Optimal land use behind golf course decisions: economists

[SINGAPORE] News that several golf clubs may have to lose or reconfigure their courses here have ruffled the feathers of some members, who believe the government is bending to populist pressures.

But observers say while such views are understandable, the moves are more likely to be driven by economic imperatives.

The Ministry of Law (MinLaw), the parent ministry of the Singapore Land Authority, said on Tuesday that Keppel Club is unlikely to be able to keep its golf course once its current lease expires in seven years, and at least one of the Singapore Island Country Club's (SICC) locations may be affected under the government's plans for land use.

The Tanah Merah Country Club (TMCC) and National Service Resort and Country Club (NSRCC) at Changi may have to reconfigure part of their courses to allow for expansion of Changi Airport, it added.

MinLaw's statement gave greater clarity to the fate of these courses, which have been the subject of much speculation. Members of the four clubs will meet government agencies at separate briefing sessions on Sunday.

Among the four, the impact on SICC is deemed to be the most significant, as Keppel's golf course sits on land that had been reflected as a residential site as early as the Urban Redevelopment Authority's 2001 Concept Plan.

"Why at our expense? Why do we need to be the sacrificial lamb?" said an SICC member, commenting on rumours that an SICC golf course will either be given to another club or made public. "Because it sends a perceived right signal, that the government will show the common Singaporean that we don't act in cahoots with the rich. We are one of you."

The SICC, the largest golf club here with four 18-hole golf courses, is regarded as one of the most prestigious golf clubs, and its 7,800 members read like a "who's who" of high society.

Economists, however, believe that the competing needs for scarce land resources is the main reason behind decisions over the extension of golf course leases.

"There is a bonafide commercial and residential need that far outweighs the benefits of retaining a course," said Mizuho Bank economist Vishnu Varathan.

"If we just look at where their land is, both (SICC and Keppel's) are pretty prime land, whether you want to look at it as a residential or commercial land. It's not surprising that (the government) are rethinking what the land ought to be used for, particularly given the magnified pressures on land usage, and the kind of very rapid development that has come about."

Seen from a purely economic perspective, it is about putting scarce resources to better use, said DBS economist Irvin Seah.

"There have been so many complaints on the ground about overcrowding. This shows that policymakers are listening," he said. With Singapore planning to accommodate a larger population of 6.9 million by 2030, more land will be needed, and these put to better use, he said.

"At the end of the day, it's about balancing the needs of everyone from a political and economical standpoint," said CIMB economist Song Seng Wun. "Finding a balance to a liveable city requires give and take."

The fact that the SICC is also affected also shows that the government is leaving no stone unturned in doing so, he added.

"It basically shows that the government considers everything and anything . . . it doesn't mean if you're a Tan Sri you'll get protected."

Besides the consideration of alternative developments, a second priority for land planners in allocating space for golf course land is to ensure that there are sufficient courses accessible to the public.

The lease for the Marina Bay Golf Course - the only 18-hole public course - expires in 2024. It is zoned for commercial and residential uses under the Draft Master Plan released last year.

MinLaw said on Tuesday that the minimum requirement is to have one 18-hole course available for public use, and that it will find a replacement site when the lease for the Marina Bay Golf Course runs out.