Darryl Lo

Young athletes' performance at SEA Games signal ‘bright sporting future’ for Singapore: Official Singapore's athletes ended their SEA Games campaign with a medal haul of 52 gold, 61 silvers and 89 bronzes.

Singapore will not allow hate speech targeted at any group, says Shanmugam after Bondi Beach attack SINGAPORE: Singapore will not allow hate speech targeted at any group, Coordinating Minister for National Security K Shanmugam said on Monday (Dec 15)."Not against Muslims, not against Jews, not against Christians, not against Hindus, not against any religious or racial group. Nor will we allow hate...

On 9 Dec 2025, there were 2 news relating to Charities in Singapore - (1) A man who ran a donation scam who was sentenced to 46 months over four counts of cheating; and (2) Commissioner of Charities (COC) is probing Animal Lovers League for non-compliance with the Charities Act.

This piqued my curiosity and led me into a rabbit hole looking into “how often do charities submit their annual report and financial statements to the COC?”

Did you know - Under section 16 of the Charities Act, charities are required to submit an annual report and financial statements to the COC within 6 months of the end of each financial year. Any person, who without reasonable excuse, is in default in relation to any requirement imposed by section 16 shall be guilty of an offence and shall be liable on conviction to a fine not exceeding $10,000 or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 3 years or to both.

So, I randomly searched terms and found that some registered charities did not submit their annual reports.

Some of them did not submit the Mandatory Governance Evaluation Checklist (GEC) too following the Code of Governance for Charities.

I pose the following questions to the COC -

(1) How many registered charities amongst the 2422 charities, that have not submitted their annual reports ending 2023 and/or 2024.

(2) How many registered charities have not completed the mandatory GEC.

(3) How many registered charities submitted their past annual reports late and was there anything the COC did to reduce this occurrence?

(4) Were there any actions taken against the Governing Board Members for the above non-compliance(s)? The data is publicly available on charities.gov.sg and the COC could see which registered charities have not submitted their annual reports and GEC.

To those who plan to donate to charities during this season of giving, learn more about safer giving here: https://www.charities.gov.sg/Pages/Fund-Raising/Safer-Giving.aspx

Submitted ahead of the deadline because I had to go back for reservist!

I am very pleased to know that Jeremy Tan, the other independent candidate in GE2025, and 55 others have put their names forward to be considered as NMPs. Thank you for wanting to contribute to the Parliament of Singapore your lived experiences and diverse views.

57 names proposed for Nominated Member of Parliament positions Members of the public were invited to submit their nominations from Oct 8.

2025年大选两无党籍参选人 有意寻求推荐任官委议员

I spent Saturday afternoon with many youths at National Youth Council Singapore’s SG Youth Forum.

Thank you for taking the time to proudly share with me your ideas, your aspirations, and the projects you have organised for your community. It was really inspiring to hear you pitch your ideas so confidently and stepping out of your comfort zone in wanting to build a better Singapore.

I am equally hopeful for our future.

NEA Hawker Centres and Socially-conscious Enterprise Hawker Centres

Part A: Initial Thoughts
In early 2025, I came across a new private coffeeshop that was up for lease. The listing was for the entire coffeeshop, 11 stalls in total. A group of us considered pooling our resources to lease the whole space. The plan was simple: we would operate the drinks stall ourselves, and sublet the remaining 10 stalls to others.

But as we discussed it, we realised the risks were high. What if there were no takers for the individual stalls for the whole period? What if the footfall wasn’t strong enough to attract entrepreneurs? At that point, we decided against it.
For the longest time, I assumed this was simply how hawker centres are operated - taking over the whole hawker centre, then recovering their costs through subletting.

It was only recently, through the online debate on Socially-conscious Enterprise Hawker Centres (SEHCs), that I discovered the model was quite different from what I had assumed. Not only does the Government pay SEHC operators a management fee to run these centres, but the operators also collect monthly rents from the hawkers on top of that. If not for this debate, I might have remained unaware of a system that has been in place for several years.

While I do eat at hawker centres frequently, I did not know much about the difference between NEA-operated and SEHC-operated hawker centres. I did not know how much rent hawkers are paying, what the table-cleaning fees are, or the service and conservancy charges. However, after going through the Parliamentary Hansard and NEA’s website, I now have a better understanding, and hope to use this platform to share widely.

