TR EMERITUS

Dear Mr Mah, I refer to the comments you made in parliament as reported by Straits Times on 23 Feb 2010. You said that the BTO scheme reduces uncertainty for flat buyers because they are now in a good position to plan for when they will get their flats.  On the other hand, the BTO scheme also means that flat buyers cannot get their flats as quickly as their circumstances require. You said HDB took five years to clear what was at one point 31,000 unsold flats in the 1990s.  That could be due to flats being built at undesirable locations.  In addition, we must be careful with what we mean by "waste of public money".  We must acknowledge that the flats were ultimately sold and not left unoccupied so there is no waste of public money as far as building the flats is concerned.  The only real loss would be the interest losses due to the five year delay in the receipt of mortgage payments from occupants.  So it's not so much a waste of public money but a delay in HDB receiving money from occupants. You said in the mid-1990s, there were 150,000 applicants and the waiting time was six, seven years which seems to suggest that the waiting time for the old system was much longer than the current 3.5 years for BTO.  However, we were building flats for 150,000 applicants then compared to 12,000 flats we are building this year.  Can HDB build 150,000 BTO flats in 3.5 years?  Chances are, it will take the HDB seven, eight years also. So please don't portray the BTO like the magic bullet that it isn't. Thank you Ng Kok Lim  Read More →

By MJ (S-League correspondent)   The 2010 S-League season has kicked off with two new foreign clubs in the fold, Etoile FC and Beijing Guoan (the latter styled as Beijing Guoan Talent FC). The inclusion of the new clubs, especially Beijing Guoan Talent, has been hotly debated in the local football fraternity, as the FAS has omitted Yishun Reds in the process (a local club converted from Super Reds). Many supporters of the local league have bemoaned the admission of yet another Chinese club as more local footballers are deprived of the opportunity to play in the S-League and hence the chance to play professional football. To date, the track records of Chinese clubs in the S-League have been unimpressive, to say the least. Beijing Guoan’s predecessors - Sinchi FC, Dalian Shide Siwu FC and Liaoning Guangyuan FC - have all failed to provide a respectable challenge to the local sides and all of them had finished in the bottom half of the league. China’s own domestic league (Chinese Super League) has been plagued with match-fixing scandals which they had struggled to eradicate over time. Recently, two Chinese clubs were relegated by the FA after investigations revealed that they had bribed oppositions.[1] Observers noted that this incident is by no means isolated and may be just the tip of the iceberg of a massive problem in Chinese domestic football. This attitude of tolerance to match-fixing had spilled over to the S-League as several players and officials of Liaoning Guangyuan FC were charged and jailed after allegations of match-fixing surfaced in 2008. There is no suggestion here that Beijing Guoan Talent FC’s parent club is corrupted, but the link is undeniable. Beijing Guoan Talent are three matches into their maiden campaign and over 300 minutes of football, they had shown nothing on the pitch to suggest that they can live up to their management’s promise of good football before the campaign had started[2]. They only have earned a point from a goalless draw with Woodlands Wellington FC and lost their season opener with fellow debutant Etoile FC to a single late goal. They have also been knocked out of the Singapore League Cup by perennial underdogs Sengkang Punggol. The bulk of their squad consists of players below the age of 21. To the parent club, this is just a reserve league to help their young players obtain some playing time. How can these young and inexperienced players be expected to provide a strong challenge to the local sides? When fatigue and homesickness kicks in as the season progresses, expect poorer performances from this side. On the other hand, FAS may have a wider political agenda to include a Chinese team in the league to attract the large number of PRC immigrants here. What they had failed to realise is that football is never that popular a sport in China and domestic football hardly gets a mention in the Chinese media. As the first few Beijing Guoan Talent games had proven, large crowd of Chinese fans waving the PRC flag did not turn up at the stadia to back “their” team. The FAS has made another poor decision in choosing Beijing Guoan Talent FC. The S-League is a local league and it should be provide local football players with the platform to play at the highest level possible. There is a danger here of the S-League becoming a feeder league to another domestic league. There are a lot of reasons not to include this Chinese side and FAS seemed to have missed them all. Let us not forget that there are still several defunct ex-S-League sides (including Sembawang Rangers and Tanjong Pagar United) still waiting for financial support to make a return but they had been widely ignored by FAS.   About the author - MJ has watched more S-League games than anyone he knows and hopes to see it blossom into one of the strongest leagues in the region. He is however annoyed by the lack coverage in the mainstream media and hopes to be the alternative voice [1] http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/8527889.stm [2] http://www.todayonline.com/Sports/EDC100119-0000084/Beijing-Guoan-start-with-a-clean-slate,-say-FAS  Read More →

