Why the Urban Renewal Act needs tenant protections and community consultation

An open letter to Housing and Local Government Minister Nga Kor Ming

I would most respectfully urge you to defer the tabling of the Urban Renewal Act to next year, as many groups including residents’ associations, the National House Buyers Association and political parties have raised legitimate concerns.

These concerns have to be addressed so that a wider consensus is attained before the amended and improved bill is tabled in Parliament.

The socialist party PSM would like the government to look into several issues that we had flagged earlier (in addition to the points being raised by other groups).

The first is the issue of tenants. The current proposed bill is silent on this. Some of the rundown flats have many low-income families staying there because the rents are low in these dilapidated buildings.

The report that is mentioned in Section 4 of the bill should present the data regarding these tenants, and the planned redevelopment should take into account their residential needs.

Perhaps state governments should consider putting up a PPR (People’s Housing Programme) flat in the vicinity of the redevelopment project so that housing units can be rented out to these families at rates that are affordable to them.

The second point the PSM would like to raise is that there should be local community consultation before redevelopment plans are finalised. There is no provision for this in the proposed bill.

Urban renewal often leads to a higher population density. Will this cause traffic congestion or flash floods because the infrastructure isn’t sufficient? Will there be green spaces for the children to play?

All of these should be addressed in the proposal to redevelop the area, and the local community (which should include all people staying within 1km of the planned redevelopment site) should be given an avenue to give their feedback.

Public consultation should be mandated in the bill with clear avenues for the public to complain if they feel their concerns haven’t been adequately addressed by planners. Perhaps they too can complain to the mediation committee, described under Section 14(2) of the bill.

In this context, Sections 10(3) and 11(3) need to be jettisoned. These two clauses state that the failure of any person to object to the plan within 30 days of being informed of it, can be presumed to indicate consent on his or her part. This is rather heavy-handed and undemocratic.

The final point we would like to raise is the independence of the urban renewal mediation committee. Section 14(2) of the proposed bill confers the power to appoint this mediation committee to both the federal and the state executive committee.

However, the executive committee is the body that decides on the project, selects the developer and approves the redevelopment plans. The mediation committee can only be impartial and fair if it is not under the direct control of the executive committee.

Part IV of the bill needs to be reconfigured to define an independent committee that is entrusted with the selection of the members of the urban renewal mediation committee. The independent selection committee should comprise individuals such as retired judges, senior professionals, trade union leaders and a representative from the residents’ association.

The sultan or governor of the state should be required to appoint members of the mediation committee every three years as advised by the selection committee described above. The mediation committee should be allocated sufficient funds to employ staff to carry out its responsibilities.

This principle of the separation of powers is crucial for the better governance of our country and should be observed in all instances where a mechanism of checks and balances is set up. This mechanism must be independent of the executive branch of government. If not, there is a real risk of it being weaponised against groups that are not aligned to the executive.

We hope that the “Madani” (trustworthy) government will set a good example to future administrations by taking the concerns expressed by various groups seriously, and creating a space where these concerns can be aired and resolved through suitable amendments to the Urban Renewal Bill.