Monday, April 28, 2025

30.8 C

Singapore

Home

type here...

The Independent Singapore
- Featured News
- International
- SG Economy
- Singapore Politics
- In the Hood
- Lifestyle
- Celebrity
- Entertainment
  - Gaming
  - Movie
  - Music
  - Sports
- Lifestyle
  - Fashion
  - Food
  - Travel
About Us

Home Blog Page 5227

Rudd-y negative, Rupe

World

The Independent

August 18, 2013

By P. Francis

MELBOURNE-born American media mogul Rupert Murdoch, chairman and CEO of News Corp, could be the X-Factor tipping the scales in the Australian federal elections on Saturday, 7 September, some people claim.

Already the Australian media polls have shown the honeymoon of the second coming of Kevin Rudd as prime minister after being unceremoniously stabbed in the back – somewhat like what Brutus did to Julius Caesar – is beginning to wear thin.

Australia’s online 7NEWS on 10 August under the headline ‘Rudd momentum stalls, voters abandoning Labor’ said that their poll of 3000 voters in a two-party preferred vote showed Labor drop 1% to 47%, while the Coalition of Liberals and Nationals added 1% to climb to 53%. However,) 9NEWS’ online poll on 5 August showed that 75% of people had already decided who to vote for. The report said: “In the latest Essential poll published on Monday, 44 per cent of voters say they will ‘definitely not’ change their mind, while a further 30 per cent say a shift is ‘very unlikely’.” However a similar web poll on that day had the figure as high as 95% decided, though this could include non-voters and ‘repeat’ clicks by viewers.

Murdoch’s third-generation business empire was estimated to be worth US$ 8.3 billion in 2012 – including interests in Australia, the UK and the US. But it has not been smooth sailing. The 82-year-old has faced allegations of phone-hacking by his staff at the daily Sun newspaper in 2011 after he shut down his tabloid The News of the World.

His online biography said: “Murdoch has drawn wide criticism for monopolising control over international media outlets as well as for his conservative political views, which are often reflected in the reporting of Murdoch-controlled outlets such as FOX News Channel. In the 2010 American midterm elections, News Corp donated $1 million each to the Republican Governors Association and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, a group supporting Republican candidates. Critics argued that the owner of major news sources covering the election should not contribute directly to the political campaigns involved.”

The mastheads Murdoch owns in Australia include The Daily Telegraph in New South Wales, the Courier Mail in Queensland and the Advertiser in South Australia. There have been front-page attacks on Rudd, who angrily countered with allegations that Murdoch, who owns Foxtel, had opposed the rollout of the NBN (National Broadband Network) by Rudd’s government to protect his Foxtel interests and was now waging a vendetta.

Meanwhile, the independent Monthly commentator Mungo MacCallum said that “the anti-Rudd push, if coordinated at all, was almost certainly locally driven” as opposed to being directed by Murdoch, who also took a different position from local editors on such matters as climate change and stimulus packages to combat the financial crisis.

However, The Guardian’s Bronwen Clune wrote on 9 August: “Amongst all the outraged responses to The Daily Telegraph cover featuring Australian prime minister Kevin Rudd and the call to ‘kick this mob out’, not to be outdone its latest front page, the most interesting point was lost. Can Murdoch’s editorialising impact an election? Evidence suggests there is no correlation between reader’s media consumption and how they vote. At least that’s been the consistent finding of the Australian Election Study, the most exhaustive set of data ever collected in Australia on the dynamics of political behavior, conducted on large samples for every election since 1987 and 2010.”

It could be said that mischief and Murdoch go hand in hand. In the past, he has described Rudd when he became PM in 2007 as “”…more ambitious to lead the world (in tackling climate change) than to lead Australia…”. He also criticised Rudd’s expansionary fiscal policies, during the 2008 financial crisis, as unnecessary.

So is the writing on the wall for the end of Rudd? Are voters going to be swayed by Murdoch’s media savaging PM Rudd? I asked a few voters two questions: (1) Do you think it is unfair to Rudd for Murdoch to use his media to target Rudd? (2) Will it in any way change how you vote?

