In case you are not one of the unfortunate Sengkang residents living in Fernvale, this is what has happened so far:

On Dec 30. 2014, The Straits Times published a report that a Chinese Temple with columbarium service was to be built in the Fernvale precinct.

Australian funeral services company Life Corporation won the tender and initially claimed that the "space will be used to run funeral services, columbarium space and associated services".

Residents in Fernvale were surprised by the news in the media, prompting many to register their displeasure with their Member of Parliament Lam Pin Min.

An online petition to stop the development of the columbarium had garnered more than 800 signatures so far.

Let's fast forward to events that occur today.

Lam arranged a residents' dialogue session with Life Corp, URA and HDB this Sunday morning at Anchorvale CC Multipurpose hall to discuss the matter.

Was the dialogue useful? 

- The developer and the agencies have reassured residents that there will not be funeral and cremation services in the development. 

- The agencies have confirmed that there will not be funeral parlours nor crematorium in the neighbouring land parcels identified as "Civic and Community" spaces. 

Lam also mentioned that "all the feedback of residents have been registered" and he would be working with the relevant agencies to address these concerns.

Unfortunately, the frustrated residents are not placated by the dialogue.

Just read the responses on Lam's Facebook page.

Beyond NIMBY, there are important questions that the authorities should address

It is easy to dismiss the residents' concerns as having the NIMBY ("Not In My Back Yard") syndrome.

But below are some valid concerns brought up by netizens on MP Lam's Facebook page:

1. Why do many residents have the mistaken impression that the site will house a Chinese temple but not a columbarium? Should HDB make disclaimers on its website more clearly to BTO-buyers?

2. Why do many residents have the impression that the development looks more like a columbarium than a Chinese temple?

3. What are URA and HDB's considerations in developing a masterplan for a town? Why do residents have the impression that certain amenities were prioritized? 

4. What were the evaluation criteria for the tender? 

In a tender document from HDB, it is obvious to all that Life Corp via a private limited company, had put in the highest bid for the Fernvale Link site.

Was site awarded to Life Corp based on the amount of the bid?

Did HDB assess Life Corp's track record as a religious institution?

This is because it is clear that Life Corp is a public listed company whose mission is to be Singapore's "pioneering premium funeral services provider".

In a Straits Times report, Lam said "URA guidelines did not restrict the type of company that can develop a religious institution and he understood from the URA that it has been done before".

But isn't that a loophole that could be exploited by private companies?

According to a Straits Times article, the Government plans and zones land for places of worship, factoring in population growth in towns and mindful of Singapore's multi-religious setting. Each parcel of land is open for tender by the HDB only to each particular religious group.

Life Corp's example means that private companies could outbid religious organisations with less resources to secure the land for commercial purposes.

This would be ironic.

In allocating each parcel of land to a particular religious group, HDB protected certain religious groups with less resources by not allowing other religious groups to outbid them.

But it is now unable to stop non-religious private companies from outbidding these religious groups with less resources.

Some things in life just cannot be measured by money.

For money measures everything in short, except that which makes life worthwhile.

If land gazetted for religious use is to maintain Singapore's ideal of religious harmony and diversity, private companies with no religious affiliation must not be involved.

Related articles:

Life Corp CEO claimed Straits Times reporter did not verify facts on Sengkang columbarium

Sengkang resident-turned-heroine Sharon Toh asks the hard questions about Sengkang columbarium

Top photo from Lam Pin Min Facebook.

Like what you read? Follow us on Facebook and Twitter to stay updated.