In his latest book, Lee Kuan Yew effectively ruled out Education Minister Heng Swee Keat as the next PM. “He was the best principal private secretary I ever had. The only pity is that he is not of a big bulk, which makes a difference in a mass rally.”
Ouch!
Many years ago, Lee ruled out Dhanabalan for prime ministership because he is not a Chinese.
Law Minister K Shanmugam seems to side with the non-Chinese argument. In a TV interview, he said race is a potent issue. He went on to talk about Barack Obama becoming the US president because he is “exceptional”.
What did he mean by race being a potent issue?
The reporter did not follow through with that question.
Aren’t there are exceptional non-Chinese politicians in Singapore?
Again, the reporter did not follow through.
We hope to hear more from Minister Shanmugam on these issues. Maybe, he can use his Facebook, where he is very active, to elaborate.
[yop_poll id=”4″]
That Shanmugam interview
God is called "Allah" case goes on appeal in Malaysia
Christian prayers fell on deaf ears. The Malaysian government today won the right to appeal against an earlier court ruling that allowed Christians to call God, “Allah”.
Archbishop Tan Sri Murphy Pakiam urged the Catholics to pray for a “just verdict” before the Court of Appeals hearing today. Malay-speaking Christians had long used “Allah” to mean God, said the church. And a lower court in 2009 permitted the Catholic newspaper, The Herald, to use “Allah” in its Malay-language edition. But the Court of Appeals today ruled the government had the right to challenge the lower court verdict.
Some 200 protesters from Malay-right group Perkasa and other organisations rallied outside the courthouse after the ruling, reported The Malaysian Insider.
The Rev. Lawrence Andrew, editor of The Herald, expressed disappointment but said his team would accept the ruling and argue its case next month.
Appeal hearings are due to begin on September 10.
The earlier verdict sparked a wave of arson and vandalism at 11 churches, a Sikh temple, three mosques and two Muslim prayer rooms, reported AP.
In effect, non-Muslims are banned from using “Allah”. The government’s ban remains in effect because of a stay order on the verdict until the appeals process is completed, said AP.
The appeal court’s ruling “is likely to compound the perception that Prime Minister Najib Razak’s administration is growing more hardline and ‘Taliban-like’ in its policies after losing the popular vote in the recently concluded May 5 general elections”, commented the Malaysia Chronicle.
It added: “Political observers also point to Najib’s Umno party, which is due to hold its party election in October. ‘It is not unfair to suspect some amount of political influence on today’s decision. If the government’s appeal had been struck out, Najib and Hishammuddin (his cousin and the former Home Minister) will come under fire at the Umno election,’ a political analyst told Malaysia Chronicle.”
“Allah” is Arabic for “God”, but it is not just Muslims who use the word. God is called “Allah” also by Arab Christians and the Christians of Malta. The Maltese language is akin to Arabic.
The noted writer and journalist Christopher Hitchens, who spent his earliest years in Malta and died in December 2011, expressed his alarm at what was happening in Malaysia. Writing in Slate magazine in February 2010, he commented on the Malaysian case in an article headlined Holy Names:
“Arabic is a great language of literature and poetry, and derivations from it (such as algebra) are found in our own dictionaries as well as across the geography of Spain (Alhambra, Alcázar. etc.). You might think that Muslims would be flattered that Christians in Mediterranean Europe and Asia employ the Arabic word for the divine… But it seems that grim sectarianism now carries all before it.”
An entrepreneur is born… not in Singapore
By Janice Seah Teo
Perth
Not in a million years when I lived in Singapore did I ever think my husband and I would ‘go into business’.
Risk adverse and short on liquid cash, we just lived as the majority of Singaporeans with good, secure jobs did – safely and comfortably. The last thing we wanted were sleepless nights worrying about paying off a business loan and the fear of bad times or a falling bottom line. Who needed the stress? Honestly.
As far as we were concerned, going into business was the territory of the well-connected, the well-heeled or the scions of industry.
No, we were happy in our jobs and the pat Singapore formula of getting a good education, a good job, a house and then falling back on our CPF in our old age. The formula suited us just fine.
And then we moved to Perth in 1993. Our CPF joined us a few years later and suddenly everything changed. We bought a house and then realized that we had better do something with what remained of our modest nest egg to make sure our retirement nest was well-feathered.
Because if there was one thing the Singapore government had drilled into us, it was that nobody is going to take care of you so you’d better make sure you can take care of yourself.
