F1 contracts to be reviewed amid Iswaran’s corruption allegations, 2022 race to be audited

SINGAPORE — The terms of the Formula One (F1) Singapore Grand Prix contracts will be reviewed by the Ministry of Trade and Industry (MTI) given the allegations of corruption surrounding former Transport Minister S Iswaran, said Minister-in-charge of Trade Relations Grace Fu in Parliament on Monday (Feb 5). An audit of the 2022 F1 race here will also be conducted.

These moves come after Iswaran was charged last month for bribery and corruption, as well as for obstructing justice. Iswaran is alleged to have accepted gifts, such as tickets for theatre plays and football matches, from hotelier Ong Beng Seng, who is widely credited as the person who brought F1 to Singapore.

Speaking in Parliament on Monday, Ms Fu noted that the ministry had previously issued a statement that it had “considered carefully” contracts between Singapore GP and the Singapore Tourism Board (STB), a statutory board under MTI, and had found “nothing to suggest as of now that either the F1 contracts or other contracts were structured to the disadvantage of the Government”. 

“But as members will appreciate, given the allegations of corruption, we are reviewing the terms of the deal again,” said Ms Fu, who is also Minister for Sustainability and the Environment and was given the trade relations role following Iswaran’s resignation from the Cabinet last month.

While MTI will lead the effort, the review may “involve other agencies in the process”, she said in response to a query from Leader of the Opposition Pritam Singh.

An MTI spokesperson told TODAY that the ministry will work with the board of directors of the STB to review the F1 agreements. 

According to STB’s website, the chairman of the board is Mr Olivier Lim, who is currently the lead independent director of DBS Group Holdings and DBS Bank, and also the chairman of Starhub.

The spokesperson added that the details of the review are being worked out. 

As for the 2022 race, the audit is ready to proceed and will be conducted by STB. “Members will understand that I cannot say more on this at this point,” she added. 

“While we will review any government contracts to safeguard Singapore’s interest, we remain committed to the F1 Singapore Grand Prix. Preparations for the 2024 race have started,” said Ms Fu.

She was responding to questions from Members of Parliament (MP) about how MTI had assessed that the contracts with Singapore GP were not structured to the disadvantage of the Government, and whether the Government plans to conduct a full assessment of the relationship between Iswaran and Mr Ong, among other questions. 

In 2007, the STB entered into a contract with Singapore GP to organise the F1 night race in Singapore. STB renewed this contract three times, in 2012, 2017 and 2022, and is on the fourth term of the contract, which will end in 2028.

Mr Ong owns the rights to the Singapore Grand Prix and is chairman of race promoter Singapore GP, while Iswaran, who was Minister-in-charge of Trade Relations, had been actively involved in the Government’s engagements with F1.

Apart from the F1 contracts, nine MPs from both sides of the aisle asked a total of 12 parliamentary questions that related to the code of conduct of office holders and whether it can be improved.

MPs were also reminded at the start of the proceedings by Speaker of Parliament Seah Kian Peng that the case is still before the courts.

Responding to MPs’ questions, Minister in the Prime Minister’s Office Indranee Rajah referred to a previous parliamentary question filed by Progress Singapore Party Non-Constituency MP Hazel Poa, who had called for Iswaran to be suspended as an MP so that he would not receive his MP allowance during his leave of absence while under investigation.

She said this issue has been addressed as Iswaran had resigned from Cabinet and as an MP prior to being charged, and said he would voluntarily return all monies he received, including his ministerial salary and MP allowance since investigations began in July. 

“In these circumstances, the specific issues regarding Mr Iswaran which the House was concerned with have been addressed,” said Ms Indranee. 

HOW PUBLIC SERVANTS SHOULD ACT WHEN OFFERED GIFTS

Several MPs also asked whether the Public Service Division is currently undertaking a comprehensive review of the rules guiding the interactions of public service officers with private sector stakeholders in social settings, as well as whether the current system of checks and balances on senior government officials and whistleblowing processes are adequate. 

Minister-in-charge of the Public Service Chan Chun Sing said that the rules that government officials abide by should not be so onerous that officers cannot operate, or so lax that discipline and trust in the system gets eroded. 

Speaking in general, Mr Chan, who is also the Education Minister, said that the Government looks at three areas when such issues arise: 

• Whether it was a case where the rules were clear but were flouted or ignored, and if so, then the rules need not be adjusted but action needs to be taken against the offender
• If it was a case where the rules were unclear, then they should be clarified or simplified. However, not all “grey areas” can be clarified, and officers should understand not just the letter of the rules but also the spirit of them
• If it is a case where the rules were too lax, or if it is a new situation not envisaged or covered by the rules, then the rules should be updated

As an example, Mr Chan said that under the rules on gifts, an officer may be allowed to retain a gift less than S$50 without paying for it, if doing so does not affect the integrity of the civil service.

“But should an officer accept multiple gifts of S$49 repeatedly? I think we know the answer from the spirit of the rule,” said Mr Chan. “If such a pattern of behaviour is observed, it must stop.”

Mr Chan said that to know which of these approaches apply to Mr Iswaran’s case, the facts of the case need to be known. 

“We should not prejudge these facts before the court trial,” he said. 

In a supplementary question, MP for Holland–Bukit Timah Group Representation Constituency Edward Chia asked what standards of procedure are in place for public officers when it comes to invitations to dinner by external parties, where “declining invitations… may be perceived as disrespectful”. 

Mr Chan said that public agencies are inherently different from private companies. 

“Our public service is in the business of governance and providing public services to a nation of people from diverse backgrounds, and who have different expectations and aspirations. This is very different from the private sector where they are more concerned with transactions between private parties,” he said. 

He added that the public sector needs to earn the respect and trust of the public by putting in place a fair system that is not about having connections, for instance. 

“This is why the public service holds ourselves to high standards of conduct, to give confidence to all stakeholders that they will be treated fairly and transparently,” said Mr Chan.