Singapore Election 2011

Latest news and updates about Singapore's 14th GE

Example of PAP making profits from forced land acquisitions

Posted by singaporege2011 on April 19, 2011

Posted by Ray Han as a comment on Yahoo News

The big land around Kew Drive & Jalan Haji Salam, and between Eastwood Road & Bedok Ria Drive used to be a freehold land. In early 1970s, the PAP government came knocking and telling the residents saying that the land is needed urgently for national development in defence & infrastructure.

The land around Kew Drive used to be a Muslim cemetery. When this land acquisition notice was enforced on the people staying there, nobody, I repeat NOBODY, dared to say anything as you know who was in charge then!?!? But much later, after the land had been cleared & everybody out (including my Great Aunt & Uncle who owned land there), the affected people found that PAP actually had sold the land to developers based on open tender system.

As you can see now, most house, in fact all houses there are now on 99-year lease. Not a single HDB flat, hospital or polyclinic is been built. My great aunt received less than $8000 for a land that is now worth more than $3m! So much for “national development”. This is one way how the PAP government used trickery, deceit & manipulation to land-grab all the real estate in Singapore. And, this is just one example.

The trick that this PAP government used is simple. They used national policies as a means to generate income to be locked into the reserves. And this reserves actually come from the people of Republic of Singapore, not from the PAP’s reserves!

Source: Yahoo News


7 Responses to “Example of PAP making profits from forced land acquisitions”

  1. mic o mic said

    Chinatown, All houses were gazetted and became state property. Owners compensated peanuts. Later individual shophouses were auctioned off at more than a million a piece and buyers had to restore it themselves. A complete robbery.

  2. atobe said

    With LKY being the master practitioner in the black art of ‘DUPLICITY’ for his political relevance and survival, it is not a surprise that The “Pro Alien Party” will similarly be an expert and skilled practitioner in ‘DUPLICITY’ to govern Singapore.

    For 52 years – since 1959 – generations of Singaporeans have been duped by LKY and his “Pro Alien Party” into giving him blind support inspite of his thinly disguised manipulation of ‘duplicity’.

    After 52 years, it is not a surprise that he will ungratefully call Singaporeans to be ‘DAFT’ – and that Singaporeans are ‘not corrupt’ as we are are ignorant, while Hongkongers are shameless, and Taiwanese are ruthless.

  3. seah yang howe said

    We have Mah Bow Tan saying building flats on cheap land (Am I correct)tantamounts to robbing our national reserves. But did the minister question where the land came from in the first place? Wasnt the land robbed from the very people who stayed there for many years, to be evicted and paid very little and have to fork our thousands to get back a roof on their head? All the time, the amount compensated was not enough to buy back a flat that was built on their land.

    Why cant the HDB at least give them back a free flat? We have developers who are willing to demolish your semi-D build 2 terraces and give you back a smaller but new house. WHy cant the HDB do that? Are they finaicially too inefficient?

  4. DD said

    My Uncles had a 3 store shophouse on High Street. Taken away for pittance.

    Another Aunt Stamford Road – also same thing.

  5. Geoff said

    Teng Fuh’s land at 20-22 Geylang Road and the Cashin family’s sprawling land at Punggol, all compulsorily acquired for a song during Teh Cheang Wan/LKY’s time:


  6. Singaporean said

    An ex-colleague and her family used to own a large plot of land in Punggol which was used for their boating business.

    There were several similar businesses there. All were forcefully moved to Keppel, under the Land Acquisition Act which compensated them a pittance for freeold land.

    They tried to put up a fight but it was futile.

    See how much the HDB selling their 99-year flats in Punggol for ?

  7. Albert Street Resident said

    My family lived in a huge house at Albert Street and we had also shophouses along Prinsep St and Rochor Canal Road. All these were compulsorily acquired during the 1970s by the Govt supposedly for public purposes and the compensation was a pittance (over 20,000 sq feet for under $100K). What was the public purpose? One part was sold to a private developer (Sim Lim) to be developed as Sim Lim Square (I don’t have the stat for how much it was sold for), and the other part was sold to Wing Tai for over $300 million who built up Burlington Square. This is daylight robbery / plunder and grab, and not an honest acquisition of money. The PAP Government is no better than the pirates in Somalia.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: