?

Prof. Jayakumar: Mr Speaker, Sir, I do not have the details but I believe that there is no distinction between the rentals paid by the different occupants of these premises.

Mr Chiam See Tong: Then, Sir, why are priorities given to foreigners ahead of Singaporeans? They can easily get many of the condominium units or other units that are available. Why should they evict local Singaporeans?

Prof. Jayakumar: Sir, I do not understand the thrust of Mr Chiam's question. This is a straightforward landlord-tenant relationship. The occupants were given short-term leases on a month-to-month tenancy previously, precisely because the premises might be needed again and the tenants knew about this. In fact, more than ample notice had been given. This is a case of a very sympathetic landlord who has gone out of his way to help, firstly, by giving a very long period of notice, more than that required in the contract, and secondly, I understand that, as far as Singaporeans are concerned, the UDMC even offered alternative accommodation which they are not obliged to do.

Mr Chiam See Tong: Both foreigners as well as Singaporeans enjoy the same tenancy terms. But the thrust of the question is: why should you give these premises to foreigners and not to Singaporeans? There are alternative premises where these foreigners can go to. You have one set of premises, and you have got sitting tenants who are Singaporeans. What is the reason for evicting all these Singaporean tenants and bringing in foreigners? It is easier for the Government to house these foreigners elsewhere, or they can look for their own premises.

Prof. Jayakumar: I take it that what he is saying is: why is MINDEF going to house the Logistics staff in this locality instead of somewhere else? That is the thrust of his question. But, surely, Sir, this is not the place to decide or debate whether MINDEF is wise, or right, in deciding whether to house them in these premises or some other premises. That is for MINDEF to decide. The question is: in asking these people to leave, has there been any breach of any law or any agreement by the UDMC? The answer is "no".

Mr Chiam See Tong: Sir, we are not talking about the breach of the law. We are talking of Singaporeans who are sitting tenants. Unless there is good reason for eviction, it has caused them grave inconveniences and great hardship. Because I understand --

Mr Speaker: Mr Chiam, could you ask your supplementary question? You are making a speech. What is your question?

Mr Chiam See Tong: I have been asking the same question. Why are priorities given to foreigners ahead of Singapore citizens for this very special type of premises where, I believe, the rentals are fairly low?

Prof. Jayakumar: Mr Speaker, Sir, I have made it clear that the tenants, whether they are locals or foreigners, knew that they were there on a very short-term basis, on a month-to-month basis, or on a very short lease, precisely because the Government would need the area when plans arise; and plans have arisen, and that is exactly why they have been asked to move.