So, because the need to grow our resources out-ranked every other consideration and fear, we ventured into the all-new world of being our own bosses. Which is just another way of saying let’s see how much pain and torture we can inflict on ourselves before we take a dive, head-first, out of said nest. (No, it wasn’t as bad as that. Not always anyway).
What I found out, as I was writing this article, was that it wasn’t just level-headed, steely-eyed pragmatism that steered our ship; it turns out that buried deep in my husband’s mind was something he remembered Lee Kuan Yew saying sometime, somewhere:
Apparently, Mr Lee said something to the effect that “A man should have his own business, or at least consider going into business, by the time he’s 40.”
Those words struck a chord with my husband and, incubated by time and circumstance, came back to him in full-grown inspiration years later.
We began with a little pet care and grooming franchise and worked that for two years – he with a van and an incredible capacity for hard work, me with the housework, a two-month old baby and a six-year-old son.
I handled the accounts and the bookings, he got on with the job. It was tough work but manageable and we learned quite a few valuable lessons about Australia’s tax system and many invaluable lessons about Australians.
Tired of that after two years, we began hunting around for something bigger to do and considered buying property, but then an opportunity to invest with some partners – some Australian, some Singaporean and Malaysian – in a bottled water company and build it from the ground up came along and we took it.
Thus began 10 years of extremely challenging but rewarding work and experiences we would never otherwise have had – cold-calling and door-knocking for new customers; managing staff (a headache-and-a-half in Australia where wages are high and workers not always reliable) and equipment.
What was it like being a Singaporean doing business in Australia? It was quite an attitude shift in some areas – Australians are an egalitarian lot and prefer the matey approach to bosses than the traditional Singapore position of subordinate. Aloof bosses are not popular; bosses who roll up their sleeves and get into the trenches are.
Contrary to perhaps what many Singaporeans may think, we never had an issue with racism.
Neither did we find the average Australian petty – those who came into the shop to buy bottles of water would just take the bottle closest to them.
Many Asians, on the other hand, scrutinized – with narrowed eyes for that extra bit of precision – the level of water in each bottle and insist on buying the one with just that little bit more.
My husband worked there for the next 10 years and had the satisfaction of seeing the company go national and then public.
As husband and wife, we grew much in our relationship. We celebrated every victory together, supported each other through the tough times – and developed a depth of admiration and trust for each other that nourishes us to this day.
Would we have ever gone into business in Singapore? I don’t think so. Some are born to become entrepreneurs and businessmen. Others are born to stick with eBay. Then again, that’s what I thought too.
The Education Conundrum
By Alfred Dodwell
Many are of the view in Singapore that the people are her only resource. There has been much emphasis on education and some would say not always with best results. There is a feeling that the tinkering with the education system is unhelpful. Others believe the system encourages rote learning and should be abandoned in favour of a more creative one to teach the children to be articulate and think for themselves.
Amidst this education conundrum, PM Lee Hsien Loong, speaking at the National Day Rally, announced what many hailed as welcome changes.
First, Edusave is extended to all students, including those in madrasahs, being home-schooled or studying abroad. This is commendable. It is unfortunate that such students were left out earlier. They should have been brought under the scheme decades ago. Hopefully, they would get all the benefits enjoyed by other students, including the preferential transport passes.
Second, PM Lee announced the addition of 20,000 pre-school spaces over the course of five years. That amounts to adding 5,000 spaces every year. This is commendable. But it does not take a rocket scientist to figure that pre-school education costs have sky-rocketed over the years. So spaces should have been increased years ago.
Third, PM Lee announced a new PSLE scoring system more akin to the O levels. This is commendable. However, it is several years too late. Why did the strategic thinkers at the MOE take so long to realize that children as young as 11 or 12 should not be subjected to these stress-laden score cards? Generations of PSLE students, now adults, have suffered from the stigma of the score cards. However, at a post NDR seminar Minister Heng said what we need is a change in parents’ mindsets…
PSLE exams are known to be extremely difficult and many have complained over the years. Yet the system remained in place though, as PM Lee himself says, it is pointless putting such pressure on children. Decades of Tiger Moms have dedicated their lives to the PSLE and, even with the new scoring system, it would be wishful thinking to conclude that these fierce, driven ladies would put less pressure on their kids. They would still push their children to be straight A students – and deserve an E grade for EQ themselves.
