Nation's next step? Nourish its soul
Panellists discuss what country needs in quest to be First World state
Lee Siew Hua, Straits Times 20 Jan 09;
SINGAPORE loves topping global rankings. But it will truly join the First World only when it improves its levels of optimism, diversity and other neglected indices of the 'soul'.
A paradigm shift as bold as this will also ensure Singapore's long-term success and the rootedness of its people.
This big picture was painted by Mr Peter Ong, managing partner of Gallup in Singapore, Hong Kong and South-east Asia. He was a speaker at the annual Singapore Perspectives conference organised by the Institute of Policy Studies (IPS).
The day-long event tackled four issues confronting the nation, under the theme The Heart of the Matter: Can Singaporeans afford a high-cost Singapore? Can Singaporeans remain rooted? Can Singapore preserve its hub status? Can the Government do less and Singaporeans do more? The audience of 630 came from policy circles, academia, business and other sectors.
Mr Ong noted that Singapore aces six of Gallup's global indices: law and order, national institutions, youth development, food and shelter, community basics, and personal health. But it fell short on six others: the work, personal economics, positive experience, thriving, diversity and optimism indices.
'If we can nail these areas - where we are already in the top one-third of all countries polled by Gallup - Singapore will be second to none where businesses and talent, foreign or home-grown, will find most engaging to live, work, play and, most importantly, achieve,' he said.
The current economic downturn could be the best moment to release these inner reservoirs of optimism and compassion, he suggested. This would make Singapore 'the best home for all'.
The concept of home and rootedness was also discussed by a pair of delightfully different panellists from the National University of Singapore. Lawyer-playwright Eleanor Wong constructed playful narratives while sociologist Tan Ern Ser wielded analyses - with both enjoying chemistry with the audience.
Associate Professor Wong of the law faculty suggested that Singapore's narrative of rootedness is an 'emperor's story' that would be meaningless if there were no subjects to rule over.
Her remarks recall the emotional debates on Singaporeans heading overseas, which occurred in 2002 when then prime minister Goh Chok Tong talked about 'stayers' and 'quitters'.
Prof Wong, always contrarian, rather liked the fact that 'my emperor believes in the emperor story'. It keeps the Government 'stressed out' about keeping citizens happy, she declared, leaving people like her free to live a happy, principled and contributing life.
Like her, Associate Professor Tan of the sociology department had intriguing posers. For instance: Is Singapore an economy or a nation?
The official message often appears to be: Singapore is first an economy, then a nation and community.
The official insistence on meritocracy and self-reliance percolates into Singaporean minds as: 'You have to depend on yourself.' Such thinking can cut off the roots, he suggested, as people feel loyalty to a nation, not to an economy.
A lively sub-topic within the discussion on rootedness was one on foreign talent and labour. This resonated with an audience that included global Singaporeans and foreigners working here, such as Philippine-born Astrid Tuminez, a Russian scholar at the Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy.
She commented to The Straits Times that even among labourers and domestic helpers, there is talent. She asked: Can we identify those who can become good citizens and owners of the Singapore Dream?
In the United States, immigrant labour endlessly reinvigorates the country and engenders its next generation of achievers. True, the US is a vast land that absorbs millions of immigrants - but Singapore too can value the new hunger that outsiders of all levels bring.
If there was one gap yesterday - articulated by candid IPS director Ong Keng Yong himself - it was the absence of 'fireworks', especially during the final panel session that asked if the Government should do less, while Singaporeans do more. Perhaps that is because the issue needs further exploration, in contrast to the much-dissected issue of rootedness.
But at least the audience was unambiguous on this. In an instant audience poll, the IPS found 81.68 per cent on the side of the Government doing less. Only 18.32 per cent disagreed. A nation often tagged as the nanny state can decide if this is good for the soul.
