Public Rental Housing in Singapore – A Last Resort?

Introduction: Housing a Nation 

Public housing in Singapore is the most "intrusive social engineering" ⁽¹⁾1. Jeremy Au Yong, “Singapore's neighbourhoods key to social inclusion, says DPM Tharman,”The Straits Times, December 01 2015, (accessed 20 Dec 2018).project that the state utilises to manage its populace. What is less understood, though, is the evolution of public housing rental schemes in Singapore. Singapore's housing policies are not standalone ⁽²⁾2. Kok Hoe Ng, “Public housing policy in Singapore,” Global-is-Asian, (accessed 28 Dec 2018). as they also take on multiple peripheral roles in fulfilling politico-ideological purposes of nation building.

Initially , In the 1960s, public housing was assigned a rental status and the scheme was first conceptualised as a 'low rent' scheme; a "deliberate policy of the government to improve the standard of living of the people" as it catered to the broad masses of society ⁽³⁾3. Housing and Development Board, Annual Report 1969. Singapore.. One of its main tasks was to rehouse the "urban poor" ⁽⁴⁾4. Belinda Yuen, “Squatters no more: Singapore social housing,” Land and Urban Policies for Poverty Reduction, (2005): 269., and subsequently evolved to serve two main functions⁽⁵⁾5. Ibid:

1. Provide low-income groups with rental housing
2. Provide middle-income groups with a homeownership scheme

The push for homeownership policies was in the interest of the late Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew's political and economic drive to give every Singaporean 'a stake' in the country.

Due to economic growth, the 'urban poor' had branched out into several categories, one of which is the 'very low-income' group referring to the bottom 5 percent of the population by income⁽⁶⁾6. Ibid . This group, which required the most assistance, would be housed in public rental housing flats, effectively transforming the utility of rental flats for the intention of housing the poor.

Block 25 Hougang Avenue 3, a rental housing block in Hougang constituency (Source: Authors’ photograph)

Jalan Kukoh neighbourhood, where rental flats are clustered within one neighbourhood in Jalan Besar constituency (Source: Authors’ photograph)

Rental flats of Blk 299B, Tampines Street 22, on the left together with purchased flats within Tampines constituency (Source: Authors’ photograph)

While this group requires government intervention to meet their housing needs, the public rental scheme was reframed by the government as the 'last resort' option in 2009. This raises two important policy questions:

1. How does the government determine who qualifies for public rental housing?
2. How much resources should the government provide for rental flats?

How the government approaches these questions have important social ramifications, affecting multiple domains of life.

Questions and Challenges: Who Qualifies?

Determining eligibility for rental flats is not just an administrative prescription but also a moral decision. The government has to assess and identify the specific needs of individuals and at the same time, make a moral judgement on whether they qualify for rental flats.

1. Family as the first line of support

The government takes the dogmatic position that the family must be the first line of support, emphasising that the government will only step in when the family lacks the resources to fulfil their needs. This is a fundamental principle guiding social policies in Singapore⁽⁷⁾7. Beng Huat Chua, Political Legitimacy and Housing: Stakeholding in Singapore, London: Routledge (1997)., and this can also be seen in the way the government assesses who qualifies for rental flats. However, such criteria assumes that healthy family ties are the norm without considering the complexities of family dynamics.

Acknowledging the complexity of family dynamics, the Government adopts a 'case-by-case' approach in dealing with situations which fall out of the prescribed policy. However, while this allows for some flexibility, it remains a difficult task for ground administrators to assess and account for the conditions of the families when deciding their eligibility.

2. 'Normal Family' ideology

In deciding the eligibility for rental flats, the government asserts authority in its conception of the normal family ideology since its pro-family stance in 1987⁽⁸⁾8. Mie Hiramoto and Shi Ling Cherise Teo. “Heteronormative love makes a house a home: Multimodal analysis of luxury housing ads in Singapore,” Journal of Language and Sexuality 4, no. 2 (2015), 223-253.. The  ideal type is made up of an extended family consisting of three generations - grandparents, parents, and children - and is a legally married heterosexual couple with three or more children if they can afford it. ⁽⁹⁾9. Paulin Tay Straughan, “The Social Contradictions of the Normal Family: Challenges to the Ideology,” Working Paper 135, Department of Sociology, National University of Singapore (1999).. This policy effectively excludes unwed parents and divorcees from the family nucleus, denying them from access to rental flats. The government, till now, is still resistant against such provision as it goes against their vision to promote familyhood and homeownership.

3. Identifying the poor

Drawing the line between those who do and do not need rental flats can be arbitrary. The government has set the income ceiling at S$1500 and this figure appears to be pegged to the income level of the bottom 20th percentile. When asked in 2011 if the Housing and Development Board (HDB) would revise the income criterion in view of increasing median household income due to inflation, then Minister of National Development responded that, "while the median income has moved, the bottom 20 percentile has not," ⁽¹⁰⁾10.  2011, Singapore Parliamentary Debates. November 21, Vol 88, 552-553. which implicitly suggests that the income criterion is pegged to the bottom 20th percentile.