Fourth, PM Lee said, “I believe we can make every school a good school.” This is wishful thinking. For centuries Oxford and Cambridge have been top tertiary institutions and will remain so. Closer to home, Raffles Institution and Victoria School have a name and reputation that draws the crème-de-la crème. Can any neighbourhood school achieve a similar standing? Perhaps a few students from these neighbourhood schools will make their way to Raffles Junior College but most would not. So, instead of aiming for the sky, a more realistic measure would be to turn some of these schools into specialized institutions. Schools can carve out a niche and make a name for themselves by excelling in sciences or maths or the humanities. Teachers and students with the requisite skills and abilities could be posted to those schools, which would bring out the best in them.
We need more changes in our country – that is for sure. Still, PM Lee should be commended for taking new initiatives and moving in the right direction. These are measures which should have been taken years ago, sparing generations of students the agony of the stressful Singapore education system. But the burden is somewhat being eased at last. And perhaps, I can leave the readers with a food for thought – why not scrap the PSLE altogether?
Car utilisation causes congestion, not ownership
By Vignesh Louis Naidu –
The government tries its best to make cars unaffordable and yet we stubbornly insist on buying them. In this year’s budget the government announced another round of measures to increase the cost of a car and yet the demand for COE still far outstrips supply.
Why do we need cars so badly and use them so excessively? Are cars really a necessity in Singapore? Is our public transport system so bad that we would rather spend copious amounts of money on the privilege of owning a car?
Maybe it’s time we rethink our approach towards reducing car usage in Singapore.
Let’s get one thing clear from the get-go; Singapore is a small country and car usage not only causes congestion but also unnecessary pollution. Reducing vehicle utilisation is a necessary policy measure.
Standard economic principles would suggest that the increased taxation with a controlled supply (managed through the COE system) would lead to a decrease in demand. Demand is certainly lower than it would be in an economically free market but car ownership is still relatively high.
What is more worrying is the level of car utilisation in Singapore. The annual mileage of cars in Tokyo and Taipei is half that of those in Singapore. (Christopher Tan, The Straits Times, 30 April 2012: Time to rethink COE system?)
I shall propose reasons as to why: 1.The demand for cars (i.e. the demand for COEs) remains strong, 2.When we own a car, it is highly utilised.
Despite the measures announced this year, COE’s prices today are roughly eight times what they were a mere three years ago. Yes, supply has been reduced but not by a factor of eight or anything close to that.
I think that our successful public housing system could be one of the factors contributing to this rise in COE prices.
The famous economist, Tibor Scitovsky noted, “Money income as a measure of one’s success in life has the drawback that knowledge of it is seldom in the public domain. Therefore to enjoy not only one’s high income, but also the esteem it can secure, one must make it known through appropriate spending behaviour.”
At last count, roughly 82% of Singaporean families live in HDB apartments. We all work really hard in Singapore aspiring for a better life. But intrinsically all of us want others to know about our success. The greatest display of success would be in the acquisition of bigger and grander houses. With property prices in Singapore being one of the highest in the world, this is simply not possible. So we do the next best thing: we buy cars.
It is my opinion that the latest round of measures may have inadvertently increased the appeal of car ownership. Now when a friend purchases a car, you don’t just think he is successful because he can afford the monthly instalments but you are amazed that he has the cash for the down payment.
Behavioural economics is a relatively new field which the Singaporean government has utilized in its policy making. It can be used to explain the high mileage clocked by cars in Singapore. Despite our small physical size, cars in Singapore clock an average of 24,000km per annum. I believe the principle of ‘honouring sunk cost’ has a part to play.
We fork out a large amount of money for the luxury of owning a car. We will incur the cost regardless of whether we use the car or just park it at home. The incremental cost of running a car; petrol, parking charges, ERP etc is significantly smaller than the cost of ownership. As such, most Singaporeans feel that they should use the car as much as possible. I even find myself subscribing to that train of thought. Whenever my parents choose to take public transport, I will always encourage them to drive. “Mum you might as well drive, leaving the car at home is pointless, we are still losing money on it. Use the car, why bother?” And I studied economics.
The COE system only aids in this fallacy of honouring sunk cost. We have little incentive to use our cars sparingly so that we can prolong their lifespans. At the end of 10 years a car is usually destined for the scrapyard, unless it’s a very unique and desirable example that could be exported. I personally think it is very tragic that cars that are only 10 years old or younger are relegated to the crushers.