The cost of all-out growth
Forum speakers urge Government to lead charge in reducing costs
Teo Xuanwei, Today Online 20 Jan 09;
WHILE the Government’s “grow-at-all-cost” policy has brought Singapore from third-world to first in one generation, it could be time to change tack, said speakers at an Institute of Policy Studies (IPS) conference.
The race to constantly keep the Republic one step ahead of other economies has caused business costs here to escalate at an unsustainable pace, argued Member of Parliament Inderjit Singh. He was speaking at a panel session entitled “Can Singaporeans afford a high-cost Singapore?”
As a result of such costs, many small-and-medium enterprises may be forced to fold eventually. On why that should be avoided, Mr Singh said: “The whole region around us is developing very fast, and they will have capabilities as good as ours very soon. There is no guarantee the multi-nationals will continue to operate out of Singapore.”
Local enterprises will be “the only ones that will stay around”, he added — which is why we need to develop them to “become the anchors of the economy for the future”.
In Mr Singh’s view, the influx of low-cost foreign labour has also “pushed down wage growth” for Singaporeans, which will hinder the efforts of the low-income to escape the poverty trap.
Although opposition MP Chiam See Tong had previously advocated a minimum wage system here, the suggestion was knocked down. But Mr Singh said it “may be something we may have to start thinking about”.
“Depressed wages in high-cost countries is not sustainable. All of us are going to have difficulties coping with this environment,” he said, adding: “If we can have a minimum wage system, Singaporeans will be able to manage high costs better.”
The CEO of the National Volunteer & Philanthropy Centre, Mr Laurence Lien, said low-earning households generally suffer more in a high-cost environment.
Not only will they struggle to meet their daily needs, they are less able to save for contingencies and old age, he noted.
Escalating costs of living also means retirees will see the “real value of their savings being eroded”, added Mr Lien.
Mr Singh urged the Government to “lead the charge in reducing costs” during this economic crisis.
Both he and Mr Kevin Scully, executive chairman and founder of NRA Capital, argued for slashing the Goods and Services Tax — which they described as a “sacred cow” — as the answer to easing the pain for both businesses and households.
Other areas they suggested the Government could help in reducing costs were Electronic Road Pricing charges and property taxes.
Getting Singaporeans to remain rooted
Zul Othman, Today Online 20 Jan 09;
EVEN as Singapore inches closer to its goal of being a world-class city, and its citizens are exhorted to think globally, what efforts have been made to get cosmopolitan Singaporeans — aware of opportunities elsewhere — to remain rooted to their homeland?
Besides, won’t certain sections of the community feel marginalised as the Republic rapidly goes global?
For starters, the definitions of success and contribution need to be broadened. We also need to have a “culture of affirmation”, said :National University of Singapore (NUS) Department of Sociology lecturer Associate Professor Tan Ern Ser yesterday.
“Even if 10 per cent of the population are world class, what happens to the other 90 per cent?,” he said at the Singapore Perspectives 2009 seminar organised by the Institute of Policy Studies (IPS).
Then there is the issue of foreign talent. Fellow speaker Associate Professor Eleanor Wong of NUS’ Faculty of Law said enlisting them to keep its global vision on track has also created a thorny issue for Singapore to navigate. “Now, the citizen is put against two groups of foreigners — one highly-skilled group who come in to provide the brains, and the other group who come in at the bottom to provide the muscle,” she said.
If we want people to stay, commonly- held views must also change, said Assoc Prof Tan. “We emphasise too much on meritocracy and self-reliance ... the message we send out is that ‘you have to take care of yourself’,” he said.
His view is that meritocracy doesn’t do well in inculcating rootedness. “There is also a lot of emphasis on how you add to the market, not the fact that you are Singaporean,” he said.
He is however, optimistic on this, as the process of enhancing rootedness among Singaporeans has already begun.In 2007, the Committee of National Education outlined its three-pronged framework aimed at strengthening heartware and rootedness among citizens.
