VOID DECK AT BLOCK 143, POTONG PASIR AVENUE 2 (Use for political purposes)

Mr Chiam See Tong asked the Minister for National Development whether planning permission has been granted to the People's Action Party Community Foundation to utilise part of its premises at the void deck of Block 143, Potong Pasir Avenue 2 for political purposes and, if so, if he will specify the rationale for allowing such change of use.

Mr Lim Hng Kiang (for the Minister for National Development): Mr Speaker, Sir, part of the void deck at Block 143 Potong Pasir Avenue 2 has been let to the PAP Community Foundation (PCF) by HDB since 1st July 1987 for use as an Education Centre.

Under the terms of the Tenancy Agreement, the tenant may allow other organisations to use the premises for non-profit purposes for a maximum of 20% of the total operational hours within a year, subject to the rent charged not exceeding the monthly rent payable to HDB. The use of a room in the premises for meet-the-people sessions held two hours per week is within these guidelines. Since office use is occasional and does not constitute a material change of use, there is no need to seek planning permission.

Mr Chiam See Tong: Is it not true that the PAP Community Foundation is a charitable organisation? Because it is a charitable organisation, the HDB rents out to this organisation at a special rate. If it were a charitable organisation, can it then be allowed to let out part of its premises, which are supposed to be for charitable purposes (education is a charitable purpose), for political purposes? Is it not right that planning permission has to be obtained first for a change of use before it can let out part of its premises?

Mr Lim Hng Kiang: Sir, obviously, the Member for Potong Pasir did not pay attention to my answer. First, whether the PAP Community Foundation is allowed to sub-let its premises for other non-profit purposes. I have already explained that the Tenancy Agreement allows the PCF to use the premises for non-profit purposes for a maximum of 20% of the total operational hours. The PCF operates the premises at a concessionary rent and when the PCF sub-lets its premises to non-profit organisations, the rent that it charges to such non-profit organisations is not allowed to exceed the concessionary monthly rent payable to HDB. So the PCF is a non-profit organisation and does not make profit out of sub-letting.

Secondly, the use of the premises for meet-the-people sessions at two hours per week is within these guidelines. Since the use is only two hours per week, the use is occasional and does not constitute a material change of use. Therefore, there is no need to seek planning permission.

Mr Chiam See Tong: I am surprised at the answer of the Minister. The premises are let out by the HDB, I presume, for a charitable purpose. I said that education is within the definition of "charity". But now that the premises with which it was originally rented out for educational purposes were sub-let for a different purpose, my question is: has the PAP Community Foundation obtained a change of use? As far as I understand, other organisations --

Mr Speaker: Order. Mr Chiam, you have asked your question.

Mr Chiam See Tong: But he has not answered it. Has the PAP Community Foundation asked for a change of use? Please answer the question.

Mr Lim Hng Kiang: Mr Speaker, Sir, the premises were let to the PCF to conduct kindergarten classes. Indeed, it conducts kindergarten classes and, therefore, it is well within its Tenancy Agreement for the use that it applied for. Many other premises that have tenancy agreement with HDB are also allowed to have sub-letting provisions in their tenancy. So this is not something unusual. In getting the premises from HDB, they are allowed 20% of their operational hours to be let out for non-profit purposes. For example, in my PCF centre, we let out the premises in the evening for conducting BEST classes. These are all non-profit organisations. We did not depart from our main purpose, which is to run kindergarten classes for our students. But when it is not used at night, we let it out for all other uses, for example, BEST classes.

Mr Chiam See Tong: The Minister has still not answered my question. The point is that it has sub-let for a political purpose. In the original permission given, is there a clause which says that the whole premises were allowed for political purposes? If there is not, then the PAP prospective candidate at Potong Pasir should not be using it for political purposes. He has got no right to, because it is in breach of section 5 of the Building Control Act, as he has earlier quoted.

Mr Lim Hng Kiang: Maybe I could answer in Mandarin the next time.

Mr Chiam See Tong: Do not be sarcastic!

Mr Lim Hng Kiang: The tenancy agreement allows the tenant to sub-let its use and it is working well within the tenancy agreement. So when the HDB gave the premises to the PCF, it is provided for within the tenancy agreement for the PCF to sub-let it for not more than 20% of its operational hours.

Mr Chiam See Tong: I am not happy with the Minister's answer. I want an answer - "Yes" or "No". Has planning permission been given to the PAP Community Foundation for a political purpose? "Yes" or "No"?

Mr Lim Hng Kiang: Now I must answer in Tamil. I have already said that the office use is occasional and does not constitute a material change of use and, therefore, there is no need to apply for planning permission.