Part B: Hawker Centres - Singapore's Pride

We can all agree on a few simple truths about hawker centres.

First, hawker centres are unique and integral to our national identity. They are not just places to eat, they are part of our cultural heritage, and they must be preserved (UNESCO, woohoo!)

Second, hawker centres are also community spaces. They are where residents of every background gather, be it for a cup of kopi-o siew tai, or to sit together at a table and share food across different stalls.

Third, as of 25 July 2025, the National Environment Agency (NEA) manages 123 hawker centres across our island. The Government has also committed to build 20 new hawker centres by 2027, 16 are operating now with 4 more to go. Every single one of these new centres will be operated under the SEHC model. Each new hawker centre costs around $15 million to build, with the Government fully absorbing the capital expenditure.

Part C: What SEHCs Are Contracted to Do, and What They Have Achieved

SEHC operators are contracted by NEA:
Fixed Costs and Transparency: Rentals and other charges must be proposed upfront and cannot change throughout the tenancy. All new charges, even optional ones, must be approved by NEA.

“Pass-through” costs: Fees like table-cleaning and conservancy charges do not benefit operators - they are paid to the service providers.

Reinvestment: At least 50% of any operating surplus must be ploughed back into the hawker centre or community, through initiatives like meal vouchers, training programmes, discounted meals, or marketing costs to increase footfall. The remaining 50% is for the SEHC’s Operator to keep.

Fair terms for hawkers: Stallholders are required to work five days a week or eight hours a day. There will be capped penalties, simple tenancy agreements, and no excessive deposits or notice periods.

NEA monitors SEHCs closely, requiring annual audited accounts and reserving the right to impose penalties or terminate contracts in cases of mismanagement.

Despite being relatively new, SEHCs have reported some positive outcomes:

Contract requiring every stall to offer an affordable value meal at $3 or below.

Attraction of younger hawkers: the median age at SEHCs is 43.

Curation of diverse food options, incubation programmes for new hawkers, and bring in famous food recipes.
Flexibility and creativity in marketing, from carnivals to loyalty programmes, to boost footfall and patronage.

Part D: NEA-Managed Hawker Centres
Traditional NEA-managed hawker centres play a critical role in providing affordable food and community spaces for social gathering. But they also face some challenges which stem from the generic stall lease contracts.

Ageing hawkers: Median age is 60, with one-third set to retire within 10 years.

Shorter operating hours: Only 35% of hawkers open for three meals, with many stalls operating only part of the week

Bidding System: NEA’s system of awarding stalls one by one to the highest bidder, which may result in duplication of food types.

For NEA-Managed Hawker Centres, NEA is not paying a management fee to a private operator, thereby saving upfront costs.

It is also worthwhile to note that the Senior Minister of State for Manpower (Dr Koh Poh Koon) shared in Parliament while debating hawker centres that "Government agencies do not have the abilities or instincts to operate businesses." (hmmm…?)

Part E: What SEHCs Revenue Streams are

There is sometimes confusion about the financial flows between SEHCs and the Government.

Take the example of JW50 Hawker Heritage, the SEHC operator of Jurong West Hawker Centre at Block 50, Street 61. Contrary to popular belief, JW50 does not pay the Government $4.86 million. Instead, NEA pays JW50 this sum, spread over nine years, as a management fee for running the centre.

Thus, a SEHC-operator’s revenue comes from two sources:
1. The management fee from NEA; and
2. Stall rentals from hawkers - in Jurong West’s case, 39 stalls.

Part F: Questions We Must Ask About SEHCs

There are still critical questions that deserve answers.

Cost transparency - SEHC operators are required to pay the Government the Assessed Market Rent. But how much exactly is this figure? Without this data, it is hard to evaluate whether fair value is being achieved.

Public accountability - Operators already submit audited accounts to NEA. Why not make these accounts public? Doing so would allow Singaporeans to see how government funds are being used, how rental income is managed, and whether surpluses are reinvested responsibly. It would also provide a valuable learning base for future SEHCs to adopt best practices and avoid mistakes.

Management Fees - What is the total value of management fees paid by the Government to each SEHC operator?
The long-term model - With 20 new hawker centres being built by 2027, will the Government consider setting up its own management to oversee these 20 hawker centres?