I think the government has thus far done a great job in ensuring that our roads do not get as congested as many of our Asean neighbours’. The government has also expended a great deal of resources in building a world-class public transportation network. But we still have a problem. The demand for cars does not seem to be abating and the level of usage remains unnecessarily high.
Maybe it’s time for us to start thinking outside the box. Maybe the government should accept that car ownership is always going to be highly desired by Singaporeans. We should not stop Singaporeans from aspiring to own a car. We should incentivise them to leave the car at home and utilise public transport as often as possible.
Car ownership does not create congestion, car utilisation does.
Vignesh Louis Naidu is a young and passionate Singaporean who recently completed the Master of Public Policy course at the Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy.
PM Does Not Move Me
By Augustine Low
As Prime Minister, Mr Lee Hsien Loong has been competent and committed. He has done well for Singapore. On the international stage, he has not once let Singapore down.
Yet I have misgivings.
Of his leadership style, I am unsure and unclear, even after nine years as PM.
At times, there’s a hint of authority, without icy dispatch. At other times, a modicum of grace, without the charm offensive.
There is no style to call his own.
Could it be that he came in as his father’s son? His role model was so impeccable, it could have taken him a long time to hone his own instincts and persona.
Then there is the manner in which he was catapulted into office. Just when I was beginning to really like Mr Goh Chok Tong as PM, he had to go in the name of succession planning. I’ve wondered what might have been, he was doing a heroic job.
And on heroics, who among us has a hero who is flawless? Mr Lee came in with nary a blemish. I’ve never had to root for him.
As his father’s son, he was never the underdog. You feel that somehow he would be all right.
Of Mr Goh, I at least had to root for sometimes. Not least when Mr Lee Kuan Yew called him “wooden”. As a young man, I wrote in to The Straits Times forum page in defence of Mr Goh (the letter was published). When Mr responded to the taunt with aplomb, I cheered.
As a Singaporean, I am always grateful for Mr Lee’s service to nation beyond the call of duty.
It’s just that in nation building, in agony and in victory, I would like to walk with my leader.
I want to embrace the heroism, the triumphant spirit, the grace under pressure.
With Mr Lee, I cannot celebrate nor commiserate. There is a distance and a detachment.
I cannot walk with him.
Augustine Low is a communications strategist. His heroes are Muhammad Ali, Gabriel Garcia Marquez and Pope John Paul II.
Also read the rebuttal to this piece: PM rises to the occasion
PM rises to the occasion
By Tan Bah Bah
The National Day Rally has always been a unique and intensely personal opportunity for the country’s leader to bond with the people, as much as it has been the platform to clarify policies and set or reset national directions. The PM faces the nation – unplugged. He pours out his heart. He explains, he gives insights on government workings, he offers his own thoughts, he encourages, he inspires.
As there have been only three PMs, judging how PM Lee Hsien Loong measured up to his predecessors requires only a recalling of the performances of Lee Kuan Yew and Goh Chok Tong.
It was the first PM who set the format, tone and standards. The first rallies were relatively Spartan events. A simple auditorium, a few potted plants around the stage, and at one point, not even a screen backdrop. Then came the visual aids which became more sophisticated with better audio-visual technology. But nothing distracted from the state-of-the-union purpose of each rally. The speaker himself was often as important as the content of the message.
Lee Kuan Yew was such a natural orator that he really needed no props. It was not just a matter of excellent public speaking skills. He had developed a mutual trust with his audience which practically gave him carte blanche leeway to deal with the problems of the day.
Goh Chok Tong inherited that abiding faith. He even enjoyed some goodwill, with the public accepting the fact that Lee Senior’s giant boots were not easy to fill. He grew comfortable towards his later NDP rallies.
One disadvantage was his linguistic skills. He was being compared to the two Lees who could speak the three main local languages – English, Mandarin and Malay – rather well.
The current Prime Minister not only knows these three languages. He can also read Jawi and speak Russian.
Singaporeans expected and understood one important message emanating from the two-hour speeches on Sunday — that the government was listening to them and has decided to respond on housing, healthcare and education.
Sunday’s speech was pure cut to the chase. It was directed at the Singapore core, telling them that they will be taken care of. PM Lee exhorted young Singaporeans to reach for the sky as there is no limit to what they can achieve, provided there is trust.
The references to Changi, Paya Lebar and Tanjong Pagar were a reminder that there is ample space and land for many many more years of development.