4. Unqualified Qualified - Illusive 'Case-by-Case' basis

The illusive 'case-by-case' basis mentioned previously highlights the discretionary measures impinged on individuals who ostensibly do not qualify but are still considered in the application process. The process entails great uncertainty whenever individuals - especially those who are single parents - appeal to the relevant authorities for assistance. Furthermore, individuals must invest significant portions of their time and energy, in order to go against the tide of bureaucracy to make their appeal cases. Doing so has may create more resentment towards the system than resolution.

Policy Recommendations

In March 2019, the government took steps to resolve the issue involving different ministries by setting up the Homeownership Support Team (HST) ⁽¹¹⁾11.  Rachel Au-Yong, “Parliament: HDB to form team dedicated to spot families in rental flats who may be able to buy their own homes,” The Straits Times, March 05 2019,  (accessed 31 Aug 2019) dedicated to spot families in rental flats who may be able to buy their own homes in order to mitigate income inequality in a more holistic way.

As Senior Parliamentary Secretary for National Development Sun Xueling explained, this was the government's endeavour to provide individualised approach to uplift lower-income families - "We want to provide stronger, personalised hand-holding for families who are ready for home ownership" ⁽¹²⁾12.  Ibid.⁽¹³⁾13. Rachel Au-Yong, “Debate on ministries’ budgets - HDB setting up team to help rental-flat families buy own homes,” The Straits Times, March 05 2019, (accessed 31 Aug 2019).  .

We suggest reviewing the fundamentals of the public rental housing scheme through a better understanding of the changing landscape of low-income rental dwellers. This includes considering emerging trends, i.e., rise in single-parent application for rental flats, to see if there is a need to revise the eligibility criteria so that the scheme works to prioritise urgent cases.

1. Long-term integrated investment to achieve upward social mobility

Policies proposed should also focus on the long-term investment of individuals and families for them to successfully achieve upward social mobility. While the government has provided more support to assist rental flat dwellers to achieve homeownership, this remains an aspiration for many others who will be confined by their financial circumstances to rental flats. Rental flats have always functioned as temporary shelters for the low-income, but as more individuals and families require rental flats for long-term housing without the means to become homeowners, policies need to be recalibrated to reflect the changing rental flat housing circumstances, or the government would risk excluding those that it intends to provide assistance. As greater burden falls on the government to help more rental dwellers over longer periods, assistance to rental dwellers will need to be more integrated – where the community, family, and market gets more involved in. The government will need to encourage more actors to contribute in tackling the issue and share the burden.

2. Inter-governmental dialogue for mutual understanding

With respect to the Government's recommendation of mixed-income blocks in May 2018 ⁽¹⁴⁾14.  Ng Jun Sen, “Parliament: HDB to go one step further to integrate rental and sold flats in same block, says Lawrence Wong,” The Straits Times, May 17 2018, (accessed 31 Aug 2019). ,  comprehensive conversations should be conducted with key stakeholders, i.e., rental flat dwellers, homeowners, government representatives, social workers, non-profit organisations, philanthropic organisations, and most importantly, the Minister of National Development.

A key challenge facing mixed neighbourhood areas is the tension between individuals and families from home owned units and rental units. Homeowners may raise various objections to having rental dwellers as neighbours, and if the plan is instituted on a larger scale without sorting out the intricacies of this issue, day-to-day neighbourly conflicts will be a common occurrence.

3. Addressing physical conditions of rental flats

Apart from incorporating rental dwellers into mixed neighbourhoods as the norm, housing policies should be revised to address the physical conditions of rental flats. The size of rental flats should be allocated according to the family size, and the government should consider limited provision of three- and four-room rental flats for large families where available, while providing them with the abovementioned social support to achieve upward social mobility.

4. Relooking into the Homeownership Scheme

Without resting on its laurels, the government should widen its housing ideological focus to encompass the need to uplift the bottom 5 percent of low-income individuals and families to help them become homeowners. Without a strong narrative that acknowledges not just the needs of low-income rental dwellers, but also that some need more time to break out of their poverty cycles, rental flats and their occupants will continue to be stigmatised in society and be blamed for their plight despite the realities of intergenerational social immobility. While rental flats are viewed as a last resort, they should also be seen as safe havens where rental dwellers can be assured of sufficient social support so that they may improve their standard of living.

Conclusion

Ultimately, with the government's role as the primary agent assisting the low-income, more robust discussions and policy recommendations are needed to tackle the changing nature of the public rental housing scheme. How then the government decides to facilitate this notion of self-led and community-led social intervention will produce consequential outcomes with respect to the degree of upward social mobility among the low-income.

For a more in-depth review of the issues and debate, read the case study, Public Housing in Singapore - A Last Resort?, by Lim Jun Jie Gabriel, Muhammad Ruzaini Naim Bin Azman, and Tham Kah Jun Gregory under the guidance of Dr Ng Kok Hoe.

For more public policy case studies from the Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy, visit https://lkyspp.nus.edu.sg/research/case-studies/all-case-studies.