Retired Malaysian-born Pat Lim, who lives in Melbourne, and has worked as a journalist in Australia and Malaysia, will be voting in the elections. He said: (1) “In any democracy, it’s a common practice for media organisations, whether big or small, to take sides for or against the government of the day – just as the government of the day takes aim at specific media organisations during their time in power. This is no different in Australia. The reality of the situation is that ultimately it is the voter who will determine the final outcome of the elections, and there are many factors to help the voter to decide or make up his or her mind. A media organisation’s slant may or may not have any influence at all in the final vote. (2) Absolutely not. Why should it have any influence on how I vote?”

Anthony Perera, of Canberra, who used to work in media production in Australia, Malaysia and Singapore, thought differently: (1) “It is not right for Murdoch to use his media to attack any politician.” (2) “Yes, it will affect how I vote.”

Benjamin Liew, who arrived from Malaysia 25 years ago, said: (1) “Murdoch’s attack on Rudd was unjustified. Why is he telling me and the people not to vote for Rudd? I feel there must be an ulterior motive on his part to control the media in the future when the Liberal is in power. Power crazy? He should be doing more charities to clean himself up with the amount of griefs and angers he created in his media corporations.” (2) “It does influence my vote because I think he has an ulterior motive if the Opposition (Liberal) is in power. I will vote against his wishes. It will be a negative impact if he keeps telling the people how to vote.”

Whatever the outcome on polling day, the sun will still rise on Sunday, 8 September as birds chirp in the trees and Christians worship in church. A mere mortal would have been elected overnight to lead the Great Southern Land in an unenviable ‘battle’ against an economy that can make or break a prime minister!

P. Francis is an English tutor in Melbourne, who has more than 20 years’ journalism experience with newspapers, books and magazines in Singapore and Australia.

Forgotten sports icons

Uncategorized

The Independent

August 18, 2013

By Suresh Nair
Lloyd Valberg. Tan Howe Liang. Tan Eng Yoon. “Uncle” Choo Seng Quee. Natahar Bava. Canagasabai Kunalan. Syed Abdul Kadir. Chee Swee Lee. Patricia Chan. Ang Peng Siong.
Just to name 10 Made-in-Singapore sporting icons. And it begs the question: Are they sporting heroes or forgotten men and women?

As I went through the 487-page, 2005 edition of Singapore Olympians, I came across 150 Singaporeans who took part in the Olympic Games from 1936 to 2004. “This book lights the flame and sparks dreams of glory in future generations of athletes,” says Deputy Prime Minister Teo Chee Hean, who calls it “the story of Olympic sports in Singapore and its impassioned athletes”.
Yes, after covering sports for more than three decades, I realised that the road to sporting success, like the ascent to political power, is never an easy one.
On its most personal level, the journey requires tremendous faith and dedication, great sacrifice by athletes and their families. And the monetary rewards, up to a few years back, were a pittance. Nor was there much by way of recognition.
In a foreword to Singapore Olympians, Jacques Rogge, the now-retiring IOC (International Olympic Committee) president, says sporting icons are modern-day heroes who motivate young people, inspiring dreams of Olympic success and reaching pinnacles of glory.

