ALL RELEVANT INFORMATION MUST BE SHARED
In assessing how the government has handled the matter, analysts have said that the time between the issue emerging and detailed information being released would fuel more talk and speculation. However, rushing to respond has its drawbacks when there is a need for accuracy.
Leader of the Opposition Pritam Singh and three lawmakers from the ruling People’s Action Party have already tabled questions on the matter.
More importantly, the release of the review’s findings will allow a “thorough and meaningful debate”, said Assoc Prof Tan, adding that the government “is not in the habit of drip-feeding information and also does not want to be seen to be caving in to all demands for further particulars”.
NTU’s Dr Tan called for an “honest” debate about the details of the review and how it was conducted.
Beyond that, all relevant documents and correspondence relating to the two leases should be made public, the political observers said.
“As a country that prides itself on its stringent stance against corruption, Singapore and its officials must of course take steps to ensure that there is no perception of bias in favour of its policymakers and officeholders,” said Ms Ngiow.
“A possible resolution could be for the government to take a radically transparent approach through the publication of all relevant and supporting documents in parliament to reassure the public that no special treatment was involved in the process,” she added.
These documents would include lease agreements and documentation relating to disclosure of interests, as well as the trail of correspondence within SLA and between the agency and the lessees of the two properties.
“These documents can be appropriately redacted such as for market-sensitive information or confidential information,” said SMU’s Assoc Prof Tan, adding that further information on the guide rent and the number of bids submitted for the properties could also be provided.
Dr Tan from NTU said the government’s report should provide clarity on how the decisions for the rental transactions were made by SLA, for example by providing a timeline for how and when the approvals to rent the two properties to the ministers were reached and who was involved in these approvals.
“There is a need for some kind of thoroughness in the investigation and the report,” he told CNA.
The identity of the “senior Cabinet colleague” whom Mr Shanmugam had notified in 2018 about his bid for the property should also be made known.
Doing so will help to provide transparency and due diligence in establishing the facts of the matter, said Dr Tan.
“The revelation of the identity of this senior Cabinet colleague would also ensure that he or she was not complicit, in any way, with regard to this matter”, the political analyst from NTU added.