IPS chairman Professor Tommy Koh believes globalisation isn’t likely to weaken a citizen’s rootedness. “As long as you live in the world of nation states, there will be boundary, nationality and citizenship”, he said during the Q & A session. “If you think about it, people — generally speaking — love their country despite all its imperfections.”
Citing the countries of the European Union as an example, Prof Koh said the expectation would be that the poorer folk would pack up for the big cities in search of a better life. “You would imagine that people would leave countries where their governments are dysfunctional,” he said. But this has not happened “because they love their country and their cities”.
Various suggestions brought up at Singapore Perspectives Conference
S Ramesh, Channel NewsAsia 19 Jan 09;
SINGAPORE : With Singapore's Budget 2009 just three days away, more suggestions are being brought up to bring costs down and to improve the well-being of Singaporean workers.
Suggestions include getting the government to provide direct loans and using leading indicators to anticipate what lies ahead.
Signs of the global economic slowdown came as early as May 2007.
Speaking at the Singapore Perspectives Conference on Monday, Gallup Singapore's managing partner Peter Ong said a number of Americans were then already worried about putting food on the table.
These leading indicators were shared with political leaders here.
Mr Ong said with these leading indicators, "multiple ministries and statutory boards can take complex steps and actions way in advance to influence both Singaporeans and Singapore so that a better future can be created".
As for Singapore's small and medium enterprises, entrepreneur and MP Inderjit Singh said the government may have to do more by providing direct loans, especially when financial institutions have failed.
The MP for Ang Mo Kio GRC said: "This is an excellent opportunity... for us to level up the playing field. The dust has not settled. The corporate changes and problems have just started to happen. We need to watch carefully.
"We want to avoid too many of our local enterprises folding first or folding too quickly, and therefore I think that some form of government support and rescue will be necessary if we want to, in the long-term, create a vibrant economy here, which will be driven by local enterprises as it is in many other countries."
He added that ideas to help tackle the downturn are expected to be discussed during the Budget debate after Thursday's speech.
Meanwhile, the often-debated subject of whether the Singapore government can do less and Singaporeans do more was also discussed at the Singapore Perspectives Conference.
One area which the panellists felt that the government does not have a choice is engaging Singaporeans in the feedback process, especially with the advent of technology and various avenues that are available for citizens to express their views.
Philip Jeyaretnam, senior counsel and former Law Society president, said: "I can understand that you do not want Bar Associations from entering politics. The question really is who should be deciding where the boundaries are.
"Is this a matter for lawmakers and politicians, or is it a matter for society as a whole, and can't you actually leave it to professional associations or other NGOs to decide on the boundaries themselves?
"Maybe there will be some mistakes, but probably most of the time, they will get it right and they will exercise power responsibly. But if you do not even provide that space, then you are actually short-changing the potential of the professionals."
Debra Soon, chief editor, MediaCorp News, said: "Singaporeans who are educated and whom you want to keep here to be able to drive and continue with Singapore's success story will up and leave if they feel they are not being engaged.
"The government in a way has no choice. We are seeing more and more of that happening. Also at the same time, Singaporeans seem to be more willing to be engaged now. But it is only a certain portion of Singaporeans in my view. The majority of Singaporeans are concerned with bread and butter issues." - CNA/ms
Limited impact to Govt's efforts in spreading wealth: Volunteer chief
Straits Times 20 Jan 09;
INCOME redistribution efforts by the Government help to bridge the income gap, but there are limits to their impact, said the chief executive officer of the National Volunteer and Philanthropy Centre (NVPC), Mr Laurence Lien.
He gave three reasons.
One, these efforts cannot be too customised to meet unique needs. Neither can they be too generous as they have the tendency to encourage a sense of entitlement and dependency.
Third, it could damage self esteem among the lower-income groups.
He said: 'Because there're limitations to what the State can do, there'll be gaps that the people sector needs to plug.
