Broader Perspectives - The Singapore Issue

BROADER

PERSPECTIVES

THE SINGAPORE ISSUE

2010 ISSUE SEVEN & EIGHT / SGD $11 / MICA (P) 065/09/2010

DEMAND A BROADER PERSPECTIVE

1

The Singapore Issue

BROADER PERSPECTIVES IS PUBLISHED BY SCHOOL OF THOUGHT 112 Middle Road #08-01, Midland House, Singapore 188970 www.schoolofthought.com.sg tel +65 6334 8773 fax +65 6337 2434

SUBSCRIPTION RATES FOR 2010 $61 (10 issues, February to November) (including gst and handling) For subscription enquiries and back issues, please email: broaderperspectives@school-of-thought.com

THE BROADER PERSPECTIVES TEAM EDITOR-IN-CHIEF Elizabeth Kon liz@school-of-thought.com CREATIVE DIRECTOR Shiao-Yin Kuik yin@school-of-thought.com SALES MANAGER Yee Tong yee@school-of-thought.com COPY EDITOR Rachel Chng rachel@school-of-thought.com

BROADER PERSPECTIVES the singapore issue

CONTRIBUTING WRITERS Vivienne Chua, Matthew Chia, Joash Loh, Xu Yuqin INTERNS Desiree Chua, Alpha Yam DESIGN ASSISTANTS Carrie Ho, Daniel Lim

PRINTER Jabez Printing House SOLE DISTRIBUTOR Righteous International Subscription Services, 71 Ubi Crescent #05-09 Singapore 408571 tel: +54 6323 1833 fax: +65 6323 1838 michael_chung@righteous.com.sg

Contents Page Pledge Examination

06

National Identity The definition of what it means to be Singaporean is a complex one especially in the face of increasing ambivalence regarding the assimilation of new migrants.

09

Race Does Singapore need to pursue the concept of absolute racial equality or is it enough for her to achieve racial tolerance?

12

Language It is now time to take a deeper look at the languages that our Pledge may have unwittingly told us to overlook, and to re-cultivate the cultural links intrinsic to them.

15

Religion Singapore's religious harmony is not natural, but a hard-won product of top-down pruning and bottom-up cooperation, and the fragility of her religious harmony can never be underestimated.

18

Democracy Learning the difference between keeping politicians accountable and subjective ranting, no matter how messy the process, may be the only way we can grow as a nation.

21

Justice It is with constructive and contextualised criticism that the judiciary can work to ensure a transparent legal system that is relevant to citizens’ needs, social stability, and the global landscape.

24

Equality To Singapore, a classless society is a fantasy, thanks to the everpresent forces of human ambition, inherent differences in talent and a Darwinian instinct to thrive.

27

Happiness More Singaporeans are believing that living a life less ordinary may not only be possible, it may even be profitable.

30

Prosperity The need to improve the labour productivity of Singapore is grounded upon the importance of ensuring future success.

33

Progress Only when we strive to work on our possible areas of growth and development can Singapore progress in more ways than she already has.

DEMAND A BROADER PERSPECTIVE

3

Singapore campaigns

36

38

The Packaging of Patriotism The style in which they have been written have undergone significant changes that reflect the changing experiences and expectations of Singaporeans.

Singapore's Cosmopolitan Dream Singapore is determined to be one of the most attractive cities in the world to work, live and play in.

Interviews

41

Alvin Tan Founder and Artistic Director of The Necessary Stage.

42

Chia Yuan Jun Yvonne Member of the Young People's Action Party.

43

Bernard Chen Jiaxi Member of the Young Workers' Party.

44

Ng Ying Yuan Head of Human Resources at the Economic Development Board.

45

Dr Goh Wei-Leong General Practitioner, Chair of HealthServe Ltd.

46

Nikki Draper Independent Film Maker & Lecturer at NTU

Comprehension

48

BROADER PERSPECTIVES the singapore issue

Universal Declaration Universal responsibility is the real key to human survival and the best foundation for world peace.

WE, THE CITIZENS OF SINGAPORE, PLEDGE OURSELVES AS ONE UNITED PEOPLE, REGARDLESS OF RACE, LANGUAGE OR RELIGION, TO BUILD A DEMOCRATIC SOCIETY BASED ON JUSTICE AND EQUALITY SO AS TO ACHIEVE HAPPINESS, PROSPERITY AND PROGRESS FOR OUR NATION DEMAND A BROADER PERSPECTIVE

5

PLEDGE EXAMINATION National Identity

WE, THE CITIZENS OF SINGAPORE

The definition of what it means to be Singaporean is a complex one especially in the face of increasing ambivalence regarding the assimilation of new migrants. BY DESIREE CHUA

U

P TILL Singapore’s post-independence years, the nation mainly consisted of first and secondgeneration migrants who arrived in search of better job opportunities, while keeping close ties to and identifying with their countries of origin. As such, it was with little surprise that post-independence, the tenets associated with economic survival and prosperity were the primary means by which social cohesion could be achieved, and Asian conservativism emphasised as the means by which a Singaporean national identity could be developed. Today the influx of new first-generation migrants in this millennium has foregrounded the continuing complications of building national identity in a young nation, raising questions of how to accommodate more forms of multiculturalism while retaining existing traditions and values.

A

globalised world and rapid developments in transport networks have made migration a hot topic. In 2005, the United Nations reported that there were 26 million new migrants in the past 15 years, highlighting the extent and global scope of migrant flows. Singapore too has felt the effect of this global phenomenon, with Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong addressing it as a main issue during this year’s National Day Rally speech. The government’s stance is a delicate balancing act of welcoming foreigners and their talent while reassuring increasingly worried citizens that they are valued.

T

he latest policies in Singapore primarily differentiate between locals and migrants, and are based on the principles of “citizens come first”, in which housing, healthcare and education subsidies have been adjusted to sharpen the distinction between locals and foreigners. Additionally, PM Lee stressed that changes in the current Foreign Worker Levies, the implementation of

BROADER PERSPECTIVES the singapore issue

Workfare Income Supplements (WIS) and a brand new National Service Recognition Award (NSRA) are specially catered to the benefit of citizens, and are intended to protect the interest of Singaporeans amongst fears of foreign competition. Still, such populist measures might not be enough to quiet the increasingly vocal dissatisfaction of citizens.

T

he need for such government measures begs the question of who counts as bona fide Singaporeans.

What are our fears of migrants founded upon, considering our current level of prosperity and stability and more importantly that most Singaporeans themselves were new migrants just two or three generations ago?

Interestingly, our instinctive misgivings regarding foreign residents actually shed more light on Singaporean traits than they do about founded concerns. Being typically and infamously "kiasu" and "kiasi", a main concern among Singaporeans is that foreign talent will take away the best work and education opportunities, putting locals at a disadvantage. This in turn seems to have built a collective psyche based more on opposition, than inclusion, of people we deem as others.

F

urthermore, Singaporeans have grown too accustomed to paternalistic behaviour management policies and campaigns that unfortunately can all too easily cultivate passive and reactive social attitudes. For example, the National Courtesy Campaign, launched in 1979 and now incorporated into the Singapore Kindness Campaign, attempts to overtly cultivate positive public behaviour and personal interaction between citizens.

The outcome is that Singaporean comments made in the public sphere are primarily intentioned to ensure the government continues to protect a narrow understanding of the status quo, rather than evidencing any

IMAGE CREDITS Happy National Day by photo_gratis, Flickr Creative Commons

PLEDGE EXAMINATION National Identity

sustained desire to have a more open minded and nuanced debate about such important concerns.

T

he definition of what it means to be Singaporean is a complex one especially in the face of increasing ambivalence regarding the assimilation of new migrants.Considering decreasing birth rates, brain drain concerns, and the desire to perform well on the world stage, it is evident that government policies are implemented due to sheer necessity and pragmatism. In the 2000 Singapore Census, it was found that most foreign workers in Singapore were taking on unpopular jobs in construction and domestic help services. At the other end of the spectrum, Singapore requires the expertise of highly skilled foreigners to attract continued multinational investment and maintain international standards of competitiveness. Despite the knowledge of the benefits and conveniences that migrant workers can bring, citizen resistance to foreigners is actually intensifying. Besides worries of increased competition, we complain that foreigners significantly contribute to the overcrowding of public spaces and the housing bubble. This unhappiness culminated in the intensive backlash when PM Lee quoted the need for an approximate 100,000 new foreign residents for 2010, which resulted in him revising the figure to 80,000. All these instances reflect the volatility of the migrant issue, and points toward the complexity of negotiating a national identity in a global age.

T

he need for a prompt address of locals’ anxiety and the importance of allowing migrant inflow for continued economic success explains why our national values are being explicated so deliberately by the government.

The authorities have set in motion initiatives to help foreigners adapt to Singapore society,

to allow for better assimilation and thus initiation into Singaporean society. Newly implemented initiatives include the Singapore Citizenship Journey, through which permanent residents get a tour around some of Singapore’s landmarks, and learn about national symbols, institutions, and value systems. When needed, they also undergo an English proficiency programme and are introduced to community and volunteer organisations. The global trend is that increasing inflow of migrants are forcing countries all over the world to reconsider their national identity and value systems. Singapore represents an interesting case whereby her youth and survival instincts still propagates top-down, institutionalised measures to define identity, as opposed to the organic process that far older nations have taken.

T

he discussion of national identity has grown to its largest to date, moving beyond Social Studies classes to pervade public channels of communication. In newspapers, online forums, talk shows, and Ministerial dialogue sessions, Singaporeans are experiencing a peak of discussion about what it means to be Singaporean. The hope is that the incorporation of the migrant issue will open up the discussion and pave the way for Singapore to become a more mature and progressive nation. After all, it is shared lifestyle habits, mindsets and experiences, the very things that we take for granted as part of our normal routines, that actually contribute to our collective identity.

T

he illumination of a national identity is a long-drawn process. It is likely that stop-gap populist measures cannot effect a change in local attitudes towards foreign residents in the long run. Rather than dwelling on what the government should be doing more of, perhaps a better way to tackle such apprehensions is to look inward – we share more similar aspirations with migrants than we may want to admit. Sharing in the journey of discovery to achieve an identity that current and future Singaporeans can inherently relate to may ultimately be the route to achieve a spirited and lasting culture like what successful and developed nations have done before us.

DEMAND A BROADER PERSPECTIVE

7

NATIONAL IDENTITY Immigration flows into Singapore between 1980 and 2010

1980 80,000 1990 128,000 2000 364,000 2010 80,000 - 100,000

Sources: National University of Singapore (Department of Sociology), Singapore Department of Statistics, PM Lee Hsien Loong’s 2010 National Day Rally Speech

Racial Diversity

United States of America 2000 White Hispanic Black Asian

69.1% 12.5% 12.1% 3.6%

United Kingdom 2001

2009 White Asian Black Mixed Others

65.1% 15.8% 12.3% 4.46%

92.0% 4.4% 2.0% 1. 2% 0.4%

2007 88.2% 6.6% 2.8% 1.7% 0.7%

National branding: presenting an image that matches national identity

Watch This

LKY on foreign talent and its threat to our national identity http://www.youtube.com/watch? v=s28NO5A_2PQ&p=67DB16C9 E85F9F18&playnext=1&index=26

BROADER PERSPECTIVES the singapore issue

http://www.ibtimes.com/ contents/20100804/nationbranding-presenting-image-matchesnational-identity.htm

Read This Solidarity in a Pluralist Age http://www.project-syndicate.org/ commentary/ctaylor5/English

Singaporean Youths would rather be White or Japanese http://www.nytimes. com/1999/12/20/news/20ihtsing.2.t.html

PLEDGE EXAMINATION Race

REGARDLESS OF RACE Does Singapore need to pursue the concept of absolute racial equality or is it enough for her to achieve racial tolerance? BY SHIAO-YIN KUIK

S

INGAPORE'S proverbial elephant in the room is race: a reality nobody wants to draw too much attention to while it looms large and silent, waiting to be fed. With 5 million people of various races and a history of ethnic clashes dating only half a century ago, Singapore cannot be complacent about racial politics. As recent as September 2010, when MM Lee blamed Malaysia's “most unhappy situation� on her refusal to accept a multiracial base in an interview with The New York Times, Malaysia's former prime minister Mahathir Mohamad was provoked to blog that poor race relations in Malaysia was precisely because of Singaporean meddling and Lee's keenness on having a Chinese majority. o contain said elephant, Singapore favours a double-barrelled strategy, combining the encouragement of racial tolerance with the punishment of racial intolerance. From micro-managing racial compositions in housing estates to establishing English as official lingua franca, the state has worked hard to cultivate social cohesion. Creating common spaces for civilised intercultural dialogue is done via collaboration with non-governmental groups, religious leaders and paragovernmental organisations like the National Integration Council and the Inter Racial and Religious Confidence Circles. Fair racial representation in government also allows the state to make sure that ethnic self-help groups and leaders who are likelier to gain a hearing with the community handle sensitive issues. For instance, the growing social problems of Malay delinquency and unwed mothers are generally left to Malay ministers as well as Mendaki and Muis (Islamic Religious Council of Singapore) to handle. To safeguard the sanctity of these common spaces, the state wields the big stick of unabashed censorship of seditious voices, as in 2005 with the blackout on the Danish Prophet Muhammad cartoons and punishment of bloggers expressing anti-Muslim sentiments.