作者:冀居·谢 2010年2月22日早报 《让辩论在明确的事实上驰骋》是难得一见、允执厥中的社论。虽然还是拖了一条烂尾巴：『基于让社会舆论贴近理性的需要，建屋局(HDB)理应延续至今公布详细数据的做法，让极端和非理性的观点，在舆论市场中没有立锥之地。』——虽口口声声说要“理性辩论”，却难逃“未审先判”。 社论说：『建屋局近日开始陆续公布的2008年住户抽样调查报告，可谓来得及时，其详细数据，不但让民众可以对公共住房 (public housing) 现状有一个全面性的了解，还可以让大家在具体而明确的事实基础上，进行理性的讨论。』——可是根据这些薄弱数据的解读，我想引出的疑问比“明确的事实基础”还多，这是用数据“骗人不晓”的乌鱼战术。 【有8000户家庭调查样本的结果却发现，约86%的受访住户认为组屋“屋”有所值；此外，近81%住户对自己有能力负担及拥有组屋感到自豪。当然，这并不否定还未购买组屋的年轻人就没有焦虑感……】 这完全是卖家观点，问题是这些屋主是在哪一个年份、或“朝代”买下组屋的？是在1990年吴作栋接棒当总理之前还是之后、是在2004年李显龙接棒当总理之前 还是之后？如果是在吴作栋之前，那时买下的组屋所需数千至数万元而已，如果是在吴作栋和李显龙之间的，那时也是十几万一间，这样的成本，谁不认为屋有所 值，和“对自己有能力负担及拥有组屋感到自豪”呢？ 【2008年的组屋住户有88%是新加坡公民，永久居民为8%，外国人只有4%。】 这个更是“难得糊涂”，如果建屋局或马宝山(Mah Bow Tan)有诚意的话，应该定量分析这88%的新加坡公民里面，有多少是在吴作栋之前就住在组屋、有多少是在李显龙之前拥有组屋、又有多少是从97之后接受中港移民(Chinese Hong Kong immigrants)的这个时间点上？ 因为80%以上的国人都住进组屋，似乎是在吴作栋时代已经成就（那时的PR几乎都是和我们有历史渊源的马来西亚人），那么12%的新移民和外国人是什么时候形成的，人们要知道的是近年来新移民对组屋市场的冲击。 同样，永久居民属于一个变数（有买了组屋还不变公民的吗？那可亏大了），这个数字是怎样在这十年内变化的，并且每年有多少人脱离这个数据成为公民，其中突变的最高点是发生在什么时候？ 【建屋局的数据表明，在以年轻族群为主的首次预购组屋者当中，竟然有半数在抽签到选购机会后决定放弃购屋，无怪乎接受本报采访的房地产经纪，都对于如此高比例 的弃权者感到讶异。在建屋局去年推出的11个预购组屋项目中，平均申请率将近四倍，一些项目甚至出现七人抢购一个单位的热潮。】 这个『半数在抽签到选购机会后决定放弃购屋』有点语焉不详，就是说有70人抢10间组屋，结果10个抽到的人有一半（即5个）不行使购物权，那么之后还有没有第二轮抽签呢等等……是不是表面上报章报道 说预购组屋七人抢一间，实际上有时还卖不完？那么这5个应该归回到另外60个抽不到的，那么就不止一半的人参与投标而不买，因为建屋局对这65人根本不知 道他们心里想什么，制度出了问题，他们还不知检讨？ 【另一个容易引发情绪化讨论的面向，是组屋真实成本与津贴售价的差异。】 这个问题自詹时中(Chiam See Tong)驾富士维根(Volkswagen)到处竞选拉票时，建屋局已经无法说清楚了，何况去年詹时中还庆祝连任国会议员25年，说起来已经是搁置了四分之一个世纪的老问题。 其中关键的莫过于土地成本。 有人甚至辩论说建屋局根本没有土地成本的问题，因为这些都是从建国初期，通过立法手段豪夺过来的土地。你有听说过建屋局向公开市场购地建组屋吗？ 这些库存到现在还用不完，甚至还以市价出售给私人发展商去兴建购物商场、公寓和洋房。马宝山说的津贴其实只是把土地时价算进去的惺惺作态，这一层画皮只要戳破，肯定损失不少选票。 来源：大马论坛  Read More →