PM Lee rose to the occasion – within the parameters set by Our Singapore Conversation. But did he reach out far enough to all Singaporeans, including those who continue to be anxious about their jobs and the presence of so many foreigners in their midst? A clue will come when the next elections are held.
Also read the rebuttal to this piece: The PM does not Move me
Strange bedfellows
By P.N Balji
AirAsia founder and Group CEO Tony Fernandes is not known to be fond of the Singapore establishment. Many a time he has been thwarted by the Republic when he tried to grab a slice of the lucrative Changi Airport cake.
It has been a cat-and-mouse game with Singapore since he audaciously launched Asia’s first low cost carrier in 2002.
As the airline soared to become the biggest budget airline in this part of the world, the Singapore business was somehow elusive.
But that is changing as the airline launches a charm offensive to fly more often out of Changi.
Fernandes can be Prince Charming when he wants to. Like when he wanted to get the Malaysian government’s permission to get the airline off the ground.
He told a Singapore audience in 2002: “I went to get Dr Mahathir Mohamed’s agreement. His PA told me Tun was not too well and can spare only a few minutes.
“I had to think on my feet. What do I tell him in those few minutes to convince him to let AirAsia take off.
“I thought of this line: I will let every Malaysian fly. How could the PM say no to that?”
But all his smartness and sharpness did not work in Singapore. Initially, he was not given landing rights at Changi. So he went to Bangkok, registered Thai AirAsia and flew into Singapore.
His attempt to start a bus service from Senai Airport in Johor Baru to pick up passengers in Singapore was stymied by the Singapore authorities.
The relationship was not going anywhere and at every opportunity he got, a frustrated Fernandes would poke fun at Singapore.
As recently as February 2012, he said in a tweet: “Singapore Airlines to start long-haul low cost carrier. Hahahaha. Deja vu.”
But things are changing. Air Asia started a subsidiary in Singapore in August 2012 — its fourth in Asia.
Then last month, it inked a three- year $1.8 million deal with the Football Association of Singapore to sponsor the national, under-23 and youth teams.
Why Singapore soccer? In world rankings, the country is behind the Philippines and Vietnam. The country has dropped from a top spot of 73 in 1993 to 156 in July this year.
Yes, so why Singapore?
Fernandes said at a press conference to announce the deal: “The Football Association of Singapore came up with a great proposal and I like what they were going to do with the youths.”
We emailed him some questions on the soccer deal and the hurdles he faced in Singapore. Uncharacteristically, the master of the soundbite and the PR spin declined to be interviewed.
A source who knows Fernandes well said: “That is Tony. He has learned when to keep quiet, when to talk.
“Singapore is the jewel in the aviation crown. it has taken him a while to shake hands with Singapore.
“He is not going to say or do anything that will spoil the party for his airline.”
The AirAsia-Singapore stand-off has cost the airline much momentum as other low cost players like Jetstar and Tiger Airways have muscled in into Changi.
Singapore CEO Logan Velaitham admitted in an interview with the Today paper: “The take-up rate among Singaporeans is not there. It’s about brand perception and the marketing team is talking to a lot of travel agencies about how to sell the brand to the Singapore heartlanders.”
Part of the problem is that many still think AirAsia flies only out of Kuala Lumpur.
As Fernandes and his team adjust to the realities of doing business in Singapore, there is one silver lining: the Indonesian market.
With AirAsia establishing its Asean base in Jakarta and Singapore signing an air agreement with Indonesia, the potential for growth is greath.
The airline has just added Medan and Surabaya to the list of Indonesian cities that passengers can fly directly to from Singapore. Add to this a burgeoning middle class, which McKinsey estimates will grow by 90 million by 2030, and they point to AirAsia finally finding its feet here.
In business, you have to be politically correct. Fernandes is finding that out the hard way.
African economy on the rise
By Gabriel Yap
Africa has posted economic growth of 5% per annum over the past five years. A figure forecast by the IMF to increase to 5.5% this year and 6% in 2014. It seems that the Eurozone crisis or the Fed Reserve change in monetary policies won’t affect the African continent at all.
In Nigeria, for instance, the continent’s most populous nation with 170 million people, consumer consumption has been on the rise and now accounts for 20% of GDP. The Nigerian government plans to build four airport terminals costing US$500 million and a gargantuan 20,000 MW electricity supply grid costing US$20 billion.