T

IMAGE CREDIT Children at a wedding by madaboutasia, Flickr Creative Commons

DEMAND A BROADER PERSPECTIVE

9

PLEDGE EXAMINATION Race

S

ingapore’s policy-makers favour playing down the moral rhetoric and playing up the practical benefits of racial integration. The state’s recurring message is simple but effective: everybody benefits when everyone gets along. In PM Lee Hsien Loong's 2010 National Day Rally, he confronted creeping public discontent over how dipping native birth rates and a constant influx of Chinese and Indian migrants were changing the racial dynamics of Singapore. While Lee took special care to reiterate the longstanding PAP view that the Singaporean spirit was “not based on a common race, language or religion” but on “shared values like multi-racialism, meritocracy and respect for every talent”, he stressed that Singaporeans had to accept the new racial reality as a reflection of a new economic reality. After all, Singapore's secret to survival has always been her willingness to accept change for the sake of survival – even change in something as sensitive as racial makeup.

P

erhaps the most significant outcome of Singapore's pragmatic strategy is her embrace of meritocracy and rejection of affirmative action. Singapore’s goal is not equalisation of results among the races but equalisation of opportunities to attain those results. In August 2009, when NMP Viswa Sadasivan questioned whether Singapore should strive for the racial equality as promised by the Pledge, MM Lee's answer was blunt; “Our Constitution states expressly that it is a duty of the Government not to treat everybody as equal. It's not reality, it's not practical, (and) it will lead to grave and irreparable damage if we work on that principle.” To Lee, “the equal treatment for all races” was really a “highfalutin” abstract ideal that would take decades, if not centuries, to achieve thanks to historical and pragmatic reasons. Lee made a pointed comparison between how Article 152 of the Singapore Constitution specifically spelt out the duty of the Government to “constantly care for the interests of the racial and religious minorities in Singapore” and provide Malays with a “special position”. This allows the State to carry out the Constitution, unlike the more high-sounding call in the 1776 American Constitution that declared “all men are created equal” but did not state practically how that would work out in reality, allowing America to legally practice racial segregation and deny African Americans the right to vote well into the 20th century.

In Singapore, exception is given to the minority Malay population only because of their special position as the indigenous people. But even so, as more Malay Singaporeans joined the middle class, the government worked with Mendaki to have them waive their rights

...WHILE TAKING INCREMENTAL STEPS TO CREATING A MORE AND MORE LEVEL PLAYING FIELD. BROADER PERSPECTIVES the singapore issue

SINGAPORE BELIEVES IN ABANDONING THE FANTASY OF ABSOLUTE RACIAL EQUALITY...

to free university education to give away the fees they were originally entitled to towards helping more disadvantaged Malays. Thus, Singapore believes in abandoning the fantasy of absolute racial equality ― while taking incremental steps to creating a more and more level playing field. ot everyone agrees with the State’s rejection of the possibility of absolute racial equality in favour of its ‘lesser cousin’ racial tolerance. A 2010 report on the state of racial politics in Singapore

by UN Special Rapporteur Mr. Githu Muigai opined that several legal practices were entrenching racial divisions, like the use of racial categorisation on Identity Cards and ethnic-specific self-help groups. Muigai also believed that limits placed on the level of involvement of Malay Muslims in the Singapore Armed Forces due to the State's concerns that “primordial loyalties of ethnicity and religion may trump the civic and secular loyalties to the Singapore nation” could cause other races serving side by side to view their Malay Muslim peers suspiciously. Nonetheless, it is indisputable that Singapore is thankfully free of the scourge of institutionalised racial discrimination. Her policies reveal an acute awareness of the need to balance out ideals with tough, even unpopular, measures to tackle the harsh realities of xenophobia and racism.

N

n the 2010 National Day Rally, PM Lee Hsien Loong stated unequivocally “the work of building a multi-racial, multireligious nation will never be complete.” Although there is dispute about whether her policies may have marginalised certain ethnic groups, these side effects can and must be alleviated through communication between the state and the people, as well as within stakeholders in civic society themselves. Barring an incident of immense controversy, large-scale interracial conflict is rather unimaginable in Singapore – an enviable situation that many of Singapore's neighbours cannot lay claim to.

I

Debating Race UN Special Rapporteur

In July 2010, UN Special Rapporteur, Mr Githu Muigai, was invited to Singapore. Over a week, Mr Muigai visited various landmarks and institutions to gain an insight into Singaporean society and her workings. Below is a summary of his key observations and recommendations, and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs' response.

Education Observation Despite statistics showing that great progress has been made, Malay students seem to have remained below the national average.

Legal

Recommendation Specific measures to ensure that the educational interests of Malay students are protected and promoted, in accordance with article 152 of the Constitution of Singapore.

The president of Muis, Haji Mohd Alami Musa, said that the Malay community disapproves of any affirmative action policy, and is confident in its own ability to achieve steady progress under the national system of meritocracy.

Ministry of Foreign Affairs

Observation In its 40 years of existence, the Presidential Council for Minority Rights (PCMR) had never issued a statement or taken a position on any particular legislation or public policy that may have affected the rights of members of ethnic minority groups.

There may also be a potential conflict between the dual role of the Chief Justice as head of an independent judiciary and as Chairperson of the PCMR.

Recommendation

PCMR has worked well to preserve racial harmony in Singapore.

To review the mandate conferred to the PCMR and its composition, and that its independence is ensured, that it may consider any legislation or public policy on its own initiative.

Chief Justice Chan Sek Keong has said that if there were any conflict of interest in a case, he would recuse himself.

Watch this

Read this

Pledge Aspiration Debate – Race Segment http://www.pmo.gov.sg/News/ Transcripts/Minister+Mentor/ MM+rebuts+NMP+s+notion+of+ race+equality.htm http://theonlinecitizen. com/2009/10/nominated-mpviswa-sadasivans-maiden-speech/ points 22-30

National policies Survey on opinions towards ethnicity arguing that Singaporeans are becoming less divided along racial lines http://www.spp.nus.edu.sg/ips/docs/ pub/pa_ooitansoh_Ethnicity%20 Survey.pdf

Race and Multiculturalism in Malaysia and Singapore

National Museum of Singapore: Racial Riots Documentary

Edited by Daniel P.S. Goh, Matilda

http://wn.com/Racial_Riots_ Documentary__National_ Museum_%5BNMS%5D

Gabrielpillai, Philip Holden, Gaik Cheng Khoo

http://www.rsis.edu.sg/publications/ Perspective/RSIS0252010.pdf

DEMAND A BROADER PERSPECTIVE

11

PLEDGE EXAMINATION Language

REGARDLESS OF LANGUAGE It is now time to take a deeper look at the languages that our Pledge may have unwittingly told us to overlook, and to re-cultivate the cultural links intrinsic to them.

BY MATTHEW CHIA

M

ANNIKKAVUM! (“Excuse me!” in Tamil) What? 讲华语吗? (“Speak Chinese?” in Chinese) Saya tidak tahu! (“I don’t know!” in Malay)

I

n the biblical story of the Tower of Babel, the prospering people of Babel, who all speak the same language, decide to build a tower tall enough to reach heaven. God sees this and confounds their speech; they can no longer understand each other as they all speak different languages. The task of building the tower is left unfinished and the people are scattered all over the earth.

C

onsider a more familiar story. A multiethnic, multicultural, multilingual melting pot of immigrants gather on an island to begin new lives. The government imposes a common language on the people to aid the country’s prosperity. The parallels are striking: has Singapore, with her diverse people, managed to build the tower that was beyond Babel’s reach? Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew, the architect of our post-independence language policy, said in an address at Harvard University in 2000, “The use of English as our working language has helped us become a natural node in the global network of banking and commerce.” He also pointed out that as English was a new language to all races in Singapore, it fulfilled the social role of bridging the linguistic gap between the various ethnic groups. Indeed, the decision to adopt English as the first language was, in true Singaporean style, pragmatically designed to open the door to the global marketplace and economic success.

D

espite the adoption of English, our language policy still maintains the need for bilingualism. The

BROADER PERSPECTIVES the singapore issue

mandatory learning of Mother Tongue languages in schools is a nod of respect to the main ethnic groups of Chinese, Malays and Indians. More importantly, it also aims to be a link to citizens’ cultural heritage. Prominent French linguist Claude Hagege contends that languages hold the connections and associations that define a culture. Surely this is true as traditions, rituals, and various art forms constituting a particular culture are invariably expressed in the language that group speaks. One may be able to survey the Malay Annals literature or traditional bangsawan opera with interest, but it is only with proficiency in the Malay language that one can truly experience the shifting nuances in these works of art and retrieve value from studying them. Knowledge of one’s Mother Tongue is thus seen as crucial, as it opens the window to one’s cultural heritage, which is in turn an integral part of one’s identity.

This is seen as especially needful today as the globalised position of Singapore can undermine the government’s attempts to cultivate a sense of belonging and rootedness.

T

he basis of the culture-language relationship is the belief that language can transmit cultural values.

There is undeniable truth in this, but we should carefully consider the differences between historical and contemporary manifestations of culture, and the level of linguistic proficiency required to access them. For

PLEDGE EXAMINATION Language

example, a student of the Chinese language should have minimal difficulty understanding a Jay Chou song or contemporary Chinese fiction, but classics like Romance of the Three Kingdoms or Tang poetry may be beyond his comprehension.

A

lso, there is an implication that the circumstances surrounding the use of Mother Tongue have changed. Staunch supporters of Mother Tongue should remember that “the language environment in Singapore has evolved significantly”, as a Ministry of Education press release acknowledges. In 1982, 1 in 10 Primary 1 Chinese students came from English-speaking families; now, that figure stands at almost 6 in 10 students. In one generation, the successful promulgation of English has reversed the situation to the extent that most of the 6 in 10 students would have minimal exposure to Mandarin before they begin schooling. Parents may still speak Mandarin, Malay or Tamil among themselves, but as Mother Tongue has little place in the day-to-day existence of earning a living, they see less need to ground their children in the language.

T

hose who support reducing the emphasis on Mother Tongue may feel vindicated by a sentiment expressed by linguist Professor Salikoko Mufwene of the University of Chicago, who argues that as cultures

evolve, people naturally shift their language use, and “asking them to hold onto languages they no longer want is more for the linguists’ sake then for the communities themselves”. However, do we really no longer want our Mother Tongues? The source of worried parents’ angst may be their children’s grades, specifically improved Mother Tongue pedagogy, but they still want their children to “retain their cultural heritage”, as PM Lee said in his speech. The aim then should be to re-examine the place of Mother Tongue vis-à-vis our cultural identity, as well as the nature of students’ interaction with their native languages.