But the big questions is: Does Singapore truly value its sporting statesmen as it endeavours to build a sporting culture, with professionalism coming to the ranks of football, table-tennis, athletics and badminton, primarily fired by foreign talents rather than home-grown prodigies?
I remember how “Uncle” Choo Seng Quee, who guided the Singapore, Malaysian and Indonesian national football teams in the 1970s and 80s and was recognised as the most successful post-war regional coach, believed in patriotism and playing for the flag. The Lions were made to sing Majulah Singapura at the break of dawn before training started at Jalan Besar Stadium. The Singapore flag and crest were tools he used to motivate and inspire players.
Semangat, the Malay word for inner strength, was the most passionate word used by “Uncle” Choo — something which is sorely missing in the current foreigner-based era of sports here, where international successes in table-tennis or badminton are carved out by highly-paid foreign sports-labour.
An uncompromising disciplinarian, “Uncle” believed that a player must be prepared to make sacrifices, without which no success can be achieved. A match-winning team was one that was disciplined and had players who put their hearts and souls into the game in pursuit of glory, for either club or country. Not for the dollars and big bonuses they crave for now with zero Asian-class glory.
An iconic coach, “Uncle” Choo steered Singapore to triumph in the Malaysia Cup in 1964 and 1977. He won the cup with classic teams skippered by Lee Kok Seng in 1964 and Samad Allapitchay in1977. And true to his no-nonsense trademark, in the 1977 cup victory, an extra-time 3-2 win over Penang, “Uncle” daringly withdrew the skipper, midway through the match, because he didn’t show the “semangat” spirit.
Natahar Bava, likewise, brought glory with his inspiring patriotism when Singapore won a historic 1978 Malaysian Rugby Union (MRU) Cup victory in the annual tournament after 44 years of participation under the label, Singapore Civilians. Bava’s boys drew on a tsunami wave of “semangat” to turn the tables on the marauding Royal New Zealand Infantry Battalion (RNIR).
The same year Singapore finished No 3 in Asia after powerhouses Japan and South Korea — the best showing ever by an all-local Singaporean team! For its efforts and achievements, the Singapore National Olympic Council (SNOC) awarded a “Grand Slam” of three major awards – “Sportsman of the Year” to pack leader Song Koon Poh, “Coach of the Year” to Natahar Bava and the players hailed as “Team of the Year”.
Yet, to show how current repugnant political ego overrides historical glory, there’s no mention of Bava’s heroics on the Singapore Rugby Union (SRU) website. Click on http://www.singaporerugby.com/p/history.html and you see the rugby register, recorded only from 1995. (If you click on http://www.mru.org.my/ver3/ the MRU website, you view some genuine history with the game first started in 1823 when William Webb Ellis spontaneously decided to spoil his schoolmate’s soccer game by picking up the ball and running with it towards the goal line!).
If I had a magician’s wand or a crystal ball, I’d like to see the so-called history of Singapore sports rewritten and the heroes of yesteryear genuinely recognised with lasting memorials – for example, with a football stadium, hockey astro-turf pitch, athletics arena or sports building named after them.
If there can be a Khoo Teck Puat Hospital (in YIshun New Town) or a Tan Kah Kee MRT Station (in the new Downtown Line in 2015), why not a Tan Howe Liang Auditorium, where youngsters can flex their muscles and train to be future weightlifting champions, emulating Singapore’s first Olympic silver medallist at the 1960 Rome Games?
Should we not have a Choo Seng Quee Stadium to honour the legendary football coach who died 30 years ago after inspiring the Lions to success with his fiery patriotism? And how about an Ang Peng Siong Pool to continue the waves made by the semangat-bred swimmer? Let’s not forget he was the world’s fastest in the 50-metre freestyle in 1982 and regarded as Singapore’s most successful swimmer, having won the ‘B’ final of the 100m freestyle at the 1984 Los Angeles Olympic Games.

They cannot be forgotten heroes. Their success stories along with their sporting paraphernalia cannot just be left within the cold walls of a sports museum.
The 10 Singapore sporting legends I mentioned here, and many more deserving luminaries, must be showcased publicly, perhaps even with giant-sized iconic figures at the upcoming Sports Hub expected to open next year.
But if the current trend prevails and only lip service paid, without the revival of the semangat spirit among the bureaucrats, the sporting stars of yesteryear may well just be curiosities and conversation pieces.

Mortgage malaise

Singapore News

The Independent

August 17, 2013

In a recent blog post, Minister Khaw Boon Wan urged HDB home owners to get mortgage insurance so that they do not leave their families in the lurch.
The Independent dug deeper to see how other countries handle such matters.
The Unites States, for example, has set up a Federal Housing Administration (FHA) to improve housing standards and conditions, provide an adequate home financing system through insurance of mortgage loans, and to stabilize the mortgage market.
The key question is, why is our government not doing the same? How difficult is it to collect the insurance premiums while collecting conservancy fees, or better still underwrite them? Isn’t the government creating a riskier environment for both the home owners and the lenders?

Where is the love, Singapore?

