Cat management framework in HDB flats

In September 2022, NParks launched a six-month long public consultation exercise on the cat management framework. I asked the Minister for National Development on 5 July 2023 for an update on the cat management framework, specifically whether NParks will complete the framework by late 2023, what are the results of the six-month public consultation exercise on the framework that was launched in September 2022, and whether due consideration will be given to responsible cat owners, such as allowing cats as pets in HDB flats. 

This was my question and the Minister’s answer:

Mr Gerald Giam Yean Song asked the Minister for National Development (a) whether NParks’ review of the cat management framework is on track for completion by late 2023; (b) what are the results of the six-month public consultation exercise on the framework launched in September 2022; and (c) whether the review will give due consideration to responsible cat owners, in deciding whether to allow cats as pets in HDB flats.

Mr Desmond Lee: The key findings of the National Parks Board (NParks)’s public survey on the proposed cat management approach were shared at the Pets’ Day Out event on 6 May 2023. NParks is further engaging the community on the proposed approach, including through focus group discussions with various stakeholder groups. NParks aims to share more details on the proposed approach in the later part of this year.

In deciding whether to allow cats as pets in HDB flats, we will continue to carefully balance the needs of different segments of the community. This was explained in our response to a Parliamentary Question from Mr Louis Ng, which was issued on 7 November 2022.

7 November 2022

Review of pet cat ownership in HDB flats

Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang asked the Minister for National Development (a) how long will the Ministry take to complete its review of pet cat ownership in HDB flats following the end of the public consultation; and (b) what are the key factors which the Ministry will consider in this review.

Mr Desmond Lee: In September this year, NParks launched a six-month public consultation exercise on our proposed cat management framework. The framework aims to promote responsible cat ownership and caregiving, while safeguarding public health and ensuring the well-being of our pet and community cats. Following the public consultation, we aim to complete our review, including the possibility of allowing pet cats in HDB flats, in the later part of next year.

As we review HDB’s pet ownership policies, we will carefully consider the feedback received through our various consultation channels. These include our online survey, which has gathered close to 30,000 responses so far, and our upcoming community dialogues and focus group discussions. In conducting the review, we will continue to balance the needs of different segments of the community, such as residents who would like to keep cats in their flats, and others who may have concerns about the disamenities caused by irresponsible cat ownership.

We will also place importance on protecting public health and animal welfare. For example, the possibility of regularising the keeping of pet cats in HDB flats will be studied alongside the proposal to introduce a licensing and microchipping scheme for pet cats. This would improve the traceability of pet cats, so that we can respond to animal disease outbreaks more effectively and better protect public health. In addition, this would allow us to hold irresponsible cat owners to greater account if their cats are found to be neglected, abused or abandoned.

We will also be mindful of the circumstances of existing cat owners, including those with multiple cats. Any new measures will be carefully studied and implemented in phases where necessary, and we will provide the necessary support to help affected stakeholders adapt to any changes that are introduced.

In the meantime, we encourage members of the public to share their views by taking part in our survey and upcoming engagement sessions, as we work together to improve our policies for cat management and welfare.

Source: Singapore Parliament Reports (Hansard)

Photo by Nathan Fertig on Unsplash

Providing affordable homes for all Singaporean families

A public housing flat should be an affordable home for our families to live and grow up in. 

The original mission behind the Housing and Development Board (HDB), when it was set up in 1960, was to alleviate the severe housing shortage at that time by building affordable homes for the population. However in 1989, public housing flats took on another role as an appreciating asset for their lessees, when the Government announced several major policy changes with regard to HDB resale flats.

First, the income ceiling for the purchase of resale flats was removed. This allowed people to buy HDB flats, even if they were higher income earners. 

Second, permanent residents were allowed to buy HDB resale flats. This supported the Government’s liberalisation of immigration policies to attract more middle- and higher-income foreigners to come to work in Singapore. And third, HDB flat owners were allowed to purchase private property for investment purposes. 

These measures added liquidity to the public housing market which pushed up prices. 

The Government also introduced various upgrading programmes for HDB flats and estates. In addition to improving the living environment of HDB flat dwellers, this also bolstered the view that HDB flats are an appreciating asset.

Flat upgrading was pitched to voters by the PAP during the 1997 General Elections as a benefit they would enjoy priority for if their precincts voted for PAP candidates. Voters were told that after upgrading, their flat would increase in value. Conversely, precincts that voted for the opposition risked being placed further back in the upgrading queue.