M

other Tongue supporters should realise that in our modern times, it is impossible to expect all students to engage with traditional notions of culture. Some youths feel alienated by an arcane language and a culture they have no affinity with. This is why it is important that the Ministry of Education is tailoring the curriculum to be one based on levels of proficiency. A student of Bengali may be able to engage with the works of Rabindranath Tagore while his classmate with a lower proficiency in the language prefers Bengali movies, but at least both are engaged, and their learning is tailored to suit their linguistic capabilities. Only when the students are learning Bengali for the sake of getting an ‘A’ on their results slips would we have a problem, for in such a case, being effectively bilingual excludes being culturally aware or interested.

T

his is when improved pedagogy could come into play: to allow language to “transmit heritage and cultural values”, as Education Minister Ng Eng Hen put in a speech on impending changes to the Mother Tongue curriculum, interactive cultural activities could be integrated into the syllabus. How about a tour round Chinatown led by role-playing guides speaking Chinese, or a Hindi lesson in which the class analyses popular Bollywood songs? This seamless integration of language and culture could spark students’ interest in their respective cultures, and they would then be more willing to study their Mother Tongue, or at least see the basis for it.

O

ne united people, regardless of language. For sure, Singaporeans now have few problems identifying with each other even if their Mother Tongues are different. The widespread acceptance of English and its role in our economic success are evidenced for its continued, deserved enshrinement in our future language policy. It is now time to take a deeper look at the languages that our Pledge may have unwittingly told us to overlook, and to re-cultivate the cultural links intrinsic to them. Let us cherish the babble of Babel, even as we focus on building our tower higher and higher.

IMAGE CREDITS

American Breakfast Meeting

by WhyOhGee, Flickr Creative Commons

DEMAND A BROADER PERSPECTIVE

13

LANGUAGE

SINGAPORE Popular languages spoken (2005)

Popular languages spoken (1990)

English

29.4%

English

18.8%

Chinese

36%

Chinese

23.7%

Chinese Dialects

18.2%

Chinese Dialects

39.6%

Malay

13.2%

Malay

14.3%

Tamil

3.1%

Tamil

2.9%

WORLD

Top 8 Languages in the World (as proportions of estimated global population)

2009 (ďż˝ of 6.8 billion)

1999 (ďż˝ of 6 billion)

English

English

5.37%

Spanish

5.53%

4.82% 4.84%

Spanish 1%

French

1.33%

German Chinese

1.33%

German

1.63% 15.6%

Chinese

17.8%

Hindi & Urdu

French

3.57%

Hindi & Urdu

3.03%

Arabic

3.25%

Arabic

2.92%

Portuguese

2.62%

Portuguese

2.83%

U.S.A Popular languages spoken (2007) 80.3%

English Spanish French

Popular languages spoken (1990)

12.3%

Spanish

0.5%

86.2%

English 7.5%

French

0.7%

German

0.4%

German

0.67%

Chinese

0.9%

Chinese

0.5%

Korean

0.4%

Korean

0.3%

Vietnamese

0.4%

Vietnamese

0.2%

Tagalog

0.5%

Tagalog

0.4%

Read This

BROADER PERSPECTIVES the singapore issue

The Language Instinct: How the Mind Creates Language

Surf This

Steven Pinker traces the evolution of language and how it is a human instinct

Online language translator http://babelfish.yahoo.com/

Source Ethnologue, United Nations Populations Division

PLEDGE EXAMINATION Religion

REGARDLESS OF RELIGION

Singapore's religious harmony is not natural, but a hard-won product of topdown pruning and bottom-up cooperation, and the fragility of her religious harmony can never be underestimated. BY SHIAO-YIN KUIK

IMAGE CREDITS

S

INCE 1965, Singapore has enjoyed an admirable streak of religious harmony despite growing religious pluralism and racial diversity. Our religious harmony is not natural, but a hard-won product of topdown pruning and bottom-up cooperation, and the fragility of our religious harmony can never be underestimated. Religion is still closely associated with the other power grouping kegs of race, language and class: Buddhists and Taoists are predominantly dialect-speaking Chinese, Hindus are mostly Tamil-speaking Indians, Muslims are mostly Malays, and Christians are mostly English-speaking. This delicate balance explains why the state protects the individual's right to believe or disbelieve, but reserves the right to withdraw that protection should those beliefs threaten the collective good.

S

ingapore takes a conservative approach to the concept of absolute religious freedom: ideal in theory, unsustainable in practice. Being a small, multireligious country surrounded by much larger, overtly religious and politically contentious neighbours, allowing people absolute freedom to do or say whatever they like about other religions is literally asking for trouble.

Mannequins at Kampong Glam by yeowatzup, Flickr Creative Commons

Therefore, legal pre-emptive strikes are doled out to punish those who choose to demean other religions in the public sphere. Extensive legal parameters including the Maintenance of Religious Harmony Act and the Declaration of Religious Harmony show that Singapore takes a zero tolerance policy towards the slightest hint of inter-faith conflict. The message is clear: keep common spaces secular and religious spaces apolitical so that, as far as possible, never the twain shall meet. Of course, it is unrealistic to expect people to completely separate their (ir)religious beliefs from their behaviour, but this division of spaces into the religious and secular is an essential artifice.

P

aradoxically, by limiting absolute religious freedoms, political and religious freedoms are being protected. In Singapore, it is taboo for politicians to wave one’s religious beliefs as a cheap rallying banner, or an electoral trump card. The hope is that by keeping public debate focused on secular considerations of public interest, interest groups tend to stay objective rather than combative. The state has no issue with people of all faiths taking up political office or expressing their

DEMAND A BROADER PERSPECTIVE

15

PLEDGE EXAMINATION Religion

concerns about political issues that affect their faith, as long as office-holders understand that upon appointment, they became responsible for representing the interests of all their constituents, not just those who share their particular religious inclinations. Singapore laws thus protect everyone's right to equal treatment regardless of faith. So while the state permits mission schools like St Joseph's Institution to stay true to their Christian tradition by keeping their culture of public prayer and bible studies, it also places them under strict guidelines to ensure that non-Christians have equal access to good education: school admission is not contingent on religious belief, religious activities must be kept optional and classroom proselytising is forbidden. This prevents the ghetto-isation of society where believers feel the only way to stay true to themselves is to establish their own enclaves and institutions, as such segregation only splinters national unity and carves out fault lines ripe for future disaster.

B

ecause religion encourages the upkeep of moral standards, oversees members' well-being and invests in the socially marginalised, the state engages religious institutions as partners in the nation-building process. The careful management of religious and secular spaces is best revealed in how mindfully the government manages religious groups' use of Singapore's limited land. The state plans for and zones specific land sites for places of worship, factoring in population growth in towns, demographic make-up and multicultural sensitivities. To prevent thorny questions about favouritism, precious land sites are released in Housing Board tenders to a chosen religious group at a time and since 1990, religious land leases last no more than 30 years long. Market and demographic forces are not left alone to determine the religious landscape ― according to NUS geographer Lily Kong, mosque sites are allocated to the Islamic Religious Council of Singapore (Muis) usually at a price three to four times below market value. In 1992, when Hindus were struggling to raise funds to build their temples, the government encouraged Hindus to merge forces to build new temples in order to retain their ground in society. The government's conservative and practical nature also mostly puts political leaders on the same side of the fence as religious leaders ― in 2007, with the support of Muslim leaders, the Muslim community willingly came under the same organ donation law as other Singaporeans. Later that year, when then-Nominated MP Siew Kum Hong filed a petition for the abolition of Section 377A of the Penal Code, which criminalises gay sex, vociferous Christians and Muslim leaders found the state agreeing with their call to retain 337A, albeit for secular rather than religious reasons.

S

till, instances of disagreement between the state’s practical agenda and religious groups’ spiritual agenda will arise. In those instances, while religious groups have the freedom to defend their religious convictions, they have to firstly respect the presence of other belief systems and secondly publicly defer to the state's authority and thus, the state's decision. When the state first pushed the idea of building two casinos in 2004, though leaders from all four major religious groups were greatly opposed to it, they ultimately had to defer to secular interests. Nevertheless, religious groups are peaceably working with the state today in creating programmes to manage the perceived spiritual and moral fallout from gambling addiction.

T

he future battle to keep public debate objective and public life secular will be fuelled by three issues. Firstly, as religious entities get more superlatively powerful and become more akin to corporations, the state needs to manage the shifting religious balance of power and the unhappiness it inspires. To get around the Urban Redevelopment Authority's (URA) limited release of land-

BROADER PERSPECTIVES the singapore issue

PARADOXICALLY,

BY LIMITING ABSOLUTE RELIGIOUS FREEDOMS, POLITICAL AND RELIGIOUS FREEDOMS ARE BEING PROTECTED. sites for church use, fast-growing mega-churches have resorted to going into business and investing in commercial spaces. When a mega-church like New Creation Church can post growth rates as high as 12% each year and raise an incredible $21.1 million within 24 hours for their $500 million building project while Taoist and Hindu congregations continue to wane, managing a multi-religious identity in terms of land use will only yield more complications in time to come.

S

econdly, as the government experiments with giving ever more leeway for self-expression, Singaporeans are learning to police and negotiate the public space for themselves and discovering that the task is far more difficult and complex than it appears ― something Christians and secularists in Singapore discovered in 2009 when politically active elements among the two groups wrestled over leadership of secular women’s organisation, Association of Women for Action Research (AWARE).

L

astly, with the Internet introducing more transnational religious issues to the local marketplace of ideas while blurring the lines between public and private spaces, the possibility of inter-religious friction will only keep increasing. When Lighthouse Evangelism's pastor Rony Tan had his in-house anti-Buddhist and Taoist remarks broadcasted without permission on various websites, the Internal Security Department had to step in to ensure the church eliminated all possibly offensive recorded material from its online sermons.

T

he freedom to believe – and disbelieve – is an invaluable right. That temples, churches and mosques can co-exist on the same street in Singapore in a region still plagued by religiousinspired violence is no small achievement. Social cohesion cannot be mandated top-down forever, nor can religious sensitivities always be successfully managed by law. If Singaporeans can agree to disagree without foregoing our civic responsibility to care for each other's welfare as fellow citizens, multi-religious Singapore can keep journeying in one accord on the road of peace.

Bud

dhi

sm

RELIGIOUS BELIEFS 57.0%

& T aoi sm

50.1%

51.0%

33.6%

15.7% 15.7%

15.3%

14.9%

Islam

15.0%

14.6% 14.7%

ion Relig o N s or Other

13.5%

12.7%

10.1%

Chr

y

nit

ia ist

3.6%

3.7%

4.0%

4.0%

2000

2010

Hinduism

Source : Singapore Census http://www.singstat.gov.sg/pubn/pa pers/people/c2000adr-religion.pdf

Read This

1980

Stanley Kober traces religion’s influence on some of the world’s worst conflicts http://www.theglobalist.com/ StoryId.aspx?StoryId=2595

1990

Race: A Account

Theological

J. Kameron Carter traces races across politics, anthropology, and philosophy.

TED This

Karen Armstrong on achieving religious harmony http://www.ted.com/talks/ lang/eng/karen_armstrong_ makes_her_ted_prize_wish_ the_charter_for_compassion. html

DEMAND A BROADER PERSPECTIVE

17

PLEDGE EXAMINATION Democracy

TO BUILD A DEMOCRATIC SOCIETY

Learning the difference between keeping politicians accountable and subjective ranting, no matter how messy the process, may be the only way we can grow as a nation.

