Numbers up sharply as Government woos them to set up base here
Theresa Tan, Straits Times 11 Jun 08;
'The NGOs that come here are very practical, so we are not too worried about activism.'
AFTER years of courting big businesses, Singapore is attracting international non-profit groups such as United Nations agencies and other non-governmental organisations (NGOs).
The number setting up here has doubled to more than 60 since 2005, with about 10 arriving over the past year.
They include Operation Smile, a medical group that helps children with facial deformities such as cleft palates, and the Council for Advancement and Support of Education (Case), a group for professionals in communications, fund-raising, marketing and other fields.
Their causes range from fighting poverty and injustice (World Vision International), to offering consultancy services on philanthropy (Centre for Asian Philanthropy), and conservation (World Wide Fund for Nature).
Singapore is attractive to such groups because of its location, excellent infrastructure and large number of multinational companies (MNCs) based here.
The WWF, for instance, said the presence of thousands of MNCs here puts the organisation 'in a unique position to influence corporations and their sustainability practices'.
Said Mr Gary Loh, chairman of Operation Smile Singapore: 'Singapore has more than money to give. We have very strong medical expertise and facilities.'
To draw even more such groups, a one-stop office comprising different government agencies and led by the Economic Development Board was set up in February. Singapore also offers incentives such as tax exemptions.
The Government's push to woo these groups marks a change from the past when Singapore 'didn't know what to do with such groups', said EDB's director of new business group, Mr Jonathan Kua.
'It's not like we didn't welcome such organisations back then, but they were not our focus,' he said.
This changed as Singapore's focus on practical economic considerations widened in recent years.
'Our main goal in attracting such groups is not economic,' said Mr Kua. 'We want credibility as a world-class city. And as we develop, it's always the intangibles like quality of life, arts and civil society that attract people.'
Mr Gerard Ee, chairman of the National Kidney Foundation, said local charities will be able to learn from the international groups' global experience and best practices.
But there are direct benefits for Singaporeans as more such groups arrive - more jobs, for one.
The EDB hopes to attract at least 150 such groups by 2015, and that will create 2,500 jobs.
There will also be indirect spin-offs for the economy, such as spending by people who attend meetings organised here by these groups.
When asked about the fiery brand of activism that some groups are known for, Mr Kua said: 'The NGOs that come here are very practical, so we are not too worried about activism.'
Foreign NGOs: What good will they do?
Letter from Vinita Ramani Mohan, Straits Times Forum 14 Jun 08;
I REFER to Wednesday's article by Ms Theresa Tan, 'Singapore drawing more non-profit groups'. As a Singaporean who has volunteered and worked abroad with non-profits (NPs) and non-governmental organisations (NGOs), I applaud Economic Development Board (EDB) efforts to attract more non-profit groups to Singapore, but would like to offer a few comments.
Even if they are non-profit, I would not describe or associate some of the organisations Ms Tan features as, in EDB's Mr Jonathan Kua's words, 'civil society'. Civil society is often described as a sector of citizens and for citizens. The World Intellectual Property Organisation (Wipo), on the other hand, is a United Nations agency and has 184 member states. Further, as Ms Tan acknowledges, the Regional Disease Intervention Centre (Redic) was set up by the Singapore and United States governments. Neither is an NGO nor a grassroots initiative, both of which are strong features of a vibrant civil society.
Ms Tan writes that Singapore is attractive to international NPs and NGOs because of its 'location, excellent infrastructure and large number of MNCs'. I disagree. These are well-known (and publicised) hallmarks of Singapore's fantastic economic development which draw profit-driven MNCs, not NGOs. It has been my experience that such organisations also desire an environment that encourages citizens to question the public policies of the day, and participate in shaping them.
It is disingenuous to invite international 'civil society' in a bid to make Singapore a 'world-class city', but insist the NGOs that come to Singapore are 'practical'. Not only does this limit the very spirit civil society, which the London School of Economics defines as uncoerced non-government collective action around shared interests, purposes and values, but it begs the question: When is an NP 'practical' and when is it as 'activist'?
Suppose World Vision, a renowned faith-based organisation Ms Tan mentions, decides to act on the grievances of the disabled community in Singapore and proposes reforms the Singapore Government could introduce. Would it be deemed impermissible? I think such activism is noble and should be welcome. By contrast, Wipo and Redic's presence in Singapore hardly impacts on the average Singaporean. In fact, they do not even help to achieve the goals Mr Kua has set out for NPs - to lend Singapore civil society 'credibility' or promote 'intangibles... that attract people' to Singapore.
Amidst EDB's desire to give international NPs 'incentives such as tax exemptions', what is the plight of local NGOs? We have a good number of NGOs in Singapore that do excellent work and represent what civil society can and should be. Animal Concerns Research and Education Society (Acres) was set up in 2001 by a group of Singaporeans to raise awareness of the illegal trade in wildlife here. Humanitarian Organisation for Migration Economics (Home) was set up in 2004 to address the plight of foreign workers and migrants living and working in Singapore. Yet, funding and support for such NGOs remain minimal. Is EDB telling Singaporeans who want to be social activists in the name of positive change there is no room for them in a country that only woos 'practical' foreign NPs?
All this troubles me. Having spent time in Asian countries where civil society tangibly promotes social change, I sometimes feel I can accomplish far more abroad than in Singapore, where my ideas as a citizen are apparently not welcome unless they are 'practical'. The result of such an approach is that Singapore will continue to push passionate individuals away, and for that, we cannot be blamed as 'quitters'. Ultimately, a mature civil society is not just meant, as Ms Tan or Mr Kua suggests, 'to create jobs' or attract foreigners and tourists. It is meant to inspire Singaporeans to care; to take collective responsibility for communal or global problems.
Singapore, lead the way in non-profit groups
Letter to the Straits Times Forum 14 Jun 08;
AS A trustee of an India-based non-governmental organisation (NGO) serving the needs of the disabled and deprived, I welcome the initiative of the Singapore Government to attract international non-profit groups to operate and serve in Singapore. Certainly, more than any other nation in South-east Asia, Singapore is uniquely placed to offer a base for the non-profit organisations to serve the cause of humanity. Singapore evokes immediate confidence among people all over South-east Asia in view of its efficiency and administration and high standard of living achieved by fair management practices.
Having achieved this status, Singapore has a role to play and responsibility to fulfil to several developing nations in the region, including India.
In these countries, the problem is that vested interests often affect the functioning of NGOs. There is sometimes more emphasis on publicity and promotion than service.
This has created conditions where donors lose faith in the functioning of NGOs and hesitate to support them. Further, many NGOs do not take as much resources from promoters as they seek from others. Charity at the cost of others has become the central theme of at least some NGOs in countries like India.
Misuse of the NGO label for religious purposes is not uncommon.
The Singapore Government, while encouraging non-profit groups, should go further than merely viewing them in terms of economic and social benefits they bring to Singapore. An action plan and strategy should be worked out to go to the aid of the entire South-east Asian region, in which Singapore has the merit to emerge as a role model for its NGO policies and governance.
Even as I read the news in The Straits Times, I also read about T.T. Durai and his misadventure at the National Kidney Foundation. Perhaps this is a reflection that the Singapore Government could check only after the damage was done. Obviously, it reflects the fact that the Government has a few more lessons yet to learn.
As a trustee of an NGO from India, I hope the Singapore Government will provide the lead in facilitating and channelling the benefits of non-profit groups for the larger good of the South-east Asian population.
N.S. Venkataraman
Trustee
Nandini Voice for the Deprived
Chennai, India
