MPs raise concerns over shorter timeline for signature collection as law passed to lower en bloc thresholds

MP Wan Rizal (PAP-Jalan Besar) said a shorter period to collect signatures can reduce uncertainty and prolonged campaigning. But if the timeline is “too tight”, owners may feel rushed and tensions between neighbours may rise, he said.

Similarly, MP Ang Wei Neng (PAP-West Coast-Jurong West) suggested a mechanism allowing larger developments to apply for an extension where there are “genuine practical difficulties”.

“This would strike a reasonable balance: protecting non-consenting owners from unnecessary prolonged pressure, while recognising that large developments should not necessarily be treated in exactly the same way as the small ones,” he said.

In response, Mr Tong noted that the period of signature collection is usually the “most difficult” and “most polarising” phase of a collective sale exercise for all owners,  

“There will be sustained uncertainty and pressure in some cases, persistent lobbying. In one example, we received feedback that information on units that had not or refused to sign the CSA (collective sale agreement) were then named on social media, on WhatsApp, chat groups, other communication groups, to try and pressure these owners into agreeing to the sale,” he said.

While this does not happen across developments, such practices tend to happen in longer signature collection periods, he said.

He added that while they had considered the merits of a differentiated signature collection period, they decided against it as size is “not necessarily the only indicator of complexity” in the context of an en bloc sale.

Mr Tong added that a significant majority of signatures are typically gathered within the first four months, or within a concentrated window of one to two months. Several large developments were also able to reach the 70 per cent threshold within six months.

This data informed how they approached the revisions, he said.