BY ELIZABETH KON

veryone can spout a variation of the same story: some opposition member says something to impugn the competence of the ruling party, said ruling party sues the living daylights out of them and drives them into bankruptcy and preferably a long stay in the political wilderness, the foreign press corps cry bloody murder, the ruling party points to its successful economic track record as justification, and the whole Singapore brand of politics-as-usual starts all over again.

E

obviously gets the goat of the Western press W hat and foreign NGOs is that Singapore calls herself a

democracy when she only seems to have the bare bones of one, trampling civil liberties and crushing political dissent with no pretence of playing nice. The People’s Action Party has governed since Singapore’s independence and always held all but a few elected seats in parliament. For the past few decades, such political dominance has been accepted as the price for material well-being and social stability but as the nation grows into developed nation status and strives to be one of the premier global cities in the world, more and more citizens are feeling stifled with such limitations and hence seeking to expand the parameters of that compact.

T

he international reputation that the PAP has for political heavy handedness has to do with what is described as draconian press laws and its infamous propensity of using the courts to browbeat their opponents into capitulation and acquiescence. The overwhelming response to perceived defamation of character or party integrity is a whole salvo of lawsuits meant to be costly and painful. Stringent internal controls see bans on political video blogging and podcasting during elections and even the use of the Public Entertainments Act that requires a permit to speak in public, to prevent opposition politicians from giving any form of public address.

T

he justification behind such restrictions is that the right to free speech is not absolute, and can never come at the expense of national security and pub-

BROADER PERSPECTIVES the singapore issue

lic order. Breaches of peace also apply when the integrity of the ruling party is undermined, like MM Lee once said in an interview to The Times “If you don’t have the law of defamation, you would be like America, where people say terrible things about the president and it can’t be proved.”

E

lectoral laws also put further limits on the opposition. The timing of elections, the length of the campaign period, the mediums by which one can campaign, candidate registration procedures, and even online commentary is all decided and restricted by the government. The first-past-the-post system of counting electoral votes also negates opposition gains even if it wins more than a third of the votes.

T

he problem with such ham-fisted approaches and constraining litigious habits is that the PAP risks coming across as a bully that equates might with right, and provoking more suspicion in a citizenry that is becoming more vocal. Due to greater exposure and better education, a generational shift in attitudes and thinking is transpiring. Singapore is at an important crossroads: an increasingly globalised and wired world calls for an entrepreneurial workforce that is innovative and critical thinking. Yet this need jars with all encompassing measures that tend to inhibit conversation and ideas veering off into uncharted and unwanted paths.

IMAGE CREDITS

(top middle; top right) by* etoile; Flickr Creative Commons (above) Wikimedia Commons

PLEDGE EXAMINATION Democracy

C

ertain OB markers have been pushed outwards in recent years, granted the slow pace of change still causes irritation and misgiving. Censorship has become less blatant though most still make a strong case of a culture of self-censorship. Political debate has become relatively more open, i.e. Singapore’s opposition leaders have been able to address students, though certain controversial mechanisms like the Internal Security Act will never be done away with. Of course the more important long term consideration is the sustainability of such a trajectory: whether these changes will be greeted with cynicism or trust depends on whether a bait and switch happens in the run up to the next elections.

I

n fact, in a rare televised dialogue session “Why My Vote Matters” in 2006, MM Lee Kuan Yew faced a panel of young voters who displayed a lack of deference and a willingness to aggressively confront the perceived arrogance of the PAP, attitudes rare amongst their elders. Almost half of all future voters were born post-independence, and they are demanding more political choice and vibrancy, and more media openness.

The standard rejoinders of a tumultuous past rife with racial conflict and economic uncertainty drummed into all Singaporeans resonates less with this generation that have only experienced uninterrupted affluence and peace.

T

o be fair, the PAP is not unaware of the fact that Singapore is at a “major transition point”, as PM Lee Hsien Loong remarked just before he took over. Ever a formidable and astute political machine, the PAP is realising that it must reinvent itself to govern a citizenry that is increasingly averse to being told what to do and think. The party makes a point to seek and co-opt new talent and is not afraid to retire more established figures to keep its political line-up fresh and relevant. There is also more of an attempt to come across less arrogant and impervious to swings in public opinions, to be more personable and less stern, to be encouraging rather than didactic.

owever, a real democratic system also requires an informed and invested populace. Singaporeans need to evolve beyond taking the easy, populist positions only because they are the opposite of the PAP’s. Kneejerk pendulum swings to the opposite opinion with the misguided intention of evening out the status quo hardly counts as constructive political activism. Pavlovian responses of sneer or apprehension only build an enduring culture of apathy and allow vocal minorities to hold the debate hostage. Learning the difference between keeping politicians accountable and subjective ranting, no matter how messy the process, may be the only way we can grow as a nation. And building trust goes both ways as we need to show that we can traverse racial and religious boundaries thoughtfully even as we clamour for greater ownership in the direction the country is taking.

H

T

he PAP’s political hegemony is in no real danger, for all the chafing at such closely held reins; the balance struck is still acceptable to most citizens, especially at the more conservative grassroots level. Looking at the societal chaos resulting from playing politics naively or cynically in neighbours like Thailand and the Philippines demonstrates that we are doing alright for an emerging nation in only its fourth decade of independence, that we do not need to have completely adversarial hounds baying for blood to live up to the Western criteria of democracy. Perhaps for now, the PAP could temper certain perceptions, to show that they can take as well as they dish out, that their actions do not always have to come across as intemperate over-reactions or over-zealous bureaucratic interventions that seem as if they are spitting on the grave of journalistic principles, constructive commentary and a fair political playing ground.

DEMAND A BROADER PERSPECTIVE

19

PLEDGE EXAMINATION Democracy

THE 10 HIGHEST PAID POLITICIANS IN THE WORLD 1

Lee Hsien Loong

2

Prime Minister, Singapore Annual Salary USD$2.75 million

6

KEVIN RUDD Prime Minister, Australia Annual Salary USD$315,800

DONALD TSANG YUM-KUEN

3

Chief Executive, Hong Kong Annual Salary USD$515,300

7

STEPHEN HARPER

United States

4

President, United States Annual Salary USD$400,000

8

Prime Minister, Canada Annual Salary USD$309,800

BARACK OBAMA

JACOB ZUMA President, South Africa Annual Salary USD$305,800

BRIAN COWEN

5

Taoiseach, Ireland Annual Salary USD$342,400

9

ANGELA MERKEL

NICOLAS SARKOZY President, France Annual Salary USD$318,000

10

Chancellor, Germany Annual Salary USD$303,800

GORDON BROWN Prime Minister, United Kingdom Annual Salary USD$300,400

Public trust of politicians: 1st Transparency of government policymaking: 1st

Global Competitiveness Report 2010-2011

INDEX OF DEMOCRACY 2008 Thailand Malaysia WATCH THIS

TED THIS

SURF THIS

Singapore www.opendemocracy.net

Hong Kong

China BROADER PERSPECTIVES the singapore issue

Why My Vote Matters

Does the Internet aid oppression?

http://video.google.com/videoplay ?docid=-1409818981384963003#

http://blog.ted.com/2009/09/22/ how_the_interne/

PLEDGE EXAMINATION Justice

BASED ON JUSTICE

It is with constructive and contextualised criticism that the judiciary can work to ensure a transparent legal system that is relevant to citizens’ needs, social stability, and the global landscape. BY RACHEL CHNG

S

ingapore is an all-round attention grabber, and come October 18th, the world watched us again, as Alan Shadrake the once jolly man takes to the global stage. The British author and his scathing perspective on the implementation of Singapore’s capital punishment is hotter than any torch-led, asphalt-burning competition; the online landscape is replete with condemnation and commendation alike regarding Shadrake’s alleged contempt of court in his book, “Once A Jolly Hangman: Singapore Justice in the Dock”. This case comes from a long line of state-initiated lawsuits that repeatedly and uncomfortably foreground concerns about whether our legal system deserves all the flak about political influence on the judiciary. In particular, critics argue for the separation of powers between legislative, executive, and judiciary arms of society to ensure credibility and accountability. But to have a comprehensive viewpoint on Singapore’s justice system, we need to first examine specific aspects of Singapore’s legal system: it is with constructive and contextualised criticism that the judiciary can work to ensure a transparent legal system that is relevant to citizens’ needs, social stability, and the global landscape.

ceptics of Singapore’s legal system find fault with the stringent governing of behaviour, but these contested legal parameters also serve as reminders that Singapore’s humble beginnings required extensive control. While racial and religious harmony has been preached with a faithful fervour that is sometimes scoffed at, the fragility of the harmony Singaporeans enjoy is not organic, nor easily won. This was evinced by the furore in 2002 when the donning of tudungs, traditional Malay headscarves worn by female Muslims, was expressly forbidden in secular schools. Opposing sides disagreed on whether the wearing of tudungs would contribute toward racial distrust. That disagreement is essentially a deadlock because it depends on individual reactions to displays of religious affiliation in secular settings, but it reflected how existing norms and accepted practices of cultural tolerance continue only upon an implicit social contract between citizens. The tendency of the government to partake in micro behavioural management is thus understandable given the primacy of maintaining peace.

S

DEMAND A BROADER PERSPECTIVE

21

PLEDGE EXAMINATION Justice

the intricacy of legal construction reveals the care with W here which society is regulated and peace kept, the application of

laws reflects a judiciary’s commitment toward enforcement of legal control. The upcoming appeal date for Malaysian Yong Vui Kong, convicted of drug trafficking and given the mandatory death sentence, inspired much opposition. Yong’s family visited the Istana in late August to submit a petition signed by 100,000 Malaysians and Singaporeans, while social media like deathpenaltynews.blogspot. com profess disgust at Singapore’s defence of the death sentence.

But the root of the problem is not legal leniency for young offenders: it is the need for education and due address to social underpinnings of delinquency. Humanistic debates make for great negative publicity with which to deride the reputation of lawmakers, but it is imperative that citizens are discerning of underlying implications and motivations behind such clearly unpopular decisions. Allowing for leniency would at best be stop-gap solutions for deeper issues; libel suits filed against established news agencies Wall Street Journal and the Far East Economic Review highlight how important it is that the reputation of Singaporean politicians be preserved and upheld, as social stability is founded upon public trust in the elected government. More importantly, these unpopular legal stances are not ends in themselves: while they cater to the unique needs for Singapore, there are checks and balances to ensure a comprehensive decision-making process. The President’s power to pardon inmates on the death row and the intricate stringency that precedes the appointment of justices ensure the integrity of the justice system. The upfront decisions that Singapore laws take do not always adhere to easily swallowed opinions, but their unpopularity is balanced by a commitment to peace and accountability of opinion dissemination.

T

he embodiment of implementing law and enforcing legal parameters is the judge presiding each case, which highlights the issue of impartiality, and citizens can ensure accountability from the habitual reticence on institutional decisions by participating in civil society’s discussions on such cases. Chief Justice Chan Sek Keong’s previous employment under Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew is an often cited reason to cast doubt on judicial decisions that have bearing on MM Lee. The intertwining of the judicial and executive branches of Singapore society exacerbates this, as the current Prime Minister, now MM Lee’s son PM Lee Hsien Loong, recommends the Chief Justice candidate. In a recent address to Singapore Management University’s law undergraduates, CJ Chan cited administrative efficacy as a key benefit of the close working relationship between the government and the judiciary. However, institutional efficiency does not factor into ethical concerns, which would be much more helpful in helping Singaporeans understand the rationale behind legal decisions, rather than be brushing off their concerns with generic assurances of credibility. Civil society is gaining presence especially in the online sphere, with participatory, informational user-generated content that help simplify and document important legal decisions and developments. Savvy law observers like journalism professor Cherian George, and The Singapore Law Review by law undergraduates from the National University of Singapore thus mark an important shift in opinionformation, from institutionalised representations to legally literate interpretations, forming an important connect between the judiciary and citizens.

