.jpg?itok=H74OqAlp)
Before this, Second Minister for Law Edwin Tong had clarified that Livspace was not an appointed contractor of SLA and, nor does the company have any transactions with SLA.
He also explained that, in general, an external consultant is engaged to study the state of such properties with regard to the conservation guidelines, and to recommend what works need to be carried out. Mr Tong said that the works were carried out by a separate contractor which was appointed through open tender.
“The suggestion that Minister Shanmugam’s son or his company Livspace was appointed – and I think the sting of these allegations is that there’s a preference given to this – is completely scurrilous and unwarranted,” said Mr Tong. “There is no basis to suggest that for both 26 and 31.”
Mr Shanmugam also said that there were many untruths circulated about him and the renting of 26 Ridout Road, and this was “inevitable” as he was a political figure and “obviously a target”. But some try and make things difficult for politicians’ family members by putting out false information, he added.
“This is how some conduct politics,” said Mr Shanmugam.
Livspace later sent an official statement to the media, calling the allegations that the company has obtained contracts from SLA and has done work for SLA on properties on Ridout Road “completely false and baseless”.
“Livspace has not undertaken any project or work whatsoever at any of the properties based on Ridout Road – neither for SLA, nor for homeowners, nor for tenants. Livspace has no contracts with SLA (and Livspace has never been engaged by SLA to do any work),” the statement said.
“PUBLIC INFORMATION”
Earlier, the minister also spoke about why he went to the then-deputy secretary of the Ministry of Law to get a list of a few properties available to the public to rent back in January 2017.
This was in response to a question by Mr Sitoh Yih Pin (PAP – Potong Pasir) who had asked if it was appropriate for Mr Shanmugam to ask for this list, although the Corrupt Practices Investigation Bureau (CPIB) had found that there was no disclosure of privileged information in the process of the rental transactions.
Senior Minister Teo Chee Hean, who led a review into the transactions, said that the CPIB had looked into the matter and found no evidence of any abuse of position for personal gain.
“Which state properties are available for rent is public information,” said Mr Teo. Such lists are available to credible prospective tenants if they ask for them from the SLA or the managing agents (MA) for the properties, even those not listed online, he added.
“This is not privileged information. The SLA or the MAs have received inquiries from ambassadors, company executives, professionals to rent state properties. And SLA provides the information to companies too.”
