In 1970, the PAP Government introduced the Controlled Premises (Special Provisions) Act to allow landlords to recover their let property for redevelopment purposes, and at the same time, compensate their tenants after their premises are vacate. In order to do so, a landlord has to first submit an application to the Tenants' Compensation Board (TCB) to recover the rent-controlled property. The TCB requires the landlord to compensate his tenants only if they are eligible for such compensation.

Then, on 3 April 1997, the Government announced on that rent control would be abolished on 1 April 2001. In Parliament recently, the Control of Rent (Abolition) Bill 2001 is about to be passed to abolish rent control in three stages.

Firstly, the Control of Rent Act will be abolished effective from 1 April 2001. Meanwhile, the Controlled Premises (Special Provisions) Act will remain with the purpose of allowing the TCB to settle outstanding matters. Finally, the Controlled Premises (Special Provisions) Act will be eradicated totally and the TCB dissolved.

Although a large number of Singaporeans are middle-class, there is still a significant proportion of poor, who will be affected the most with the abolition of Control of Rent Act, even after being laid down at a disadvantage with the Controlled Premises (Special Provisions) Act being passed in 1970. Of course, the already-rich land owners will reap the benefits. They now have a free hand to price and do whatever they want with their rent-controlled property.

The attainment of first-world status and a responsive public housing programme does not justify the need to abolish the Control of Rent Act. The Internal Security Act (ISA) is becoming increasing obsolete, but still exists today. Singaporeans who can barely manage their financial straits and are living under rent-controlled property will lose the only ombudsman they have with the closure of TCB. The Government of Singapore is beginning favour the rich more and more. At the same time, foreigners holding Permanent Residence (PR) or work permits and are living in rented homes will also be susceptible to manipulation of rent rates. This goes against our policy of inviting foreign talent into our shores.

It is not plausible for the Government to turn a blind eye to these facts. With these implementations, the backlash, no matter how small, will be felt in the upcoming General Election due by August 2002, and send a signal as to how many people below the poverty line dwells on our tiny island.