IMAGE CREDITS

by Scott Clark

Flickr Creative Commons

BROADER PERSPECTIVES the singapore issue

I

t is easy to denounce the lack of political freedom and dynamism of discussions regarding legal reform, but it is really unwise to allow for legal inefficiency with benches left empty due to needless struggles over judicial appointments. Singapore’s small size, economic priorities, and importance of social stability are concerns that we have begun to take for granted as an umbrella justification for all political decisions. But we must step beyond the indifference to fully appreciate how impossible Singapore’s development is. Herein lies the apparent dilemma: education, globalisation, and technology means that Singaporeans are increasingly liberal and global in worldview, fast leaving behind the relatively archaic insistence of an unchangeable justice system. But a look at continual legal refinements, and growing civic and civil awareness and participation indicates an emerging, if as yet fledging partnership. There have been recent Parliament proposals on amendments to Bills focusing on refining infrastructure, productivity, and housing – all of which address citizens’ concerns on the increasing income inequality in Singapore. Legal Aid, the subsidised arm of legal services, continues to provide essential legal advice at affordable prices to low-income Singaporeans. Opinions regarding the repeal of Section 377A of the Penal Code published online and in interviews with the mainstream media were addressed promptly in the public arena. In all, there is an important and increasing interaction between the population and the justice system, evidencing a crucial step toward a more relevant legal framework in a constantly changing world, responding to citizen’s shifting priorities and new challenges. ecognising Singapore’s current successes has to accompany acknowledgement that the tight legal grip the state retains has played a pivotal role for our society’s progress. The diligent implementation of the extensive legal parameters has ensured the social peace that Singaporeans enjoy – easily neglected in their continuity. With due appreciation of the strengths of our justice system and informed, constructive criticism of the aspects of the legal framework that are less agreeable, we can in turn initiate comprehensive discussions on how to improve the Singaporean brand of justice to ensure fairness for all.

R

JUSTICE

The Honourable the Chief Justice Chan Sek Keong Judge of Appeal Justice Chao Hick Tin

The Supreme Court is made up of the Court of Appeal and the High Court.

The Supreme Court Bench consists of the Chief Justice, the Judges of Appeal, Judges and the Judicial Commissioners of the Supreme Court.

Judge of Appeal Justice Andrew Phang Boon Leong

Judge of Appeal Justice V K Rajah

The Chief Justice The Chief Justice sits in the Court of Appeal together with the Judges of Appeal.

Global Competitiveness Report 2010-2011 The annual Global Competitiveness Report by the World Economic Forum provides detailed analyses on countries’ various institutions. Here is a look at how Singapore fares in terms of judicial independence in relation to other countries.

Singapore

United States

New Zealand

Malaysia

The Court of Appeal hears appeals against the decisions of the High Court Judges.

It is is usually made up of three Judges.

The High Court consists of the Chief Justice and the Judges of the High Court.

The High Court hears appeals from the decisions of District Courts and Magistrate's Courts in civil and criminal cases. In criminal cases, the High Court generally tries cases where the offences are punishable by death or imprisonment for a term that exceeds 10 years.

Hong Kong

Source: World Economic Forum

Transparency International's Corruption Perceptions Index 2009 TED THIS

READ THIS

Since 1995, Transparency International’s annual Corruption Perceptions Index has shed light on perceived corruption, one of the touchiest subjects today. Countries are ranked by perceived transparency – the higher the ranking, the more transparent a country is perceived to be.

3rd

12th

17th

Global crime networks have grown to 15% of global economy

Justice: What’s the Right Thing to Do?

http://www.ted.com/talks/lang/ eng/misha_glenny_investigates_ global_crime_networks.html

Michael J. Sandel explores the philosophical implications of political, legal, and moral issues.

19th

56th

Singapore: Hong Kong: Japan: USA: Malaysia:

9.2/10 8.2/10 7.7/10 7.5/10 4.5/10

DEMAND A BROADER PERSPECTIVE

23

PLEDGE EXAMINATION Equality

BASED ON EQUALITY To Singapore, a classless society is a fantasy, thanks to the everpresent forces of human ambition, inherent differences in talent and a Darwinian instinct to thrive.

BY SHIAO-YIN KUIK

S

OCIO-ECONOMIC INEQUALITY is a hotbutton topic in Singapore because it cuts right into the heart of her cultural DNA: her reverence of highachievers, obsession with material gain, and belief in hard work as the way, the truth and the life. Every Singaporean is familiar with the adage, “Nobody owes you a living” and most believe it is this state-sanctioned ethic of hard work that catapulted Singapore from developing nation status into a developed one within 3 decades. o Singapore, a classless society is a fantasy, as human ambition, inherent differences in talent and a Darwinian instinct to thrive in comparison to others are ever-present forces. Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew said in a 1960s speech, "The human being is an unequal creature. That is a fact...he is not equal, never will be.” Since it is impossible to engineer out the income divide, the government focuses instead on mitigating it through investment in infrastructure, employment, and education, with the aim not being equality of results but equality of opportunities. Because education significantly impacts employability and thus fairness of income distribution, the foundation of Singapore's strategy has been in keeping public schools affordable and accessible to all school-going youths according to merit-based selection.

To this end, the state spends a substantial 20% of its annual budget on education with the primary objective of bringing everyone onto an equal footing. All children get

T

BROADER PERSPECTIVES the singapore issue

six years of free primary education, with heavy subsidies for secondary school, college and university education.

Since 1993, Singapore has also used the Education Endowment Scheme, better known as Edusave Awards, to help students get on the same pacing as classmates from more affluent families. Older workers also have assistance when seeking to keep their skills abreast with changing times: Singaporean employers must contribute 1% of their payroll to a Skills Development Fund that they can use to subsidise worker training. The overt governmental intervention to ensure avenues for education highlights consistent effort toward long-term equality.

T

he sore point in education, then, is the perception that main beneficiaries of the meritocratic education system have been the rich, who are taking up more than their fair share of national resources that should have gone directly to the financially needy. For instance, of all the Edusave Award schemes, only the income-biased ones like the Edusave Merit Bursary Award could be said to be more successful in equalising opportunity compared to purely merit-based ones like the Edusave Scholarship for Independent Schools which often end up rewarding bright pupils from already monied families. In 2008, a top civil servant, Philip Yeo, publicly stated that merit alone was not the best measure of how scholarships should be awarded in Singapore because not all applicants had the same social capital to begin

PLEDGE EXAMINATION Equality

with. With tuition centres charging monthly fees up to $300-500 per subject, children from households earning less than $2,500 are going to be left behind in the race to the top of the class. Barring above average drive or talent, many students from lower income families may be unable to overcome the head start of their more privileged peers.

I

n fact, sociological studies in Singapore show a clear relationship between parental education and children’s educational achievements, reflecting the clear consequence of social capital and foregrounding concerns of due and appropriate aid for the needy. In 1988, of the children who tended to do well in school, 43% had graduate parents, 5% had non-graduate parents while the rest had at least one graduate parent. In his 2003 paper on “Trends in income disparity and equality enhancing education policies in the development stages of Singapore”, Associate Professor Pundarik Mukhopadhaya states “students from favoured backgrounds… remain the major beneficiaries of the education policies, which perhaps increases the income disparity further.” Though various financial assistance schemes appear to equalise the situation for poor students, a hefty 42% of the education budget goes towards subsidising higher education, where the cohort is mainly middle-class, implying that most of the state's money might still be going to helping the haves rather than have-nots.

as this inequality in school life translated into income disparity in adult life? Some Singaporeans believe so, and are struggling to understand the state's reluctance to bridge the widening of the gap as they compare their lot against the influx of asset-rich migrants and the growing number of young Singaporean millionaires. A 2008 U.N. Development Program report revealed that based on the Gini coefficient that measures income distribution across a country, Singapore was ranked the second most unequal nation in the world in terms of income inequality.

In Singapore, the ratio of income or expenditure between the top 10% to the lowest 10% of Singaporeans was 17.7, compounded by growing global competition that depresses wages at the low end and boosts wages at the higher end. Still, because the present government accepts the inevitability of inequality, it believes the current meritocratic system has essentially served Singapore well and current policies just need to be updated.

H

onetheless, the pitfalls of meritocracy have been duly noted; on the education front, PM Lee Hsien Loong promised during his 2010 National Day Rally to roll out more opportunities for all types of Singaporeans to advance. This includes more secondary schools with an Integrated Programme to give more catch-up time to students with dissatisfactory PSLE scores, through-train Polytechnic programmes for Normal (Academic) students, and assurance that by 2015, 30% of every cohort would receive university education, versus the current 26%. On the economic front, repeated proposals to establish a minimum wage for equality's sake have been dismissed by the state as a feel-good solution that would ultimately do more harm than good. Singapore remains committed to leaving market forces alone to determine the right level of pay while the state focuses on creating more jobs, investing in education and encouraging workers to keep refreshing their skills.

N

ow shall we move forward? A constructive starting point is to acknowledge that our current system allows for and perpetuates inequities, and a mature plan of action thereafter is not to entirely drop the meritocratic system but to discover the fine balance between providing incentives for competition and efficiency while ensuring opportunities for equal participation. Singapore can achieve its dream of equalising opportunities for all if it avoids two pitfalls: the overestimation of the merits of our meritocratic system, and the underestimation of the difficulties faced by those in our midst who struggle against the deeply entrenched inequalities created by race, gender and class. Fighting against the perennial presence of elitism within a system of merit-based selection may be pointless but fighting against its entrenchment is not. Ultimately, a meritocracy only continues to be relevant and successful if the concept of merit evolves according to the times – and not just according to what the winners of today's meritocratic system perceive it to be.

H

IMAGE CREDITS

Homeless by emiliolabrador; Driving by St@ce, Flickr Creative Commons

DEMAND A BROADER PERSPECTIVE

25

EQUALITY A study by the Monetary Authority of Singapore showed that an additional year of education increases income by an average of 13.2%. Education, then, is a key driver of social mobility. Here is a look at the steps taken to ensure educational opportunities, which chart the country’s steps toward equality for all Singaporeans.

Literacy rate for adults 15 years and above

89%

94.4%

93% 2009

2000

1990

Sources: Singapore Census 2000, Human Development Index 2009

These are some comprehensive aid schemes for needy students from Primary to post-Secondary levels.

Househo ld incom e Edusave M erit Bursar y

Academic Developm ent Good Pro gress Awa rd

r pupils meant fo e is is d r a w incom This a usehold onth. The o h e s o m wh $4,000 a : less than award is up to is th f o value

Sou

$250 $350 $400

rce:

Min

istr

y of

$500

Edu

School - Primar y y School - Secondar ollege - Junior C d Institute e is al tr tion Cen al Educa f Technic o te u it st In -

Leader Edusave Aw ship Skills ards for A chievemen t

ed on iven bas cag is d r a a This aw nts in students’ year. me t s a p e improve r th sults ove p to: demic re f this award is u o e The valu chool

rimar y S

$150 - P y School econdar $200 - S ge nior Colle te $250 - Ju In d e stitu

n based o is given iv ti rd c a ular a This aw o-curric y ents in c ommunit c to achievem n he ntributio T . o d c o d ri n e a p ties ne-year over a o to: p u services is rd this awa value of School

rimar y $150 - P School condar y e $200 - S ollege

Junior C te ed Institu tion Centralis al Educa ic n ch of Te Institute

cation Centralis nical Edu te of Tech

stitu $400 - In

cat

ion

Surf This BROADER PERSPECTIVES the singapore issue

The best free cultural & educational media on the web http://www.openculture.com/

Sugata Mitra shows how kids teach themselves

Ted This

http://www.ted.com/talks/sugata_mitra_shows_how_kids_ teach_themselves.html

PLEDGE EXAMINATION Happiness

SO AS TO ACHIEVE HAPPINESS More Singaporeans are believing that living a life less ordinary may not only be possible, it may even be profitable. BY SHIAO-YIN KUIK

IMAGE CREDITS

I

n 2000, two ordinary Singaporeans – lawyer turned cartoonist Colin Goh and teacher Woo Yen Yen – explained how disillusionment with Singaporean life led them to New York in an essay, “Paved With Good Intentions”. “Paved” became an online viral sensation, sparking off an outpouring of confessions from fellow Singaporeans who also struggled to find happiness despite material success. It was a theme SM Goh would touch on, ten years later, in a surprising National Day speech. SM Goh explained that in his era, he was content despite exchanging his dreams of being a professor for a place in the civil service, because times were harsher and choice was a luxury. But with today’s growth prospects, he believed young Singaporeans could well afford to take more risks to pursue their dreams. He exhorted them to reinvent the 1980's “5Cs” Dream – Cash, Credit Card, Car, Condo and Country club membership – into something far more conducive to lasting individual and national happiness: a good Career, a life of Comfort, surrounded by Children, and the ability to be Considerate and Charitable.