To finance the aggressive expansion plans, Nigeria turned to the international bond market for the first time in two years amidst the selloff in equity markets roiled by Bernanke’s comments on a possible tapering in QE on 22 May 2013. It offered $1 billion Eurobonds – $500 million of five-year notes yielding 5.375% and $500 million of 10-year notes yielding 6.625%. Both were arranged by Citigroup and Deutsche Bank AG.
What surprised most investors was that the bonds were very well subscribed up to four times. In addition, the respective yields were even lower than the first offering – for instance, the 10-year tranche sold at a higher 6.75% when Nigeria came to the markets in 2011.
Nigeria has put in place a Eurobond yield curve with the new issuances, with outstanding issues now due in 2018, 2021 and 2023. This will go a long way to buffer the volatile revenue stream from its oil production which now stands at 2.53 million barrels per day.
The other notable case is Ethiopia, the second most populous country – it averaged GDP growth of 10.6% per annum in the seven years to 2011, but its conservative government has chosen a more tightly controlled development model rather than the neoliberal ones adopted by other African countries like South Africa and Nigeria.
Nevertheless, Ethiopian GDP has grown to a respectable US$33 billion and is moving to unlock some sectors of the economy for foreign investments in a bid to reduce its US$8 billion trade deficit.
It has embarked on an ambitious five-year public works programme that will spend 15% of its GDP on infrastructure projects like roads, roadway and dams. It will also open up its telecom and retail sectors for foreign investments. Major retailers like South Africa’s Shoprite, privately-owned Makro and Walmart-linked Game, are certainly eyeing such opportunities.
In Ivory Coast, the government seeks to lure back investments after months of post-election crisis in 2011 which led to violence that killed about 3,000 people. That spooked investors and forced the country to miss payments on its international debt.
That landscape has changed rapidly – Ivory Coast’s GDP is expected to grow a strong 9% this year and the government will spend as much as US$10 billion in the next six years to expand its port at Abidjan, build a railroad between the western town of Man and San Pedro, Ivory Coast’s second largest port. In addition, US$500 million will be spent on the construction of a 275MW hydroelectric power plant in Soubre. These infrastructure projects are expected to fuel economic growth in the next five years as stable business conditions seep in and the growing consumer class emerges.
Another African rising star is the world’s second largest cocoa producer Ghana and I am certainly looking forward to the country’s first issuance of longer maturity bonds – it plans to offer 200 million cedis (US$97 million) in two tranches of seven-year bonds next month and again in November. Foreign investors like me would be able to participate.
Ghana is West Africa’s second largest economy and GDP growth is expected to hit 8% this year. Already I own some three-year and five-year Ghana bonds which are traded OTC by local banks and big regional banks like Standard Bank and First African Bank. The bonds are also listed on the Ghana Stock Exchange for easier monitoring.
A common capital distortion in EM or Frontier markets is the huge disparity in risk premiums for long and short-term debts. For instance, in Ghana, you can buy and sell three-month Treasury bills yielding more than 20% pa (yes, you would double your capital in four years). Of course, for foreign investors like me, the foreign currency risk is something I watch closely – in Ghana, the cedi has depreciated by about 7% against the US$ to about 2.05, but the risk-return is definitely still on risk-on gear as the country seeks to narrow its budget deficit which currently stands at 4% to GDP.
Who says that there is no money to be made in volatile Africa? Other than the sun-soaked beaches in Pretoria and Freetown, there are other attractions – not just nature and wildlife, but bright opportunities for the shrewd investor to cash in on the rising star.
Housing affordability a key concern in Singapore
A regional survey by iProperty has found that Singaporeans are concerned about affordability of housing given that HDB prices have doubled in the last seven years.
Low global interest rates and high liquidity in the asset market have driven property prices up, according to the iProperty survey report.
The report states that “72% of respondents think that foreigners have a part to play in driving up property prices,” elaborated iProperty Group’s Chief Executive Officer, Shaun Di Gregorio.
Forty three per cent feel the Government is not delivering enough housing to soak up the demand from foreigners. This is despite the fact that foreigners’ proportion of private home transactions have slipped downward as shown in the response before this.
Sixty per cent want more steps to cool the property market. The government agrees to this sentiment as Singapore’s central bank has introduced rules to ensure that a property buyer’s monthly payments do not exceed 60% of income.
There are also concerns that any hike in interest rates may lead to a sharp rise in mortgage defaults in Singapore. The gross rental yields in Singapore are also very poor, ranging from 2.58 per cent to 3.01 per cent, which increases the risk of default.
Download the full report here