Tangible Improvements - If SEHCs are meant to innovate, what tangible innovations have they introduced to improve existing hawker livelihoods?

These questions are not raised to undermine the SEHC system. Rather, they are meant to ensure that the model remains transparent, accountable, and sustainable, so that hawker culture can thrive for generations to come.

Lastly, we have to recognise that this is a significant investment by the Government. 20 new hawker centres cost $300 million to build, and assuming $5m payable in management fees for each of the 20 hawker centres over 9 years, that's another $100 million committed.

Given the large sums involved (hundreds of millions in build cost + management fees), would it be more cost-effective for the Government to manage directly instead of outsourcing to private operators?

Is the SEHC model truly serving the public good, or primarily benefiting private operators at taxpayers’ expense?

What are your thoughts?

Earlier this morning, I had the opportunity to see first-hand how our world class SCDF acted in a fire @ Bukit Purmei, too close to home.

Extremely thankful to SCDF and SPF who acted quickly, with professionalism, to prevent the fire from spreading and rescuing those affected.

While the cause of fire is still investigated, we have to remain vigilant and adhere to fire safety precautions:

Do not leave cooking unattended. Turn off cooking appliances and unplug them when not in use.
Keep flammable products and combustible materials away from heat sources.
Do not throw burning embers and cigarette butts into rubbish chutes.
Do not place window curtains or combustible materials near prayer altars, stoves or lighted materials.
Keep lighted candles away from paper or cardboard decorations, curtains and furnishings.
Do not overload electrical outlets. Switch off electrical appliances when they are not in use.
Check for broken wires and exposed wiring. If any are found, have the wires replaced immediately.
Keep lighters, matches and candles away from children.
Do not leave batteries or devices to charge unattended for an extended period of time or overnight.
Do not tamper with, modify, or attempt to repair batteries or devices on your own. Stop using the battery if you notice any damage or deformities.
Keep entryways, common corridors and staircases free from obstructions.

[Fire @ Blk 108, Bukit Purmei Road]

Earlier this morning at about 2:30am, SCDF was alerted to a fire at the abovementioned location.

Upon arrival, the living room of a twelve-floor unit was on fire. SCDF conducted forcible entry into the unit and extinguished the fire with a water jet. The fire was confined to the living room.

During the firefighting operation, firefighters rescued three persons from two bedrooms. They were conscious and assessed for smoke inhalation. The three persons were conveyed to Singapore General Hospital (SGH).

About 50 persons from the affected block were evacuated by the police and SCDF as a precautionary measure.

The cause of the fire is under investigation.

Earlier this week, I met up with then PAP MP for Sembawang GRC Ellen Lee Geck Hoon. It has been more than 12 years since our last email - then, I was a 16 year old student preparing for my O’Levels - when the Government introduced the Population White Paper in 2013.

It is a policy to increase Singapore’s Population to 6.9 million by 2030. As you can imagine, this policy wasn’t the most popular and heated debates happened in Parliament, and one of the largest protest occured at the Speakers’ Corner.

I took note of the debate, and that was then that I first emailed Ellen to share my thoughts and views on the White Paper. She graciously responded, and since then - we spoke on other issues - Drink Driving, Financial Assistance Scheme, and 2013 Budget where she proposed that the Government pays for major examination fees.

We have never met before - and this was the first time we met after many emails! On the last photo, I printed our emails and thanked her for taking the time to reply, if not for her constant replies and encouragement, I might not even have stood for elections this year!

I am heartened to know that she is continuing her work as a lawyer, and is taking up AI courses to upgrade. I wish her all the best!

I met with Minister of State Jasmin Lau 刘洁敏 for coffee earlier this week. Her ministerial responsibilities include overseeing the Ministry of Digital Development and Information (MDDI) and Ministry of Education (MOE), and she is also the Minister-in-charge of GovTech. We spoke about our experiences during the elections, her first 100 days as an elected MP, and her responsibilities as a newly appointed political office holder.

Beyond that, we talked about the hot topic of AI - how it is going to transform economies, displace some existing jobs while creating new and better ones, and how the government is seeking to embrace technological innovations through the Economic Strategies Committee led by DPM Gan.

I wish her all the best and will be looking forward to her maiden speech when Parliament sits next month!