Library by kodomut, Flickr Creative Commons

F

or a nation long raised on the virtues of pragmatism, the speech's significance is not to be underestimated. We are a nation where many people still unconsciously move their lives, decisions to the beat set by the government. When living a life less ordinary gets stamped with the top-down approval of PAP, many would take this as a cue that this lifestyle is not only possible, it may even be profitable.

T

hrough the struggling 1960s and 70s, the government exhorted Singaporeans to make practical short-term sacrifices for long-term good: abandon dialect for Mandarin, perfect one's English, have just two children, choose engineering and the sciences versus academia and the arts. Most people dutifully obeyed, worked hard, stayed clean and, true enough, reaped tremendous material fruits in the 1980s. But they also discovered an unhappy paradox: as society grew more prosperous, the very things they thought they could afford when they were richer had gotten more out of reach. Public debate in the 1990s was plagued with angst over rising costs of living and the greatest sore

DEMAND A BROADER PERSPECTIVE

27

PLEDGE EXAMINATION Equality

point revolved around the most prestigious symbol of success – a private home. A soaring economy and scarce land had combined to price real estate out of reach of many yuppies, and those who had hedged their bets on prestigious fields of study to buy their way out of public housing felt betrayed, believing that the perceived social contract had been compromised. One Singaporean complained in a 1996 New York Times article, "I studied, I got my degree, I got a good job. I did everything right and it looks like I'll be living with my mother the rest of my life. I didn't make any eccentric choices; I didn't go into the arts or anything like that, and where's the payoff?”

Coffee-shop talk of moving overseas for a better life, where the dollar could stretch further to purchase big cars and big houses, became widespread enough for Parliament to publicly argue about “stayers versus goers”.

T

hanks to the simple economics of competition, the possibility of everyone achieving the 5Cs would always be in doubt. Moreover, even if one attained said equation, they seldom delivered the kind of satisfaction one imagined ― a Singaporean who might have been once pleased with a HDB flat soon perceived it as something lowly. Ironically, as purchasing power grew, so did expectations and thus, the benchmark of satisfaction was pushed higher and higher, always out of reach. Those who did go overseas and got their 5Cs dream for cheap now found themselves surprisingly homesick. Others felt caught in a masochistic self-woven web, a massive cultural conspiracy to keep themselves unhappily working hard at a job they did not really enjoy, for things they did not really want for the approval of people they did not really care about.

Colin Goh articulated this in "Paved": “I was acting pragmatically, but ultimately, dishonestly...It was simply un-Singaporean to think one could get pleasure without money, or that working should be pleasurable.” In a bid to look “right”, too many Singaporeans sacrificed leisure time, creative freedom, relationships, the pursuit of passions and ideals – the very “eccentric choices” that would have given them deepest satisfaction.

...WHILE TAKING INCREMENTAL STEPS TO CREATING A MORE AND MORE LEVEL PLAYING FIELD. BROADER PERSPECTIVES the singapore issue

IMAGE CREDITS

Bugis fountain by madaboutasia, Flickr Creative Commons

T

he post-millennium years are showing signs that this neurosis is losing its grip on the nation. “Career” is being redefined as a job that maximises one's strengths rather than one's bank account, and “Comfort” now includes lifestyle sustainability and emotional restfulness rather than mere creature comforts. Though “Children” still seems to be a “nice to have” rather than a “must have” to independent-minded post-1965ers, youth-led pro-family and pro-marriage movements are emerging, particularly among the religious. “Considerate” and “Charitable” are intriguing new Cs growing in popularity. The idea of taking a 'gap year' – a time-out to rediscover one's life directions – is fast gaining social acceptance in Singapore. More Singaporeans are also dropping out of the rat race to establish work-life balance and some eventually go on to start new ventures – eco-friendly, family-friendly, design-centric or socially-conscious – closer to their dreams and inclinations. Others are finding new joy of giving away what they have strived to earn: a surprising number of Singaporeans have been venturing into Timor Leste since 2006, starting up English language programmes, social enterprises and even organising tourist events to jumpstart the fortunes of one of the world's poorest and youngest nations.

O

ne of the least productive – and least attractive – traits about Singaporeans is their propensity to complain when the going gets tough, and the government has proved to be an all too convenient scapegoat for all of one's personal woes, from crammed MRT trains to being stuck in a dead-end job. The more Singaporeans leave behind this national addiction of blame-shifting, the more responsibility they will take for their own life and start aligning their choices to their greatest passions as opposed to their deepest fears.

Therein, perhaps, lies the secret of finding a happiness they can finally call their own.

Happiness

The annual Happy Planet Index ranks countries by what matters most: living life to the fullest without harming the planet. Life expectancy, life satisfaction, and ecological footprint are the study’s criteria, and Singapore ranks 49th out of 143 countries, behind the emerging powerhouses Brazil and China.

Ranked

Life expectancy

Life satisfaction

Ecological Footprint

Data is collected from the Human Development Index Report 2007/08, reflecting numbers from 2005.

Scores are derived from the 2005 Gallup World Poll and the World Values survey.

Information is obtained from the Ecological Footprint Atlas’ 2005 figures. (HPI : shows the ecological

71.7

9

th

footprint per capita, a measure of the resources used per head in each country )

7.6 10

2.4

6.7 10

2.1

7.1

4.2

Brazil

Ranked

20

th

72.5

China

Ranked

49

th

79.4

10

Singapore

TED This

Nic Marks The Happy Planet Index

Gary Vaynerchuk: Do what you love

http://www.ted.com/talks/ nic_marks_the_happy_plan et_index.html

http://www.ted.com/talks/ lang/eng/gary_vaynerchuk_ do_what_you_love_no_ex cuses.html

Watch This

Five Steps to a Happier Life http://bigthink.com/ideas/24072

DEMAND A BROADER PERSPECTIVE

29

PLEDGE EXAMINATION Prosperity

SO AS TO ACHIEVE PROSPERITY The need to improve the labour productivity of Singapore is grounded upon the importance of ensuring future success.

BY XU YUQIN AND JOASH LOH

INGAPORE’S economic accomplishments have made her a case study for economic success and overachievement, yet there are concerns that may threaten to derail this continued trajectory in the long run. Our transition from a rural landscape to a highly urbanised one in less than 45 years is nothing short of phenomenal. According to the 2010 Index of Economic Freedom, Singapore boasts one of the most conducive environments to do business in, with firms freely operating without fear of government intrusiveness or corruption, or socio-political instability. Yet, Singapore currently faces fierce competition in the global market, and risks lagging behind other developed nations or being overtaken by faster emerging economies. Labour costs are rising, as growth in productivity has stagnated for more than a decade, and Prime Minster Lee Hsien Loong specifically addressed productivity issues in his 2010 National Day Rally speech. The question remains, can these measures provide for sustained growth? In other words, are we doing what we can to “achieve... prosperity...for our nation”?

S

T

he need to improve the labour productivity of Singapore is grounded upon the importance of ensuring future success. Having just recovered from the 2008 global recession with better than expected economic growth, the focus is now on sustaining this in the long run. With our high cost of living, we can no

BROADER PERSPECTIVES the singapore issue

longer offer cheap labour to compete with emerging markets like China, India and Vietnam. And while Singapore currently has the 4th highest per capita income globally according to World Bank estimates for 2009, Singapore’s productivity can no longer afford to stay at only 55%-65% of the US and Japan’s level, as it puts us at a clear disadvantage in relation to other developed nations. The differing cases of Ireland and Japan exemplify the possible effects of productivity on prosperity.

Ireland has in the last two decades enjoyed high growth productivity rates. Her labour productivity growth rates were the highest in Europe during the 1990s. Ireland also boosted research and development in high-technology sectors, creating a technologically savvy and innovative workforce. The contrasting example is of Japan’s economy, which was recently overtaken by China.

Its productivity languishes behind the Spaniards, and by almost 40% to the Americans. Barring automobiles and electronics, other sectors have evinced negligible productivity growth rates. In terms of pure economic growth, Japan has hovered at an average of 1.3% while Ireland comparatively soared at 5.6% in the last decade.

Thus, productivity is a clear driver for long-term economic growth, and should be a primary goal for Singapore.

PLEDGE EXAMINATION

ngoing governmental initiatives and a motivated workforce are evidence of Singapore’s potential for greater productivity. To kick-start productivity, the government has in recent years heightened involvement in making local companies more efficient and focused. This year, $5.5 billion dollars have been budgeted to boost productivity gains to 2–3% in the next decade, part of which will be spent on tax benefits, grants and training subsidies.

On top of that, a new high-level state body, the National Productivity and Continuing Education Council, will be forged to oversee all stateled initiatives of this nature. Clearly, the state is taking an active role in attempts to move away from dependence on sheer manpower, to one that more effectively utilises the existing workforce. Also, it has invested heavily in promising local companies, so as to provide capital and give direction towards promising profit niches. EDB Investments has recently invested in logistic firm CWT, so that it can expand its regional presence. As such, these methods reflect an admission that a productive company will aid an economy. Additionally, Singapore already has a motivated workforce. Productivity requires both the will and desire to improve to be truly successful. Our society’s unwavering focus on the merits of hard work to attain success will be helpful to achieve the goals of economic development.

Our workforce possesses a strong work ethic, working the longest workweeks globally, according to the 2009’s Global Wage Report. On top of that, in a recent survey, 61% of respondents stated that they would continue to work despite being sick, reflecting diligent work at-

Prosperity

O

titudes. Overall, the drive that Singaporeans have puts us at an advantage to face the coming challenges ahead.

S

till, while largely top-down initiatives to improve worker productivity have worked in the past, the labour niche that Singapore is gunning for requires not only efficiency but also flexibility and innovation. To quote our Prime Minister in the 2010 National Day Rally speech, “Every worker must master the knowhow and skills to be productive and competitive. Every manager must train and motivate his staff to maximise their contribution and potential. Only then can Singaporeans do the better jobs that our economy will create, and enjoy higher incomes, brighter opportunities, and more fulfilling lives.”

Singapore could do better is to foster individual initiaW hat tive. The large presence of government-linked companies

threatens to edge out many smaller, but enterprising private companies. The numero uno, Temasek Holdings, owns a 100% stake in Mediacorp, 55% in Singtel, 49% in Sembcorp and has other stakes in areas as diverse as real estate to pharmaceuticals.

In such an environment, the root cause of competitiveness is not addressed and instead stifles productivity. These arguments thus put forth that Singapore risks creating a strong, efficient economy that lacks vibrancy. This is ultimately detrimental in the long run as it may not satisfy the needs of a new global economy.