Singapore Politics

The Independent

August 17, 2013

By Herbert Teo

Having left Singapore almost 30 years ago, technology has allowed me to follow my country of birth’s birthday on August 9 as though I was there sitting in the stands in front of Marina Bay’s Floating Platform.
This year’s Singapore celebrated its 48th year of independence. The NDP has transformed itself from just pure military and marching to multimedia, colours, lights, fireworks and everything else. I follow the parade almost every year when I can because I almost became a life member of NDPs, having religiously being part of eight NDPs when I worked for the Port of Singapore Authority. I was also in the army cadets in school and the marching and uniforms and precision reaction to drill commands were close to my heart.
2013 was all of that and more. As usual, the Oos and the Aahs were very much more for all the men in their wonderful flying machines as the jetfighters and helicopters roared overhead. The might of the military was shown in its powerful killing machines, weaponry and naval prowess. Singapore was a safe place to be.
But it was not all hardness in the NDP. Over the years, as Singapore matures, the softer edges are appearing. The children on stage were just beautiful. Not only beautiful in their colorful costumes highlighted by good lighting and multimedia. I could sense it in their voices as they sung, their pride in their dancing, and mostly in the smiles on their faces. They were happy, and proud, to be Singaporean.
However, all the glitter and gold, and pomp and ceremony, could not detract me from one figure as he sat in the terraces amongst his fellow junior cabinet members. He looked frail because of his years. His hair was white and wispy. His face has aged considerably. I could not but feel the pain of a father. This man is none other than the founding father of modern Singapore, Mr. Lee Kuan Yew.
I asked myself, with all the grandeur, all the skyscrapers, all the wonderful airports, seaports and mass transit systems, WHERE IS THE LOVE? Do Singaporeans really know how to show love, and I don’t mean in a sexual way? Do Singaporeans know how to give, and receive, compliments?
I said to my wife, who was watching with me, wouldn’t it have been so nice if Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong had walked up to his father, hugged him, shook his hand and maybe invited him to sit next to the Prime Minister of Singapore? Don’t talk to me about protocol? Mr. Lee Kuan Yew is the founder of modern Singapore! Can we not be flexible and give some respect, and compliment to where it is due, by letting him sit next to his son?
I sent a message on PM Lee Hsien Loong’s Facebook on how a fantastic public relations opportunity had gone a begging. I said, if he had done what I thought he should have done, it would have left a lasting legacy amongst all Singaporeans young and old of the love that he has for his father and the love that he has for the founder of modern Singapore. In addition, it would have endeared younger Singaporeans to the concept of filial piety, something so good that is being eroded with modernization and technology.
I did get a reply from his Page Administrator saying:

“Dear Herbert,
Thank you for taking time to share your thoughts with PM.
Best wishes Page Administrator

Deep in my heart I wish the Prime Minister could publicly love his father on National Day on national – and global – television. It would have been one fantastic show of love and filial piety for all Singaporeans to follow.
This single public gesture of love by a leader could have been like Roberta Flack’s & Donna Hathaway’s 1972 hit song WHERE IS THE LOVE that made it to number five on the Billboard Hot 100 list!

Can we expect a cracker of a speech?

Singapore Politics

The Independent

August 16, 2013

The Prime Minister will be addressing the nation this Sunday at the National Day Rally. Will he be able to move the nation, address long standing issues and unify us? Tan Bah Bah puts the PM on the spot.

Sunday’s National Day Rally speech will be Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s great opportunity to move a nation that appears like a listless boat in an ocean of uncertainty.
Two rally speeches and a milestone by-election have gone by but the citizens’ angst is still palpable.
The 2011 rally was just three months after General Elections 2011. PM Lee was a contrite leader ready to listen to the people, to find out what they were unhappy about.
The issues were not yet all that properly collated. But a slew of promises were made and action pledged.
Even before that speech, the PM was in action mode announcing the reduction of ministerial pay.
The 2012 event continued to address some of the issues brought up in GE 2011 and it also covered the traditional ones – including education, shortage of babies, work-life balance.
Five months later came the loss of Punggol East to the Workers Party. PE was by no means a WP stronghold and neither was the young Lee Li Lian a heavyweight politician.
The People’s Action Party lost by a significant swing of 13.49 per cent, a harbinger of what might well be the national scenario as many of the Piunggol East residents were young and middle-class.
The ruling party has been in a serious self-assessment and listening mode since then because next came Our Singapore Conversation. About 47,000 people came forward (or were roped in) to talk about the issues egging them. This was a government setting its own pace and agenda.
Now we are at the 2013 Rally. There is suddenly a sense of urgency. It is only three years before the next general elections, expected by many to be a momentous moment.
We are now told the PM will address what emerged from the Conversation as among the most pressing issues troubling the electorate. They are those affecting jobs, housing and healthcare.
“I will also speak about how we can together make Singapore a better home for us all,” said Mr Lee in a Facebook post.
The foreigner issue is still raw despite the government rolling back many perks for PRs and putting the squeeze on the numbers.
Sunday’s speech offers the PM a great opportunity to try and put the matter to rest.
Tell foreigners that they are welcome here, but tell them they have to decide after, say five years, that they have to make up their minds about this country. Apply for citizenship or plan to leave.
As for this country called Singapore, it is at an inflexion point, as Goh Chok Tong said the other day.
And the PM, as captain of the boat, has to move all of us in a way that he has never had to do.
Words can stir, lift hearts, live on in history and collective memory, become immortal. The greatest speeches are passed down the generations because they touch a chord and resonate.
Think of Martin Luther King, Jr’s speech, I Have A Dream, proclaiming his vision of racial equality. That vision has been translated into reality, his soul-stirring words mobilizing powerful forces that helped realise his dream. There is no denying the power of words.
We look forward to a cracker of a speech from our PM.

