SINGAPORE: A veteran hawker has publicly criticised the Ministry of Sustainability and the Environment (MSE) over what he describes as inconsistent enforcement of policies governing hawker stall operations.
He called for greater fairness and transparency in how rules against subletting and chain businesses are applied.
Niven Leong, owner of the well-known Sin Kee Chicken Rice stall, took to Facebook on 11 March to express his concerns, following remarks made by Senior Minister of State Dr Koh Poh Koon in Parliament a day earlier.
On 10 March, Dr Koh addressed questions from Members of Parliament regarding the requirement for hawkers at National Environment Agency (NEA)-managed centres to be physically present at their stalls.
He explained that the rule was intended to prevent subletting and profiteering, and said hawkers who expand significantly beyond their original operations should consider exiting the hawker centre system.
Concerns Over Policy Enforcement and Ground Realities
Leong cited Dr Koh’s remark that hawkers “must operate their stalls personally as a measure to prevent chain businesses from dominating the hawker scene.”
He questioned the ministry’s rationale, pointing out that many stalls across different hawker centres display identical signage and menus.
“Then why are we seeing the same signages at various hawker centres that borne the same name and selling the same items?” he asked.
In response to Dr Koh’s claim that personal operation was “the most practical and fair way” to prevent subletting, Leong urged the ministry to conduct ground inspections.
“Perhaps you would like to pay some visits to some of the hawker centres, accompanied by your esteemed ‘place managers’,” he said.
He suggested that such visits would help Dr Koh identify which stalls are truly operated by their licence holders, and which are run by “employees” hired by individuals with “colourful colonial titles” who only appear during high-profile walkabouts every four to five years.
Leong alleged that some licence holders feign compliance by submitting CPF contributions under employees’ names, even though the payments are made by the workers themselves.
He argued that such practices often go undetected under the current enforcement approach.
Noorman Mubarak Case
Leong referred to the case of hawker Noorman Mubarak as an example of possible misalignment between the ministry’s actions and its stated objectives.
Noorman, who has operated a stall since 2017, went public on 18 February after receiving a warning from NEA for not being physically present. His Facebook post drew widespread attention from netizens.
Leong questioned whether the issue was truly about subletting, or driven by other underlying factors.
“They had been operating since 2017 and obviously they are not subletting, unless along the way they did otherwise and your esteemed department do has concrete evidence to prove it,” he said.
Suggesting that tensions with the operator Timbre may have led to the warning, Leong speculated the issue could have stemmed from a fallout.
“I would boldly take a calculated guess that Noorman and his missus must have done certain things that upset the operator, so much so that they had to resort to the authorities to issue warning letter,” he said.
He added that Timbre, as a managing agent, does not have jurisdiction over hawkers.
Leong also pointed to Noorman’s willingness to speak out publicly as a sign of a deeper grievance.
Referring to Dr Koh’s claim in Parliament that Noorman “runs two to three stalls in NEA hawker centres, and up to 21 F&B establishments… by registered Companies,” Leong asked: “Is he running these or is he subletting these? So what is the problem here?”
He argued that Singapore should support — not discourage — entrepreneurship.
“Isn’t it a good thing to encourage entrepreneurship, whereby one can train and develop talents to expand the brand and also provide a career path for their workers?”
Scepticism Over Anti-Subletting Measures
Leong also questioned the logic behind NEA’s anti-subletting rules, which Dr Koh said were meant to prevent “rental arbitrage.”
He described the policy as flawed and disconnected from market realities.
“With the kind of bids, who in the right frame of mind would go rent from such people?” he asked.
“The ones gaining from such arrangements are likely the first-gen stallholders. Go after them!”
Leong argued that the core issue goes beyond physical presence or subletting.
A Call for Dialogue and Fairness
Responding to Dr Koh’s remark that Noorman had chosen to go on social media instead of resolving matters constructively, Leong said the issue could have been settled if all three parties had set aside their pride and come together to find a solution.
He accused the ministry of siding with its appointed operators without giving hawkers a fair opportunity to explain themselves.
“By getting on the side of your appointed operator, and annihilating the hawker without giving him a chance to state his case, what signals are you trying to send to aspiring young hawkers?” he asked.
Noorman Alleges Double Standards in Stall Enforcement
Under Leong’s post, Noorman thanked him for the support and claimed his story had been misrepresented with “many half-truths.”
He alleged a double standard in hawker centres managed by operators like Timbre and NTUC, stating that while individual hawkers are required to be present, corporate-run stalls are allowed to operate without their bosses on site.
“They take the best stalls, usually the drink stalls… but have a different rule, run by companies and a team of staff. How is this fair?” he asked.
Noorman maintained that he did not sublet his stall, instead he and his wife had operated it themselves.
He suggested that enforcement only intensified after they raised concerns about issues at their hawker centre.
Leong replied that the issue was less about subletting, and more about challenging authority.
“What they are trying to tell you is this: just do what hawkers do! You are showing that you wanted to be treated differently,” he said, advising Noorman to be cautious moving forward.
The post Veteran hawker questions NEA’s subletting rules, cites gaps on the ground appeared first on The Online Citizen.