T

IMAGE CREDITS

Singapore Cityscape by KCDstm, New Year 2010 by Eustaquio Santimano,

rying to find a perfect, timeless economic strategy is a fool’s errand. Uncertainty is a fact of life; plans seldom go as expected and are never foolproof. It is impossible to say that economic regulation is undesirable. One only need see how a lack of proper regulatory measures led to the global credit crunch that began in 2008. It seems therefore that both extremes have perilous implications. The real problems arise when we attempt to determine the perfect balance that ensures long-term economic growth. As far as we can see, what brought Singapore to its current position despite our disadvantages was that we have been quick on our feet, and ready to adapt to the demands of an everchanging world. Ultimately, there is no finishing line in the pursuit of prosperity. Past successes do not guarantee future growth.

What then is needed is a constant aspiration for prosperity that will motivate us forward.

Singapore Flyer by alex_s Flickr Creative Commons

DEMAND A BROADER PERSPECTIVE

31

SOUTH KOREA Seoul

36 mins

22 hours

13 mins

U.K. London

ITY R E SP O PR

27½ hours

27 mins

SINGAPORE

11 hours

GERMANY Frankfurt

HONG KONG

12 hours

14 mins

Tokyo

AVERAGE WORKING TIME TO PURCHASE:

13½ hours

12 mins

JAPAN

9 hours

15 mins

U.S.A. New York City

14 mins

MENU

BIG MAC

19 hours

8GB IPOD NANO

Singapore’s GDP Per Capita, In Thousands of 1990 PPP$ 30

Output per hour, hourly compensation, unit labor costs, and related measures Manufacturing, 1979-2008

25 20

15

10

5

0

-5

-10

PERCENTAGE OF OUTPUT PER HOUR

15

1979-1990 SINGAPORE

10 5

10.8

0 1965

6.9

1970

1975

1980

1985

1990

1995

2000

2005

5.6

1.2

READ THIS -6.6

YEAR 1990-1995

1995-2000

UNITED STATES

BROADER PERSPECTIVES the singapore issue

2000-2008

KOREA, REPUBLIC OF

2006-2007

2007-2008

Singapore's Success : Engineering Economic Growth

SURF THIS 101 East - Singapore's Economy part 1: http://www. youtube.com/ watch?v=ie9SzMSkq5k part 2: http:// www.youtube.com/ watch?V=YNnPwTl91M&feature=channel

PLEDGE EXAMINATION Progress

SO AS TO ACHIEVE PROGRESS

Only when we strive to work on our possible areas of growth and development can Singapore progress in more ways than she already has. BY RACHEL CHNG

IMAGE CREDITS

will never be successful enough – all our achieveW ements thus far have been mere steps forward in

Singapore’s history, and are unable to sate our society’s appetite to reach higher levels of progress. Singapore’s almost obsessive preoccupation with continual excellence in as many aspects as possible is duly explained by the age-old pronouncements of our country’s small size and lack of natural resources. Remaining competent in comparison to other countries is crucial to ensure Singapore’s continued survival. To understand how we are viewed in relation to the world, global rankings of various aspects of society are often helpful signposts as they reflect how Singapore is perceived, in turn pointing toward where we are headed. Beyond the number crunching, the criteria for these rankings can shed light on our country’s clear strengths and perceived weaknesses, to better allow us to consider and implement initiatives that help Singapore develop in a way that benefits us all. conomic success is Singapore’s proudest claim to fame, but while our country consistently fares very well in studies that focus on economic factors, it is crucial to keep in mind that this success is contingent upon constant effort. Singapore was placed at a respectable

E

Youth Olympics CAN Run, Party and Play! by WhyOhGee, Flickr Creative Commons

3rd in the World Economic Forum’s 2010-2011 Global Competitiveness Report. The key factors for the high standing were governmental efficiency, emphasis on education, and infrastructural development. This ranking duly applauds past long-term nationwide planning that has come to benefit our current generation.

It also shows how economic strategies initiated by the government are native to the Singaporean formula for material success, due to our historical need for swift improvements to disparate people’s lives. The Resilience Package introduced during the 2008 financial crisis saw the extensive fiscal expenditure on employment, commerce, infrastructure, and direct financial assistance, signalling an all-rounded approach to tiding over the economy. Atop this, however, is the highlighted need for adaptive and sustainable economic development – exemplified by the lifting of a 40-year-old ban on casinos to mark the opening of the two Integrated Resorts, which have allowed for an unprecedented million tourists in July alone. Where the hard skills in trade and industrialisation drove economic growth in the past, soft skills like human resource management were brought up as key concerns in the recent Singapore Human Capital Summit. Globalised workplaces are increasingly complex ― a new generation, technologically savvy and

DEMAND A BROADER PERSPECTIVE

33

PLEDGE EXAMINATION Progress

well educated, enters a workforce dominated by an ageing population. Changing circumstances thus necessitate adaptive strategies for Singapore’s future economic development. eyond economic developments, other markers of society are becoming increasingly important as Singapore aspires to multi-faceted sophistication that signals true “developed” status.

World rankings on non-economic aspects show that there is still some way to go. For example, media freedom continues to be a point of contention, as evidenced by the 133rd position Singapore attained out of 175 countries in the 2009 Press Freedom Index.

To top this pessimistic viewpoint, stringent publication laws and compulsory periodic renewals of distribution licenses make it easy to frame Singapore as a suppressive nation intimidating an all too compliant people. But it is important to recognise that conceptually directed studies unpack only specific aspects of societies, and do not form a cohesive picture of Singaporean society. The social harmony we have is the bedrock of Singapore’s ability to thrive, which means the path of completely open and contentious media coverage and debate will tend to be overshadowed by the need to negotiate common benefits cautiously. Singapore’s concerns clearly lie with economic prowess and social stability, and since context determines priorities, the fact that the media is not globally seen on the same level as Western standards is not as immediate or problematic an issue.

B

owever, moving forward, to truly earn the label “cosmopolitan”, our country will eventually require a revision of public media that allows for inclusion of more opinions without entirely upsetting established standards or procedures. A case in point is how civic awareness and involvement is fast increasing, with both citizen journalism and mainstream press allowing for more participation. The likes of The Straits Times online forum pages and the alternative voices of The Online Citizen blog present diverse information sources that allow for more interaction. A wider range of accessible viewpoints is crucial to develop Singaporeans’ informed involvement, active participation, and eventually constructive criticism that will contribute toward individual and national progress.

Still, in comparison to the political and cultural activism in other countries, Singapore has some way to go before establishing a more mature and discursive society, as we are just beginning to show a shift in priorities and concerns towards growth of our national community.

H

G

lobal rankings that cover more spheres of society would be particularly useful in understanding how Singapore is viewed holistically. In this year’s annual Most Liveable City Index, Singapore slipped from 18th to 21st place, with lifestyle magazine Monocle pointing toward a need for Singaporeans to have better worklife balance and more flexible work arrangements. Nonetheless, the indicators credited our country for its modern medical facilities, high level of education, especially low crime rates, and availability of entertainment, and thus concluded that our country remains a powerhouse in providing a good quality of life. A crucial lesson to be learnt is that the recipe for progress involves mixing established policies with new ones. In particular, changes in the sphere of entertainment are spearheading the spread of social dynamism.

These include Singapore’s hosting of global events like the Formula 1 night race and the inaugural Youth Olympic Games, and promoting of the art and cultural scene via top-class facilities and festivals.

The composite nature of our society thus necessitates that progress be a combination of revising old, and introducing new factors that work simultaneously.

BROADER PERSPECTIVES the singapore issue

THE COMPOSITE NATURE OF OUR SOCIETY THUS NECESSITATES THAT PROGRESS BE A COMBINATION OF REVISING OLD, AND INTRODUCING NEW FACTORS THAT WORK SIMULTANEOUSLY. I

n plotting Singapore’s graph of success, a comparison with other countries proves holistic development is possible.

Newsweek’s Interactive Infographic of the World’s Best Countries initiates a pluralistic perspective into different cities’ progress, as each city is ranked separately in terms of Economic Dynamism, Education, Health, Quality of Life, and Political Environment. The success of cities such as Zurich, Vienna and Japan highlight that economic, social, and political dynamism do not have to be mutually exclusive. Zurich’s high entrepreneurial spirit and cosmopolitan talent pool, Vienna’s new cultural wave and Japan’s strongly rooted traditions form important case studies for Singapore, and we would do well to extract relevant lessons on socio-political participation and national character from such creative and cultural hubs. Only when we strive to work on our possible areas of growth and development can our society progress in more ways than we already have.

I

t is particularly crucial to note the polarisation of standings that Singapore holds in various aspects of society, and to explore the implications for comprehensive critique and constructive evaluation while still keeping in mind the importance of remembering where we came from, and how we got this far. Change is the only constant, and in deciphering the implications, assumptions, and motivations of global rankings, we can better decide how we can contribute toward shaping a Singapore that tirelessly strives to address the separate and simultaneous concerns of Singaporeans to create a better home for all.

“We have to remake Singapore. Our economy, our education, our mind-set, our city. It must be a totally different Singapore. Because if its the same Singapore today, we're dead.”

The World Giving Index Source: Charities Aid Foundation Human Development Index Source: United Nations Development Program The Human Development Index is a comparative measure of life expectancy, literacy, education and standards of living.

The CAF World Giving Index is an average of the proportion of the public who had, in the previous month, donated money to charity, given time to those in need and helped a stranger.

25th

91st

- Lee Hsien Loong

153

177

Total Fertility Rate Source: The CIA World Factbook

221st 223

PROGRESS Quality-of-Life Index Source: The Economist Intelligence Unit 11th

Index of Economic Freedom 2010-2011 Source: The Heritage Foundation & Wall Street Journal

111 Cost of Living Survey Source: ECA International 78th

2nd

183

239

LINKS

SURF THIS

YOUTUBE THIS

LISTEN TO THIS

TED THIS

http://www.dogoodhq.com/

http://www.youtube.com/watch ?v=YOdOEg9l3jk&feature=play er_embedded

http://www.bbc.co.uk/podcasts/ series/forum60sec

http://www.ted.com/talks/aimee_ mullins_the_opportunity_of_adversity.html

Be a DoGooder! Your download generates profits, half of which are donated back to non-profit organisations.

Thought Bubble uses graphic design to increase social awareness.

BBC’s 60 seconds to improve the world invites prominent figures to speak about inventions that would make life better, in a minute.

Aimee Mullins talks about the importance of resilience, and positive language.

DEMAND A BROADER PERSPECTIVE

35

PACKAGING PATRIOTISM

THE OF

PRE-MILLENNIUM PATRIOTIC SONGS FROM the 1980s to the 1990s, made-to-order patriotic songs were much more overt in their call to national unity and did not shy away from using tough words reminding the people about the virtue of hard work and vigilance. This style of patriotic songs, however, put off a post-modern, millennial generation of youths. They were suspicious of anything smacking of propaganda and were resistant to heavy-handed lyrics and musical flourishes. National unity, they felt, could not be dictated to them by the state in a paternalistic fashion. It had to be felt naturally by individuals.

1998's Home was written to reflect this new zeitgeist. It remains one of the most wellreceived of all Singapore's patriotic songs and was brought back successfully in 2004.

7%

6%

FUZZY FEELINGS

BOTTOM UP

21%

35 %

NEUTRAL

4%

2%

FUZZY FEELINGS

BOTTOM UP

20 %

37 %

TOP-DOWN

TOP-DOWN

NEUTRAL

32 %

37 %

TOUGH WORDS

TOUGH WORDS

MAJULAH SINGAPURA (1958)

STAND UP FOR SINGAPORE (1984)

Music & lyrics by Zubir Said

Music & lyrics by Hugh Harrison

Explicit Mentions of Singapore(ans): 11.8%

Explicit Mentions of Singapore(ans): 6.8%

POST-MILLENNIUM PATRIOTIC SONGS POST-2000 patriotic songs took on a much more soft-sell approach. The music sounded more like radio-friendly pop songs, sung by an individual rather than by an anonymous mass. The lyrics, meanwhile, become deliberately more neutral in nature ― akin to those used in love songs or rock anthems ― focusing on fuzzy feelings and individual experiences. Some post-2000 songs even go as far as to completely leave out any reference to the word "Singapore". 2007's There's No Place I'd Rather Be did not mention Singapore at but listed 16 other places in the world. 2010's Sing a Song for Singapore marks an interesting balance of oldschool roots combined with new-school feel.