The property reality

Singapore News

The Independent

August 16, 2013

Property curbs increase prices of HDB flats. This the new property reality.
By Leong Sze Hian
Forget those who have the bucks to continue to buy private proverties, curb or no curb.
The latest statistics which show that new private property purchases plunged 73 per cent last month, a 43-month low, are likely to mean something to the ordinary Singaporean.
One possibility is that the demand for HDB flats will go up, which can only mean an increase in the price of such homes.
It is no comfort that the BTO and resale prices are still at record highs.
When people can’t buy private property because of the new loan curbs, they may have no choice but to turn to HDB flats. Also, the new loan curbs do not apply to new Build-to-order (BTO) flats which are governed by HDB concessionary loans.
This is the new reality in Singapore: Put the squeeze on one side, the other side is going to be affected.

Trickle-down effect – Really?

Singapore News

The Independent

August 16, 2013

Throwing money at the problem is not the solution. But somehow, when members of our venture capital community, academics and government officials got together earlier this week to discuss the problems faced by local start-ups organised by the Entrepreneurship Review Committee (ERC), they figured getting some money from the government was a great idea.
However, the problems faced by our start-ups are not limited to funding.
The Independent has spoken to several start-up founders and their major concerns are:
1. A crowded market in Singapore for their products/services;
2. Lack of knowledge/know-how on expanding to overseas markets;
3. Inability to monetise their products or execute their business plans effectively;
4. Lack of access to talent who are willing to take risk with start-ups businesses; and lastly;
5. Inability to raise money from local financial institutions
Our take: learn to walk before you start to run. Provide adequate training and support for the start-ups, take them on overseas missions (don’t just limit these to the usual suspects) and start by awarding some contracts to home-grown companies first.
Give them a chance to succeed in Singapore, the money will follow.

What singaporeans, foreigners need to do

Singapore Politics

The Independent

August 16, 2013

What singaporeans, foreigners need to do

Singapore is not perfect, but it is still a good place to call home. Augustine Low writes about the need to instil love and loyalty for our country like how the Americans love their own. And he does not condone bashing in our backyard.
By Augustine Low
On Singapore’s 48^th birthday month, let’s take stock and count the ways we can stand up for Singapore.
I can start with three.
Don’t condone bashing in our backyard: I have many foreign friends. I have no problems with them competing for jobs, jostling for MRT seats and clamouring for homes. But for them to rant and rave in our own backyard is plain rude and disgusting. A few months back, I was at a gathering where this foreigner who has been working here for several years kept going on and on about how sick he was about things here, from NEWater and taxis to public hygiene and public libraries. I could not stomach it. I told him to go back to his country if he felt that way . . . just don’t make a mockery of everything while making a living here. He looked surprised and walked off sheepishly. Chances are he would think twice about doing the same thing again. But we need to speak out.
Speak out for a better Singapore: Singaporeans making their voices heard in good faith is another matter altogether. We should not bash for no reason. And we certainly must banish the notion that when we are critical of leaders and institutions, we are anti-Singapore. We may not speak with one voice because views differ, but we speak with one heart – the yearning for a better Singapore. And let’s give credit where credit is due. Singapore is not perfect, but it is a good place to call home. We only wish for it to get better.
Instil love of country: I envy the earnest love that ordinary Americans show for their country. American patriotism is sharp and sure, anchored on the promise of individual freedom. Nearer home, I like the spirit of the Filipinos and Vietnamese in their love of country. We have some way to go. For a start, let’s instil that love in our children. Get them to respect the flag, the pledge and the anthem. And if we keep at the back of our minds the idea that we could always migrate for greener pastures and cooler climates and a less stressful education system, then our affinity to home is not sharp and sure. Let’s also not condone our sons shirking National Service responsibilities. It is a good rite of passage. Defence is integral to love of country.
Augustine Low is a former journalist with The New Paper and now owns a business in the PR industry.