Soon after the 1997 GE, then-PM Goh Chok Tong assessed that linking the upgrading programme to electoral support was the “single most important factor” in the vote swing to the PAP and that it was “decisive in tipping floating voters” in the PAP’s favour.

The PAP’s “votes-for-upgrading” election strategy continued into the 2006 election, when PAP candidates promised $180 million of upgrading projects for Hougang and Potong Pasir if voters tossed out the opposition there and voted in the PAP. Hougang and Potong Pasir voters did not bite the carrot offered.

However by 2015, opposition held wards like Hougang eventually started getting their lifts and flats upgraded. The scheme lost its effectiveness as a political tool. In fact, in my conversations with many residents in Hougang, it was this perceived unfairness that prompted them to vote against the PAP.

It is natural for people to not just desire a home to live in, but to also own an asset which grows in value. Many people think that their salaries alone will not make them rich. Properties, including HDB flats, are seen as very attractive assets to grow one’s wealth.

For the first two decades of the Government’s asset enhancement policy, the property asset-driven mindset worked like a charm. HDB resale flat prices increased 382% in value from 1990 to 2010. Many HDB lessees saw eye-watering increases in their property wealth.

However, this pathway to wealth requires ever increasing property prices to sustain it. Every property bought would need to be sold for significantly more than the purchase price. Yet, perpetual property price increases are neither sustainable nor in the public interest.

There are currently about 70,000 flats that are more than 40 years old, with remaining leases of 59 years or less. These flats will tend to decline in value after their 50 or 60 year old mark, as illustrated by Assoc Prof Jamus Lim yesterday.

Those who bought HDB flats in the 1980s and 1990s may be glad to see that their properties have increased in value. However, to unlock the value of these assets, they will need to sell and downgrade their properties before their leases start to decay. 

Those with adult children would realise that the situation is much more precarious for their offspring. Many parents of young adults nowadays worry that their children may not be able to realise the same dream they themselves achieved to own a home of their own. Those who are better off have gone ahead and bought properties for their children to move in when they get married. Others have migrated to Australia, New Zealand and Canada where they are able to buy landed property for the price of an HDB flat. But where does it leave the rest of the Singaporeans who don’t have wealthy parents and want to remain in this country to build their homes, careers and families?

While many who graduated in the 1970s were able to afford a landed home after a few years of work, private property is now out of the question for most younger graduates. Even resale flats are out of reach for many of them, leaving BTO (Built-to-order) flats the only remaining option.

Moderating the price of resale flats

My honourable friends Louis Chua, Leon Perera and Jamus Lim have tabled proposals on making the price of BTO flats more affordable. In the remainder of my speech, I will focus on moderating the price of resale flats.

Many young couples buying their first flat prefer to live near their parents. This provides them the familiar surroundings that they grew up in and the companionship they can offer to their parents and vice-versa. Their parents are also able to help them care for their children when they are at work. Many homebuyers also prefer living in mature estates where amenities and transport links to the city are better developed. Only resale flats can meet many of these requirements.

This is also why BTO flats in mature estates are so popular. Many of my residents have approached me to ask me to help them appeal to HDB for priority to get a BTO or Sale of Balance flat in a mature estate, after trying multiple times to secure one in balloting exercises and failing. When I suggest buying a resale flat and using government grants to help with the down payment, my suggestion is often met with great scepticism because resale flat prices feel so far out of reach for them.


The median house price-to-income ratio (HPI) after grants of first-timer families who bought a resale HDB flat in the last five years was between 4.6 and 5.0. This ratio is the resale flat price divided by the household income of the buyers. According to the International Housing Affordability Ratings by Demographia, such a median multiple would be rated as “seriously unaffordable”. The median multiple would need to be 3.0 and under to be considered “affordable”.

This has pushed many of my residents to either rent at high open market rates or compete with other homebuyers to ballot for BTO flats.

We need to moderate the growth in resale flat prices. Our goal must be to moderate the growth, not make the prices collapse, because the latter would negatively affect many existing flat lessees who are depending on their flats as a source of future retirement income.

There are two ways to moderate resale flat price growth without imposing price caps by government fiat. These are: To reduce demand or increase the supply of resale flats.