'The people sector can do some things better than the State because it has more moral authority, can experiment with new intervention models and go beyond national policies.'
Mr Lien was speaking yesterday on whether Singaporeans can afford a high-cost society, one of the topics covered at a conference on issues confronting Singapore.
He said more lower-income Singaporeans were being hit by a double whammy - of low wages and the rising cost of living.
One key way of helping them is still through government programmes, he added. This approach is the 'next best solution where winners compensate the losers' because increasingly, a buoyant economic period may not be able to benefit every Singaporean.
Another way is to continue to keep costs low for Singaporeans in the lower-income brackets, said the former civil servant, who held high-level positions in various ministries including finance, home affairs and education before he joined the NVPC last October.
On this, Mr Lien has a novel suggestion: Developing two Singapores in terms of costs. One for lower-income households and one for those who can afford it.
Giving an example on how a plate of chicken rice can cost $2 at hawker centres compared to $30 at hotels, he said there can be high- and low-cost choices for Singaporeans, while keeping prices of merit goods and essentials, such as housing, transport, food and health care, down through subsidies.
The third way is to encourage private giving and Mr Lien feels there is scope for Singaporeans to do much more.
Citing figures from 2007, he said Singaporeans donated $820 million, or 0.34 per cent of gross domestic product, to Institutions of a Public Character, while Americans contributed 2.2 per cent of the United States' GDP to charities that year.
He added that Singapore's volunteerism rate last year stood at 16.9 per cent, compared to 26.2 per cent in the US.
Also, by encouraging more private giving, it would help to prevent an entitlement mentality among those who succeed and not just among the poor, he said.
'We often talk about the poor having an entitlement mentality. The wealthy can also have that mentality, believing that they deserve anything that they get.'
Pointing to how donations to charities by Singaporeans went up during the recession year of 2001, Mr Lien said he is confident that Singaporeans will once again rise to the occasion.
He said: 'This crisis is a great opportunity for us to show that we care, and I'm confident that many of us will step up to the plate.'
KOR KIAN BENG
Challenges to Singapore's hub role
Kor Kian Beng, Straits Times 20 Jan 09;
SO FAR so good, but more challenges to Singapore's hub status could be lurking on the horizon, said economist Manu Bhaskaran yesterday.
He was giving his assessment of Singapore's efforts in developing and preserving its status as a regional business hub.
Last year, it jumped two notches to fourth spot in MasterCard's Worldwide Centres of Commerce Index, behind London, New York and Tokyo.
But Mr Bhaskaran, director and chief executive of economic consulting and advisory firm Centennial Asia Advisors, was quick to sound a warning to Singapore. 'Rankings are highly dynamic. You may have made it as a global city but there's no guarantee you'll remain highly ranked forever,' he said at the Singapore Perspective 2009 conference.
For Singapore, it is important to pre-empt rising challenges from nearby cities, such as Beijing and Mumbai, as China and India continue to expand.
Bangkok could also be a serious rival as a result of the rapid growth in the Greater Mekong region, while improving ties between China and Taiwan could see Taipei emerging as another contender.
Thus, Mr Bhaskaran believes that Singapore, limited by its lack of resources, needs to seriously consider a 'historic opportunity' provided by the Iskandar Malaysia initiative in Johor.
Launched in November 2006, the project - about thrice the size of Singapore - aims to leverage on its lower cost and proximity to the Republic and plans to attract RM20 billion (S$8.3 billion) in investments by 2010. Mr Bhaskaran said: 'It will give us the opportunity to grow beyond the limited space on our own area.'
Institute of Policy Studies director Ong Keng Yong supports a rethink of the Iskandar project, saying: 'I think many of us feel a bit uncomfortable because we've been socialised into the thinking of our leadership on this kind of issue.
'But for Singapore to progress and flourish, we might have to find a new way of thinking. It might not be too revolutionary to work with our closest neighbour.'
Read more!
Posts
visitors since Nov 07