“The crux of the matter is will,” residents of Geylang East declared as they questioned the government’s reasoning behind the planned relocation of Geylang East Public Library to Tanjong Katong Complex in 2030.
During a Parliament sitting on 23 September 2025, Minister of State for Digital Development and Information Rahayu Mahzam defended the move, citing declining visitorship and high renovation costs.
In a Facebook post published on 28 September, advocacy group Save Geylang East Public Library challenged the government’s defence, arguing that the state is fully capable of funding the ongoing operation of traditional libraries without “handwringing about cost and visitorship.”
The group pointed to Queenstown Library, which will be preserved as a public library and undergo renovations later this year.
“Go and visit Queenstown Library today,” the post said.
“Great effort has been made to decorate the walls and columns with extensive write-ups on its heritage and history, with no mention of renovation costs or lack of visitors.”
By contrast, the group noted, the focus with Geylang East Library had been on cost and usage, raising questions about why the Geylang East community was treated differently.
Facebook group’s detailed argument
In its post, Save Geylang East Public Library argued that the difference between conserving Queenstown Library and relocating Geylang East Library reflected unequal treatment.
By 2030, Geylang East will be 42 years old—almost the same age Queenstown Library was when it was conserved in 2013.
“Why is it that the Queenstown community gets to keep its library but not the Geylang East community? Just because their library was built first?” the group asked.
“Are the needs and wants of the Geylang East community worth less because of that?”
The group added that the government has repeatedly shown its ability to fund major projects when it chooses to.
Examples included the S$40 million allocated to maintain legacy systems for the SimplyGo ticketing platform and S$900 million committed to sustain SPH Media’s unprofitable operations.
Both, it argued, were financed without extensive public debate over cost.
NLB’s claim that relocating Geylang East Library to Tanjong Katong Complex would save S$22 million was also questioned.
The group said no breakdown had been provided for how the figure was calculated, what costs were included, or why extensive renovations were required when most users were satisfied with the current facilities.
It further argued that NLB’s financial advantage may come from the fact that it does not pay rent for its premises in malls.
If this is the case, the post said, costs are simply shifted onto others, as landlords would still have to recover infrastructure expenses from different tenants or through reduced land bids.
Visitor numbers and the purpose of libraries
A key issue raised by residents was whether visitor numbers should be treated as the primary measure of a library’s success.
The Facebook post argued that if footfall is the central key performance indicator, the incentive will be to attract larger crowds without regard to the quality of engagement.
“Does that really serve the purpose of a library?” the group asked.
It noted that Tampines Library attracts visitors who attend cooking classes, watch football matches from library seats, or use indoor playgrounds, rather than engaging in reading.
Other examples included shoppers resting at libraries in malls, such as one resident who described waiting at Vivocity Library while her restaurant queue number was called.
Such activities, residents argued, inflated visitor counts but did not reflect meaningful library use.
Tin Pei Ling highlights community unease
On 23 September, Marine Parade–Braddell Heights Member of Parliament Tin Pei Ling filed an adjournment motion highlighting the depth of concern among residents.
She described the library as “a place of shared memory and community identity” for MacPherson residents, emphasising its role in collective memory.
“To them, the building is more than a physical icon in MacPherson, but a huge part of their memories – our collective memories,” Tin said.
Her earlier appeal to the National Library Board in July was echoed by residents through a petition opposing relocation.
As of 1 October, the petition had collected 1,712 signatures.
Rahayu Mahzam: decline in visitors and high renovation costs factored in Geylang East Library’s relocation
In response, Rahayu reiterated that the move was prompted by declining visitorship and prohibitive renovation costs.
Between 2015 and 2024, annual visitorship at Geylang East Public Library fell by 31 per cent, from 670,000 to under 470,000.
Renovation at the current site was assessed to be more than twice as expensive per square metre compared with relocation, with a budget difference of S$22 million.
Rahayu also noted that Geylang East is not the only library affected.
Standalone branches such as Ang Mo Kio, Toa Payoh and Jurong Regional libraries are also planned for relocation under the NLB’s 15-year Libraries of the Future Masterplan.
She added that past relocations had proven successful: Harbourfront and Tampines libraries recorded 58 per cent and 71 per cent rises in visitorship within three years of moving.
“We hope the relocation will help to improve the visitorship for the library, just as it did for the libraries at Harbourfront and Tampines,” Rahayu said.
In Parliament, Tin asked how NLB would safeguard residents’ access to library services after relocation.
Rahayu replied that options under consideration included establishing a reading corner, pop-up library, or other presence in the Geylang East area.
“We will also work with relevant grassroots organisations to help residents access NLB’s digital resources for delivery services, ensuring continued reading and learning opportunities,” she said.
The post ‘The crux of matter is will’: Residents challenge government over Geylang East Library move appeared first on The Online Citizen.