The Government has already introduced the 15-month waiting-out period for private property downgraders to reduce demand. I will focus on measures to increase the supply of HDB resale flats.

Right-sizing for empty nesters

There is a potentially large stock of HDB resale flats that can be put on the market. Many seniors live in flats that are larger than what they require after their children have gotten married and moved out. It becomes difficult for them to clean and maintain such a large flat on their own.

As at 2021, there were 71,000 flats, 3-room or larger, which were owned by married persons over the age of 65, whose children had moved out. These flats could potentially be sold on the resale market if their owners are prepared to move into new 2-room flexi flats on short term leases. Many of these 2-room flats come with elderly-friendly fittings and nearby amenities, which seniors find quite attractive.

However, not all elderly applicants for 2-room flexi flats are successful. The application rates of BTO 2-room flexi flats allocated to elderly households, as at September 2022, ranged from 2.0 to 4.6 times in non-mature estates, to 9.9 times in mature estates.

If a larger proportion of the 71,000 senior households decided to sell their flats and buy 2-room flexi flats, the demand will far outstrip supply. By 2030, 25% of our population will be over 65. The number in need of right-sized flats will only grow as the years go on.

The Government needs to provide more help to seniors who wish to right-size their flats by building more 2-room flexi flats. Doing so will have the twin benefit of increasing the supply of resale flats for new homebuyers and moderating their prices.

Concurrent ownership of HDB flats and private property

Another area that the Government should look into to increase the supply of resale flats is to prospectively restrict the concurrent ownership of HDB and private property. 

Currently, private property owners who want to buy an HDB flat are required to dispose of their property before buying an HDB flat. The Government has stated that this is to prioritise our limited supply of public housing for residents who do not own other properties. 

However the reverse is not true: HDB flat owners are allowed to buy private residential property without selling their HDB flat. They can do so if they meet the Minimum Occupation Period and pay the Additional Buyer’s Stamp Duty (ABSD) of at least 17% on the purchase of their second and subsequent residential property. The Government has stated that this is allowed because HDB recognises that the financial position of HDB flat owners may improve over time and some may aspire to own private residential property. 

While I acknowledge that this is a valid aspiration of many higher income Singaporeans, realising this aspiration cannot come at the expense of less well-off Singaporeans who are only looking for a roof over their heads.

As at October 2022, about 3% of HDB flat owners owned at least one private property. This translates to about 32,600 units. Of these, 45% are not living in their flats. So there are about 15,000 HDB units which are not occupied by their owners, who live in another private property that they own. This represents a not-insignificant number of HDB flats that could potentially add to the resale flat supply and moderate the price of resale flats. I do acknowledge that many of these flats are rented out, adding to the supply of open market rental flats.

Has the Government given further consideration to the possibility of future buyers of private property being required to sell their HDB flats? When I asked the Minister for National Development about this in November last year, he said that the Government has been “gathering views from Singaporeans as part of Forward Singapore, and will study these as well as other views and ideas carefully.”

For those who already concurrently own both a private property and an HDB flat, the Government could incentivise them to sell their HDB flat by rebating the ABSD they paid at the time they purchased their private property, if they choose to sell their HDB flat. This would encourage private property owners to free up their HDB flat for others who cannot afford to buy private property.

This policy should be prospective, so it will not compel current HDB and private property owners to dispose of any property. It will only affect those that currently own an HDB flat and decide to purchase private property after the policy takes effect. 

If this policy is implemented prospectively, it will not immediately add to the supply of resale flats. However, in the medium to long term, it will better promote the owner-occupation intent of public housing and better ensure an adequate supply of affordable resale flats.

Conclusion

Mr Speaker, housing is a basic human need. Singapore’s public housing policies were a great success in the first few decades after our independence. But the Government got distracted along the way when it started pairing the objective of affordable housing with that of asset enhancement. As a result, public housing has become unaffordable by international measures. The longer we allow these two objectives to be conflated, the more unaffordable housing will become for future generations. It is time that we stopped kicking the can down the road and focus on HDB’s original mission of providing quality and affordable housing for all Singaporeans, especially the lower and middle income earners.


This is my speech in Parliament during the debate on public housing policies on 7 February 2023.