Lee Lilian: I have only half a term to prove myself

Singapore Politics

Kumaran Pillai

August 16, 2013

Lee Lilian: I have only half a term to prove myself

In an exclusive interview with The Independent, MP Lee Lilian speaks about local issues and why she had to quit her job as a financial trainer to focus on her constituency.

By Kumaran Pillai
Managing Editor

She made a big splash when she was elected to Parliament in January when even international media like the Wall Street Journal and The Economist sat up and took notice. “Singapore’s voters show an increased appetite for change,” proclaimed the Journal.

The opposition Workers’ Party’s Lee Lilian’s victory in the Punggol East by-election was significant not only as a vote against the ruling party but for another reason, too. It marked the triumph of the grassroots worker over the para-dropped highflyer. The voters preferred a familiar face, someone they could relate to, to a successful outsider. Koh Poh Koon, the colorectal surgeon fielded by the ruling People’s Action Party (PAP), had the potential to become a minister, according to the PM, but that did not impress the voters – they preferred someone they knew.

Lee Lilian is determined to live up to her trust. She quit her job as a financial trainer to serve the people, she told The Independent. The international attention she received on her election victory has not distracted her from keeping her eye firmly on local issues. She spoke to The Independent about what she has been doing to reduce noise from the nearby temples and the need for more childcare centres, eateries and bus services in Punggol East. Mundane matters, everyday issues that directly affect the lives of local residents.

Lee, 35, may be a new face in Parliament, but she is already canny enough to know elections are won and lost on local issues, that you have to keep your customers – sorry, constituents – satisfied.

And her work is cut out, she says, because she has only half a term to prove herself.

It has been about six months since the Punggol by-elections. How has life been since you have been elected as a Member of Parliament?

I quit my job on the 30th of April 2013 so that I can focus on serving the people because I have only half a term to prove myself. My priority was to focus on the residents and their issues, the problems that they were facing and if I could resolve them quickly. I mean, there are new issues and problems that I need to tackle every day.

Besides looking at the municipality issues, I also need to fulfil my duties as a parliamentarian. I have to look into national issues, get myself ready for Budget debate, the White paper on population as well as table Parliamentary questions. My philosophy is simple, I entered politics to serve the people and I want to keep it that way.

The Independent understands that there have been complaints about the excessive noise levels from the temples nearby. How did you go about handing this very delicate long standing issue?

As a nation, we need to live together harmoniously. So, I lost no time when this issue was first raised after the BE.

I picked on a block that is most affected to conduct my weekly house visits. I wanted to experience firsthand the kind of noise levels that they were experiencing.

At the same time, I met up with the temple management committee to discuss about the issues and I must say that I am convinced that they are already doing their best. Till today, I have yet to receive any feedback on this. And if I do, I am ready to explain to the residents what the temple have done to minimize noise pollution.

I am also aware that this is a very sensitive issue and residents understand that this is a religious organisation and they are free to practise their faith.

Are there any new amenities or improvements that are coming up in Punggol East? What are your plans?

We need to do more for the young working parents, especially if both of them are working. We need more child care centres, not just in Punggol East, but in other estates as well. The key is to keep the costs affordable for the average Singaporean who is starting a family.

I have spoken to ECDA (Early Childhood Development Agency) on this and I look forward to more centres in the short to medium term. This is one of the things that I have planned for. Other pertinent issues are the lack of eating establishments and lack of bus services along Rivervale Crescent. I have brought both issues up in Parliament.

What is you key message to your constituents?

I am here to serve and I want to thank them for putting their trust in me. My task is to look after the welfare of the residents and create the necessary conditions for them to raise their families in Punggol East. Everybody, including those who didn’t vote for me is under my care and I will do my very best to ensure that their needs are taken care of.

Iskandar hit or hype?

