Is HDB Apartment As Affordable As A $8 CAGB?

When I read that the Minister of National Develoment said, "BTO flats affordable for first-timers " and  "I think not enough credit is given to my ministry' with a smile, (ST Page A6 17 Nov 2012) I thought, maybe just maybe, during his $8 Coronary Artery Graft Bypass operation, the surgeons might have accidentally removed Khaw Boon Wan's Buddhist heart! [Link]

"We take affordability fully into account when pricing BTO flats. New flats enjoy generous discounts off market prices" . .  . "Looking at it from the situation that we are facing today, I find these figures very reasonable."

"Resale price is beyond my control. That is set by buyer and seller. But for first-timers buying BTO flats, that is within my control and it is my job to ensure it will be affordable." (emphasis mine and italics appeared in ST). Maybe a BTO flat can be as affordable as a $8 CAGB? [Link]

So the rise in prices of new HDB flats (12% since 2009) is less than that of resale units (34% since 2009). With that Khaw Boon Wan "think not enough credit is given to my ministry". The way that ministers go about asking and claiming credit (more so in their facebook) is discomfortingly embarrassing! Worse, it feels like in kick in the testicles when they still want credit after messing us up by increasing the price of HDB flats!

For the life of me and the rest of common Singaporeans, I do not understand how on earth a HDB flat is "subsidised" when the cost of building it is less than the selling price. I also cannot bring myself to accept the logic of HDB benchmarking its BTO selling price to prices of open market resale flats! If it is within the control of Khaw Boon Wan, why is he still pricing BTO flats the way he does?

The word affordable is so relative. In relation to a ministers's pay, the price of a BTO 4-room apartment at $310,000 is merely loose change in the pocket. However, to a commoner in Singapore, $310,000 (excluding interest) is one heck of a sum that needs maybe more than a life time to pay!!!

"We can't just measure our success by GDP growth, important as this is, but also by the growth of our values: compassion, empathy, altruism, love for our fellow citizens," said PM Lee Hsien Loong [Link]. If only they can do what they preach then NATO would not stand for "No Action, Talk Only!" What about "building a democratic society based on justice and equality" that our school kids and teachers read out loud every school day? Many concerned citizens and I are deafened by the silence from the Prime Minister on his PAP colleague Seah Kian Peng's intervention in a Traffic Warden's job [Link]. Does that mean MP Seah is more equal and has more justice than other Singaporeans? If silence from PM means consent, I guess we are done for!

To knock some senses into PAP and show that great ideas do not necessary come from the overpaid PAP ministers, I'm glad that SDP has worked on alternatives that the cheap NATCON (National Conversation) would do its utmost to avoid. As expected, they declined the invitation by SDP to a National Conversation that touches so many in Singapore!

Please read the exchanges below.

feedmetothefish

9 November 2012
Dear Mr Jufrie,
Thank you for sharing SDP’s housing plan with us.
MND has also received suggestions from other Singaporeans regularly. We welcome all feedback and suggestions, as they help us fine tune our policies.

Yours sincerely,
Tan Pei Shan (Ms)
Deputy Director / Housing
for Permanent Secretary
Ministry of National Development.

SDP then wrote back saying that what Singapore’s public housing needs is an overhaul rather than just “fine-tuning”.

SDP said, “When Singaporeans are retiring without CPF savings because they have sunk their funds into over-priced HDB flats, the situation calls for an overhaul, not fine-tuning.”

SDP’s reply:
15 November 2012
Khaw Boon Wan
Minister
Ministry of National Development
Singapore

Dear Sir,
I thank you for your reply dated 9 November 2012 through your Permanent Secretary.
It is incomprehensible that you would consider the public housing in need of only “fine-tuning”. You seem not to understand the anger and frustration that Singaporeans have with the public housing system.

When the HDB markets a three-room flat for nearly $800,000 the situation calls for drastic action, not “fine-tuning”. When Singaporeans are retiring without CPF savings because they have sunk their funds into over-priced HDB flats the situation calls for an overhaul, not “fine-tuning”. When, our younger generation put off having children because they cannot afford buying their own homes the situation calls for reform, not “fine-tuning”.
I hope that you will be able to see that the problems Singaporeans face over housing are real and significant.

I invite you to give the housing situation in Singapore a full and public airing by debating the SDP so that Singaporeans can compare and contrast the PAP’s system with the SDP’s plan. This will allow the people to see which policy is better for them and choose accordingly at the next elections.

Thank you.

Jufrie Mahmood
Chairman
Singapore Democratic Party

[Link]