Voluntary Early Development Scheme (VERS)

VERS was announced almost four years ago, during the Prime Minister’s National Day Rally Speech in 2018. So far, we have yet to hear any substantial details of the scheme. Many HDB flats are fast ageing, with some already over 60 years old. This means that we have less than 10 years before some flats will be 70 years or older. Nevertheless, the Government said in 2018 that VERS would be launched in “about 20 years’ time” (ie, the year 2038).

Earlier this week (5 Jul 2022), I asked the Minister for National Development two Parliamentary questions on the Government’s plans and timeline for offering VERS. In his answer, the Minister said that the Ministry is still in the midst of working out the details. Read on for the full Q&A.

PLANS TO OFFER VOLUNTARY EARLY REDEVELOPMENT SCHEME TO RESIDENTS BEFORE YEAR 2039

Mr Gerald Giam Yean Song asked the Minister for National Development (a) whether the Government has plans to offer Voluntary Early Redevelopment Scheme (VERS) to any precincts before the year 2039; and (b) what is the voting threshold that needs to be achieved for a precinct to be selected for VERS.

Mr Gerald Giam Yean Song asked the Minister for National Development what will be the terms of offer, including the compensation quantum, rehousing options and other benefits, to be provided to lessees of HDB flats selected for the Voluntary Early Redevelopment Scheme.

Mr Desmond Lee: The Voluntary Early Redevelopment Scheme (VERS) will be implemented in the longer term, as HDB flats and estates get older, to facilitate the orderly redevelopment and rejuvenation of these towns and estates. This will also allow more households to benefit from redevelopment before their flat leases expire, starting from when the flats reach around age 70 or older.

Unlike SERS, VERS will be a voluntary programme and residents will vote on the exercise in their precinct. If residents in a selected precinct vote in support of VERS, the Government will buy back all the flats and redevelop the precinct, and residents can use their sales proceeds to help pay for another flat. If the residents do not support VERS, they can continue to live in the precinct until their flat leases run out. The terms of VERS will not be as generous as SERS due to the lower redevelopment potential and hence smaller financial upside from the redevelopment.

VERS is a complex undertaking, involving detailed long-term town planning. We are in the midst of working out the details, such as how to identify the precincts, how to pace the redevelopment over time, the specific terms of the Government’s offer, the voting threshold that needs to be achieved for a selected precinct to proceed with VERS, and how to ensure fiscal sustainability in the long run. We will seek ideas and views from the public in the process, and will share more information with Members and Singaporeans when we are ready.

Criteria for selection of SERS blocks

Four blocks on Ang Mo Kio Avenue 3 were recently selected for SERS (Selective En-bloc Redevelopment Scheme). Why were these flats selected for SERS when they are only 43 years old? This was one of the questions I asked the Minister for National Development on 9 May 2022. Here is the full question and the Minister’s answer:

Mr Gerald Giam Yean Song asked the Minister for National Development (a) in selecting precincts for the Selective En bloc Redevelopment Scheme (SERS), what are the weights given to (i) the age of the blocks (ii) their redevelopment potential (iii) the availability of suitable replacement sites (iv) the Government’s financial resources and (v) other factors; and (b) what are the reasons for selecting the four HDB blocks in Ang Mo Kio Avenue 3 for SERS despite them being only 43 years old.

Mr Desmond Lee: SERS was introduced in 1995 as part of our estate renewal strategy for older HDB estates. It allows us to optimise land through the redevelopment of selected HDB precincts which have high development value.

SERS involves compulsory acquisition and is therefore highly selective. The identification of suitable sites and the pace of SERS require careful site-by-site evaluation of various factors, including the redevelopment potential of the site, the availability of suitable replacement sites to rehouse the flat owners involved, and the Government’s financial resources. While the age of the precinct is a consideration, there is no fixed age criteria to determine if a precinct is suitable for SERS.

Median cash-over-valuation (COV) for resale HDB flats

Mr Gerald Giam Yean Song asked the Minister for National Development if he can provide the figures for the median Cash-Over-Valuation for resale HDB flats by town and flat type in each quarter since 2nd Quarter 2007, with a breakdown of buyers by (i) Singapore citizen (SC) households (i.e. households with at least one SC owner) and (ii) Singapore permanent resident (SPR) households (i.e. households with SPR but no SC owners).