Featured News

The Independent

August 15, 2013

New projects are springing up in Iskandar, Johor but where are the tenants? Buyers are concerned about high crime rates in JB.

By Mathew Yap
“What do you think of Johor-Iskandar as an investment?” I casually asked Delvin, a director of a well-known Singapore-based property consultancy firm. He paused momentarily, then retorted: “Where are the tenants? I have yet to see tenants flocking in and meanwhile the projects are springing up very quickly.”
Excitement on Iskandar seemed to hit fever pitch six months ago after the prime ministers of Malaysia and Singapore officiated at the signing ceremony for Danga Bay Marina on Feb 19, 2013.
According to press reports, the two giants, Khazanah Nasional Bhd and Temasek Holdings, will develop a $3.2 billion township with another private Malaysian firm, Iskandar Waterfront Holdings, in the once swampy Danga Bay. The 71.4- acre site will be turned into a waterfront marina city by 2018 overlooking Sinagpore’s Sungei Buloh shore .
But just as new marketing brochures for Iskandar rolled out, a word of caution flew out of the pages of Lee Kuan Yew’s book, One Man’s View Of The World. “Let’s wait and see how Iskandar develops. This is an economic field of cooperation in which, you must remember, we are putting investments on Malaysian soil… And at the stroke of a pen, they can take it over. They are not likely to because they want more investments… When we go there, we must understand that any real estate or building that you plant on the ground belongs to the owner of the ground.” Mr Lee said in his book.
In response, Malaysia’s Johor’s former chief minister Abdul Ghani said Iskandar had been rapidly progressing in the past five years and therefore negative views were unwarranted.
And, as if to help prove Ghani’s point, one of China’s top developers, Country Garden, on August 11, chartered several buses to bring in hundreds of Singapore residents and Chinese nationals to the carnival-like sale launch ceremony for its $300 -400 per sq foot Danga Bay Country Garden condominium . The event was even graced by the Johor Sultan. Half the buyers were from China, 30 per cent Malaysians, and the remaining 20 per cent Singapore-based residents.
The Iskandar fervor is understandable having seemingly reached a tipping point last year – with the apparent successful completion of LEGOLAND, Puteri Harbour Family Theme Park and several education institutions, coupled with the announcement of the High-Speed Rail Singapore-KL line.
This led one major Malaysian bank to proclaim: “We remain bullish on this growth corridor and advise investors to position for the longer term.”
The main lure of Iskandar for property buyers, especially those from Singapore, is the price and, by implication, more space. Singapore property prices are now at new peak levels – 45-50% up from 2008 – which has prompted the government to introduce stringent measures to curtail investment demand. While average prices at Johor-Iskandar have also more than doubled since 2008, current house prices remain 5-10 times lower than in Singapore. As one Singaporean, Jonathan, in his 40s, puts it : “Sadly prices of HDB may be even higher than that of some properties in Iskandar, JB. But, rather than gripe about the situation, it might be better to take advantage of it and invest.”
Many analysts have given the thumbs up for Iskandar, often citing the buy-in of top political leaders and direct investment from the GLCs like Khazanah Nasional and Temasek Holdings as the key reason for optimism.
But not all is rosy for Iskandar. Crime remains a serious concern for many residents and investors – only 10 per cent of the 112,000-strong police force is actually “field-deployed” in fighting crime, according to one UMNO Vice-President source, and with the recent spate of high-profile killings in Malaysia, though not in Johor itself, many Singaporeans are understandably spooked.
Another potential source of discomfort is the regulatory and governance framework on contracts and investment issues which may be subject to changes depending on the Johor state and federal capital policy directions. For example, there is talk that the foreign ownership consent levy will be raised from the current RM10,500 RM (including RM500 administrative fee) to RM30,000.
In June, Johor Menteri Besar Datuk Mohamed Khaled Nordin said the state government would impose higher taxes on properties owned by foreigners by year’s end.
Currently, Malaysia allows foreigners to buy residential and commercial properties above RM500,000 in value. Industrial properties, agriculture and development land have other requirements to comply with. But recent press reports suggest that the Government may increase the threshold figure to RM1 million to curb rising prices and keep them affordable for the average Malaysian households.
Such changing political winds dictated by local needs may be the single greatest worry for new investors getting into new ventures in Iskandar.