1. The Ministry of Law and the Ministry of Communications and Information would like to point out that the article published on 7 July 2023 by Jom, an online publication, contains false statements of fact. The Ministry of Law would also like to provide additional clarifications on other misleading points raised in the Jom article.

    

   False statements of fact

    

   Correction Direction issued by the Minister for Culture, Community and Youth and Second Minister for Law

    

2. First, the article makes the statement that Senior Minister Teo Chee Hean did not respond to questions concerning the issue of actual or apparent conflicts of interest and possible breach of the Code of Conduct for Ministers beyond replying that it is more important to observe the spirit rather than just the letter of the Code. This is untrue. The article omits important information from what Senior Minister Teo Chee Hean said in Parliament on 3 July 2023.

    

3. Senior Minister Teo Chee Hean had expressly clarified that he meant it was important to observe the spirit as well as the letter of the Code. Senior Minister Teo Chee Hean also said that Minister Shanmugam had recused himself, and this meant that he no longer had any duty in the matter. There could thus be no potential or actual conflict of interest. He explained how Minister Shanmugam had removed himself from the chain of command and decision-making process entirely in the case of 26 Ridout Road. He had also highlighted that the Corrupt Practices Investigation Bureau (CPIB) had established, as part of its independent investigation, that no matter was raised by the Singapore Land Authority (SLA) to the Ministry of Law and hence to any of the Ministers during the entire rental process.

    

4. Second, the article makes the statement that SLA spent more than $1 million on the renovation for 26 Ridout Road and 31 Ridout Road because the Ministers were to be the tenants. This is untrue. The identity of the tenants had no bearing on the amount spent by SLA on the works it carried out on 26 Ridout Road and 31 Ridout Road. The article implies that this sum was unusually large. The article omits important information that the works done by SLA were consistent with SLA’s general practice, and were assessed to be necessary in the circumstances, as explained by Second Minister for Law Edwin Tong in Parliament on 3 July 2023.

    

5. SLA invests a significant amount in maintaining conserved properties such as 26 Ridout Road and 31 Ridout Road. A key reason for the cost is the nature of the conservation requirements for such properties, which are much older than the average property in Singapore.  Second Minister for Law Edwin Tong had spoken at length in Parliament about the details of these conservation requirements. While the maintenance works are done in periodic cycles, SLA does them in the lead up to a confirmed tenancy where practical, to avoid disrupting existing tenants and to ensure that the costs can be recovered from the prospective tenant. SLA has published information showing that similar and even larger amounts have been spent by SLA on other Black and White bungalows (see Annex A) in a manner consistent with conservation requirements.

    

6. In the case of 26 Ridout Road and 31 Ridout Road, most of the costs incurred by SLA were for works that external consultants had determined to be necessary, in light of the condition of the properties and to comply with the relevant conservation requirements. The remaining costs were incurred as part of the usual works done before the commencement of a tenancy to ensure that the property is habitable.

    

7. The Minister for Culture, Community and Youth and Second Minister for Law Edwin Tong has instructed the Protection from Online Falsehoods and Manipulation Act (POFMA) Office to issue a Correction Direction¹ to Jom in respect of its article.

    

   Correction Direction issued by the Minister for Communications and Information and Second Minister for Home Affairs

    

8. The article also makes the statement that the Government caused Instagram to geo-block a post by Charles Yeo. This is untrue. The Government did not issue any directions or requests on this matter to Meta, Instagram’s parent company, that caused Instagram to geo-block the post in question.

    

9. The Minister for Communications and Information and Second Minister for Home Affairs Josephine Teo has instructed the POFMA Office to issue a Correction Direction to Jom in respect of its article.

    

   Additional clarifications

    

10. In addition to the false statements of fact outlined above, the article states that Senior Minister Teo Chee Hean should have recused himself from the review as he was “both the informed and investigating officer”. This is a flawed argument. As explained in Parliament, the facts of the case had been established by CPIB in an investigation which was independent, thorough and authoritative. There is no conflict of interest for Senior Minister Teo Chee Hean to conduct the review, as he was not an involved party in the rental process and no matters were raised to him regarding any aspect of the rental transaction. This is similar to a situation where a director declares a potential conflict of interest to a Chairman of an organisation; if it is subsequently alleged that the director had a conflict of interest, it does not preclude the Chairman from convening a disciplinary committee or even sitting on it, unless he was a participant in the actions of that director which resulted in the conflict of interest.

     

11. Next, the article implies that SLA charged just over 10 cents per square foot of land for 26 Ridout Road, and was wrong in doing so.  The article conveys a false picture, by omitting key facts: that the market practice is for the rental valuation of such residential properties to be based primarily on the Gross Floor Area (GFA) of the  property, and that the valuation of the rental in respect of 26 Ridout Road followed established market practice. 26 Ridout Road was rented at market value, and the rental was comparable with the rental of other Black and White bungalows in the Ridout Road Estate in 2018 and 2019.

     

12. Second Minister for Law Edwin Tong explained that the rent is assessed by professional valuers from SLA’s independent valuation team or valuers appointed by SLA’s managing agents, taking into account market-driven considerations, as well as other relevant factors such as the location and condition of the property. He also explained that the valuer for 26 Ridout Road did not know that Minister Shanmugam was the potential tenant. The valuer performed the valuation using established principles and methods. The article also omits to mention that Minister Shanmugam did not want the additional land, but it was in SLA’s interests to add that land to the tenancy to make the tenant responsible for the maintenance and upkeep of the land. 

     

13. The article also insinuates that the Government will hinder deeper conversation about why there is a need to conserve so many Black and White bungalows and the land around them, because Ministers Shanmugam and Balakrishnan are staying in two of the largest of such properties.

     

14. The Government does not hinder conversation on conservation and land use matters, and the identity of tenants is not a relevant consideration. The reasons for conserving certain Black and White bungalows were in fact addressed in Parliament on 3 July 2023, where Second Minister for Law Edwin Tong spoke about the heritage and historical value of these properties. It was explained that the use of such properties takes into account master-planning considerations for the area and the specific circumstances of each set of properties such as the heritage value, location, and allowable uses. In some cases, Black and White bungalows may be demolished as a cluster to make way for newer developments.

     

    Conclusion

     

15. The Ministerial Statements by Senior Minister Teo Chee Hean and Second Minister for Law Edwin Tong provided a comprehensive account of the facts and background context of the rentals of 26 Ridout Road and 31 Ridout Road. Parliament spent about six hours on a reasoned and thorough discussion of the issue, covering matters related to the independent investigation and review by the CPIB and Senior Minister Teo Chee Hean respectively, and also matters raised in the public domain.

     

16. More information on the facts relating to the rental of 26 Ridout Road and 31 Ridout Road can be found in the Official Report (Hansard) for the Parliament sitting on 3 July 2023.

Annex A

Costs incurred by SLA for refurbishing Black and White bungalows

¹ A Correction Direction is a Direction issued to a person who has communicated a falsehood (“the recipient”) that affects the public interest. It requires the recipient to publish a correction notice, providing access to the correct facts. The Direction does not require the recipient to take down their post or make edits to their content and does not impose criminal sanctions.