Parliament sitting date: 16 September 2013

Mr Gerald Giam Yean Song asked the Minister for National Development if he can provide the figures for the median Cash-Over-Valuation for resale HDB flats by town and flat type in each quarter since 2nd Quarter 2007, with a breakdown of buyers by (i) Singapore citizen (SC) households (i.e. households with at least one SC owner) and (ii) Singapore permanent resident (SPR) households (i.e. households with SPR but no SC owners).
Mr Khaw Boon Wan : Detailed Cash-Over-Valuation (COV) data, provided there are sufficient transactions during the quarter, with breakdown by town and flat type are published in the HDB InfoWEB and updated quarterly. HDB, however, does not monitor the detailed breakdown as requested by the Member.

We do have some breakdown of COV data by buyer group, as tabulated below:

Source: Singapore Parliament Reports (Hansard)

Waiting list for HDB subsidised rental flats

Mr Gerald Giam Yean Song asked the Minister for National Development (a) what is the current number of applicants on the waiting list for HDB subsidised rental flats; and (b) when will this waiting list be cleared.

Parliament sitting date: 16 September 2013

Mr Gerald Giam Yean Song asked the Minister for National Development (a) what is the current number of applicants on the waiting list for HDB subsidised rental flats; and (b) when will this waiting list be cleared.

Mr Khaw Boon Wan : There are 1,900 registered applicants on the waiting list for public rental flats. On average, the applicants will be allocated a flat within 7.5 months. However, the actual waiting time for each applicant differs, depending on the zone selected, the choice of flat type, as well as the EIP quota for the block and the neighbourhood.

Source: Singapore Parliament Reports (Hansard)

Parenthood Priority Scheme

If the goal of the PPS is to raise birth rates, then it might be necessary to also include married couples without children, because many of these couples may be waiting to get their own home before having kids. Can the Minister provide an estimate of when this backlog married couples with children is expected to be cleared, and when married couples without children can start to benefit from PPS?

This is a ‘cut’ I delivered in Parliament on 7 March 2013 during the Committee of Supply debate for the Ministry of National Development.

———–

In January 2013, the HDB introduced the Parenthood Priority Scheme (PPS) to give priority allocation for new flats to “first-timer” married couples with children. Under this scheme, 30% of BTO (Built-to-Order) flats and 50% of SBF (Sale of Balance Flats) flats will be set aside for this group.

I agree that Singaporean couples with children should get priority in flat allocation, because they not only have to house themselves, but also their children.

However, the proportion of flats set aside for all first-timers remains unchanged at 85% for BTO flats in non-mature estates . This means that other first timers, including married couples who do not have children yet, will effectively have a lower proportion of the flats set aside for them.

If the goal of the PPS is to raise birth rates, then it might be necessary to also include married couples without children, because many of these couples may be waiting to get their own home before having kids.

The Minister has said that once the HDB clears the backlog of first-timer married couples with children, the HDB can extend the PPS to married couples without children. Will this mean that all first-timer married couples—with or without children—will be allocated 30% of BTO flats and 50% of SBF flats, or will married couples without children have a separate allocation? I think more clarity on this will help prospective home buyers better plan their flat applications.

To get a sense of the size of the backlog, for the BTO launch in January 2013 during which PPS was first offered, what proportion of PPS applicants had unsuccessful applications for previous BTO launches?

Can the Minister provide an estimate of when this backlog married couples with children is expected to be cleared, and when married couples without children can start to benefit from PPS?

Lastly, will PPS be a permanent scheme or will it only be in place until the current backlog of flat applicants is cleared?

Pricing of HDB flats

Would HDB consider permanently delinking the price of new and resale flats, so new flat buyers are not at the mercy of resale flat prices? Could the Minister share with us what is the exact pricing formula used to string all these factors together to determine the selling price for new flats? More specifically, what is the formula used to calculate the discount or “market subsidy”?

This is a ‘cut’ I delivered in Parliament on 8 March 2013 during the Committee of Supply debate for the Ministry of National Development.

————–

The Minister said in February this year that the prices of new HDB flats have been “delinked” from resale flat prices by varying the quantum of discounts applied to the selling price. He said that HDB will continue with this pricing policy for as long as “property remains hot”.

What is the criteria he will use to determine if the housing market is cool enough, resulting in the prices of new and resale flats being “linked” once again?

Would HDB consider permanently delinking the price of new and resale flats, so new flat buyers are not at the mercy of resale flat prices, which the Minister has said he is not able to control?

I understand from the Minister’s earlier replies in this House are that the factors used to determine the selling price of new flats include the typical household income of the families who buy them, the market price of similar resale flats in the vicinity and the attributes of the flats including their size and location. He said that HDB applies a discount to this price and gives housing grants to eligible buyers.

Could the Minister share with us what is the exact pricing formula used to string all these factors together to determine the selling price for new flats?

More specifically, what is the formula used to calculate the discount or “market subsidy”?

For future launches, could HDB publish the price of each new flat before and after the discount, so that home buyers will have a clearer picture of the market price of the new flats, and discounts that they are receiving from HDB?

We have already lowered our housing expectations, Mr Minister

The current housing situation is not a result of Singaporeans having unrealistic aspirations, but a shortage of flats due to poor planning in accommodating the surge in population in recent years. In fact, compared to previous generations of Singaporeans with similar education and income levels, many young couples have already drastically lowered their housing expectations.

I wrote a letter to TODAY newspaper in response to a commentary by National Development Minister Mah Bow Tan last Saturday. An edited version of the letter was published on Thursday (21 October 2010) on TODAY Online under the title, What do newlyweds want in a flat? Below is the original letter which I submitted. The sentences in bold were left out by the paper.

————

I refer to the commentary by Mr Mah Bow Tan (“Buying a flat? Choose wisely”, TODAY, October 15).

His quip about how some Singaporean men propose to their future spouses with the offer of an HDB flat application aptly reflects the strong desire among couples to own a home of their own once they get married. It is therefore regrettable that in the past few years, public housing prices—and hence these dreams—have soared out of reach from so many young couples.

Mr Mah contended that with growing affluence and education levels, Singaporeans no longer want only basic housing. He defines basic housing as simple and functional one- to three-room flats, as opposed to larger four-room, five-room and Executive flats. Mr Mah also distinguished between standard flats and premium flats—the latter referring to flats with better designs, better finishes and in better locations, like the Pinnacle@Duxton and Waterway Terraces at Punggol.

Although Mr Mah stated that that premium flats form only a fraction of the new flats offered, I question why there is a need for HDB to build premium flats in the first place. Why is it so important for a public housing agency to “set new benchmarks for waterfront living for public housing”, or to built flats in prime downtown locations? How does this achieve the purpose of providing affordable housing for the masses?

While Mr Mah is right that Singaporeans’ expectations have changed, they have not changed so drastically that they are now expecting condo-style living for their HDB flats. This is evidenced by the fact that every launch of new developments by HDB in the past year has seen massive oversubscriptions, even for those offering only standard flats. In addition, resale flat buyers are paying huge cash-over-valuation (COV) premiums for even old, basic flats in mature estates like Queenstown.

The current situation is not a result of Singaporeans having unrealistic aspirations, but a shortage of flats due to poor planning in accommodating the surge in population in recent years. In fact, compared to previous generations of Singaporeans with similar education and income levels, many young couples have already drastically lowered their housing expectations.

HDB should focus on building more basic, functional flats and sell them at truly subsidised prices, in order to meet the urgent housing demands of many young couples. As a taxpayer-funded agency, HDB should not be trying to set design benchmarks—or worse, boost their profits like private developers do.

Gerald Giam

‘Underwhelmed’ by Town Council report

Residents are personally affected by their Town Councils’ performance. If they feel that their MPs are not performing, they would have voted them out long ago. But the two opposition MPs have been returned to office again and again for the last 18 to 25 years–longer than any other PAP MPs save one. Why does MND suddenly feel the urge to tell residents what they should think of their TCs?

It is hard to contain one’s scepticism when reading the news about the Town Council Management Report (TCMR).

The Straits Times reported on Friday:

The two best performers are Ang Mo Kio-Yio Chu Kang led by Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong, and Tanjong Pagar headed by Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew, according to the government’s Town Council Management Report.

The two worst performers are run by the opposition: Hougang, by the Workers’ Party’s Low Thia Khiang, and Potong Pasir by the Singapore People’s Party’s Chiam See Tong.

Isn’t it interesting that the two Town Councils (TCs) that “top” the report are the ones “headed” by the PM Lee and MM Lee, and the two “worst performers” are those headed by opposition MPs? (Technically the two Lees do not head their Town Councils. They have delegated that less glamorous job to their backbencher MPs.)

Continue reading “‘Underwhelmed’ by Town Council report”