1%

2%

TOUGH WORDS

TOP-DOWN

2%

TOP-DOWN

14%

0%

TOUGH WORDS

5%

FUZZY FEELINGS

19%

BOTTOM UP

BOTTOM-UP

45% NEUTRAL

38% FUZZY FEELINGS

WHERE I BELONG (2001) Music & lyrics, Vocals by Tanya Chua

Explicit Mentions of Singapore(ans): 0%

BROADER PERSPECTIVES the singapore issue

74% NEUTRAL

THERE'S NO PLACE I'D RATHER BE (2007) Music & lyrics by Jimmy Ye, Vocals by Kit Chan

Explicit Mentions of Singapore(ans): 0% Explicit Mentions of Other Places: 8.3%

Since 1985, the state has commissioned a new patriotic song to be featured prominently every National Day. While the songs all share the same overt goal of inspiring patriotic feelings among the masses, the style in which they have been written have undergone significant changes that reflect the changing experiences and expectations of Singaporeans. BY SHIAO-YIN KUIK HAS THE STATE CHANGED THE WAY IT ENCOURAGES PATRIOTISM? 8%

7%

FUZZY FEELINGS

TOUGH WORDS

27 %

46 %

TOP-DOWN

NEUTRAL

11 %

3%

3%

TOUGH WORDS

TOP-DOWN

17 %

BOTTOM-UP

53 % NEUTRAL

BOTTOM-UP

24 %

FUZZY FEELINGS

WE ARE SINGAPORE (1987, 1988)

HOME (1998, 2004)

Music & lyrics by Hugh Harrison

Music & lyrics by Dick Lee, Vocals by Kit Chan

Explicit Mentions of Singapore(ans): 8.3%

Explicit Mentions of Singapore(ans): 0.8%

Taking into account their contextual meaning, we analysed the lyrics of 8 iconic patriotic songs on two fronts: TOP DOWN

Reminders from the TOP, about collective interests. us, our, you, every, united, Singapore, nation, Singaporeans, flag, country, society, people, citizens Encouraging TOUGH WORDS

7%

TOP-DOWN

51% NEUTRAL

5%

BOTTOM UP

5%

TOUGH WORDS

32% FUZZY FEELINGS

7%

FUZZY FEELINGS

35%

21% TOP-DOWN

13 %

NEUTRAL

BOTTOM-UP

24% TOUGH WORDS

WHAT DO YOU SEE (2009) Music & lyrics, Vocals by Electrico

Explicit Mentions of Singapore(ans): 0%

SING A SONG FOR SINGAPORE (2010) Music & lyrics, Vocals by Corrinne May

Explicit Mentions of Singapore(ans): 5.6%

VS.

BOTTOM UP

BOTTOMUP unity of diverse individuals home, homeland, me, my, believe, voices, family, brother, sister

FUZZY VS. FEELINGS

Focusing on values of hard work and progress

values of personal happiness

build, toil, reach, aspiration, stand, vigilance, test, future, more, success, up, time

belong, heart, love, thankful, free, happinness, care, share, feel, smile, happiness, forever

Focusing on

NEUTRAL WORDS (words that did not fall into either of the 4 categories) were also accounted for.

These were then taken as a percentage of the total number of lyrics (including repeated choruses).

DEMAND A BROADER PERSPECTIVE

37

SINGAPORE'S COSMOPOLITAN DREAMS Singapore is determined to be one of the most attractive cities in the world to work, live and play in.

SHIAO-YIN KUIK looks at how Singapore is positioning herself till the year 2015.

THE WORLD'S CHOICE HEALTHCARE DESTINATION THE HOOK: REST AND RECUPERATE IN YOUR (REALLY CLASSY) HOME AWAY FROM HOME.

In 2003, SINGAPOREMEDICINE was created. Led by Singapore's Ministry of Health and supported by three other government agencies (IE, STB and the EDB), SingaporeMedicine is all about positioning Singapore as Asia's leading medical hub and a world-class destination for advanced patient care. Ranked as the sixth best in the world and the best in Asia by the World Health Organisation in 2000, Singapore's healthcare system is renowned for its excellence and credibility. The high level of transparency in the healthcare system in publishing of vital information, like infection control statistics, also means Singapore's medical professionals can respond effectively and qiuckly to medical crises.

Dedicated International Patient Service Centres provide top-notch customer service, from a meet and greet at the airport to providing interpreter services and posttreatment follow-up when patients are back in their home countries. Wealthy patients are treated in private and exclusive facilities comparable to five-star hotels. Beyond serving patients, Singapore is also a centre for research and clinical trials as well as a major meeting place for medical professionals for training conferences.

IMAGE CREDITS Tan Tock Seng Hospital by Sengkang,

Wikimedia Commons

BROADER PERSPECTIVES the singapore issue

THE MOST RELIABLE PLACE IN THE WORLD TO DO BUSINESS THE HOOK: THERE IS NO BETTER PLACE FOR GLOBAL ENTREPRENEURS TO MANAGE THEIR MARKETS.

Singapore has consistently ranked as one of the world's most competitive and profitable places for business investors. Ever since independence, Singapore has gone all out on a holistic strategy to make herself one of the most pro-business countries in the world, building up world-class infrastructure, capital markets, a highly educated work force, social stability, stable political institutions and an attractive tax regime. The accolades make it very clear why Singapore is top choice among entrepreneurs. As the world's most globalised nation with the world's freest economy, it is no wonder that the World Bank ranked Singapore as #1 Easiest Place to Do Business in 2007. KPMG dubbed her #1 Most Cost-Competitive Place for Doing Business in 2006. Quality labour is readily accessible here considering Singapore has one of the most skilled and educated local forces with one of the least restrictive immigration laws for employing foreign labour. Infrastructure makes the movement of people and goods a breeze. Singapore has the highest quality air and land transport and is considered one of the most technologically ready and progressive nations worldwide. A lot of it has to do with how the government maintains transparency and consistency in law and policy. Singapore has the least red tape for commerce in Asia and has among the highest corporate governance standards. With protection of physical investments and intellectual property rights, companies feel more assured that their wealth will be kept safe from harm.

IMAGE CREDITS Money by Steve Nagata, Flickr CC

INTERVIEWS Name Here

A PLAYGROUND FOR THE RICH AND FABULOUS

A CITY OF CONSTANT REJUVENATION THE HOOK: IN SINGAPORE, NOTHING GETS TOO OLD AND NOBODY GETS TOO TIRED.

THE HOOK: YOU WILL NEVER RUN OUT OF WAYS TO SPLURGE THAT SPARE MILLION ― OR TWO.

Our tiny Republic happens to have the highest concentration of millionaires in the world: 11.4% of households here have fortunes that run into the millions. This means much of Singapore's real estate, entertainment and shopping is geared towards the desires of the wealthy, making her an attractive place for the world's elite to come here to live, work and play.

After years of resistance, Singapore legalised casino gambling and set up two integrated resorts, MARINA BAY SANDS and RESORTS WORLD SENTOSA, boasting posh restaurants with Michelinstarred chefs and luxe shopping. Already, the high-rollers (and the wannabes) are trooping in: July 2010 saw the number of arrivals in a single month cross the one million mark for the first time. Analysts project that the casinos will probably bring in 12.5 million visitors in 2010 and US$5.1 billion by 2011 into Singapore. Complimenting the casinos is Singapore's annual F1 NIGHT RACE, an event as much about fast cars as the fast-spending glitteratti crowd and money-spinning events it brings in its wake.

In securing the rights to host a prestigious sports event like F1, Singapore is finally going head on head with other centres of glitz and glamour like Monaco and Shanghai.

IMAGE CREDITS Robert Kubica (BMW Sauber) at Singapore's F1 Race by kojach, Flickr CC

AN EFFICIENT MODEL OF COMPACT CITY LIVING THE HOOK: HANG OUT WITH 6.5 MILLION PEOPLE ― WITHOUT GIVING UP YOUR PRIVATE SPACE.

Singapore has always been known as a model of efficient urban planning: after all, she manages to comfortably house 5 million residents over a land mass of 710 sq km.

But the DESIGNSINGAPORE COUNCIL and the SINGAPORE INSTITUTE OF ARCHITECTS made an even bolder proposal with their 1000 SINGAPORES (www.1000singapores.com) show at the Venice Biennale, an international architectural exhibition: based on Singapore's model of compact city living, the entire world population could fit into less than 0.5% of Earth's total land area ― the size of 1,000 Singapores. An intriguing concept for a world straining to contain the socioeconomic and environmental problems created by burgeoning megacities.

With vibrant cities like Hong Kong, Tokyo and Shanghai just a few hours away, the URBAN REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY OF SINGAPORE needed to show Singapore knew how to stay forever young, alluring and ready to party 24/7.

Four main sections of the city have been targetted for an AMBITIOUS LIGHTING PLAN to liven up the city with light shows, highlighted focal points, animated building walls and lightshows across the skyline, Orchard Road, Clarke Quay and Boat Quay; Bras Basah and Bugis, and the crown-jewel, the CBD and Marina Bay. Since 2009, every skyscraper in the CBD has had colourful neon lights illuminating the night sky, to celebrate festive occasions and events.

IMAGE CREDITS The Helix Bridge by Kelvin Phoon Photography, Flickr CC

IMAGE CREDITS HDB FLATS by Beggs, Flickr CC

DEMAND A BROADER PERSPECTIVE

39

INTERVIEWS National Identity

"

WHAT DO YOU LOVE MOST ABOUT

BEING SINGAPOREAN? WHAT WOULD YOU LIKE

TO SEE IMPROVED OR CHANGED IN

SINGAPORE?

DO YOU STILL SEE YOURSELF IN SINGAPORE IN 10 YEARS’ TIME, AND WHY?

ON LIFE CHANGED SINCE YOU WERE 18?

HOW HAS YOUR PERSPECTIVE

"

BROADER PERSPECTIVES the singapore issue

Conversations:

Alvin Tan

Age 47,Founder and Artistic Director of The Necessary Stage

Q1.

Alvin is the Founder and Artistic Director of The Necessary Stage. Under Alvin,

We can be quite generous when we are moved by a real cause and we know what we're donating is going directly to the people who needs the help. I like that we are brought up to be accountable which minimalises corruption although we still have some way to go where sustaining a rigorous call for human rights is concerned. I love that we treasure our stability and sense of general security, oftentimes at the expense of developing a deeper cohesion amongst ourselves borne out of debate, struggle and communal accountability and respect for one another's beliefs.

But that makes me love being Singaporean because I can appreciate how young we are as a nation and how we are growing with all our awkward anxieties and paranoia, afraid to lose that new found stability that is the foundation of our exponential growth.

The Necessary Stage has grown from a society in 1987 to one of Singapore’s most prominent and respected theatre companies. He is also one of the co-Artistic Directors of the annual international M1 Singapore Fringe Festival. One of the leading proponents of devising theatre in Singapore, Alvin has directed more than 60 plays which have been staged locally and at international festivals. Fundamentally Happy and Gemuk Girls, both directed by Alvin, have been awarded the Production of the Year during the Life! Theatre Awards in 2007 and 2009 respectively.

Alvin has been awarded a Fulbright Scholarship and the National Arts Council’s Young Artist Award. He has also represented Singapore in numerous international conferences and workshops, and serves as a member of the curatorial panel for TransLab, an initiative created by the Australian Council for the Arts to promote intercultural theatre and performance. In 2010, Alvin was conferred the Chevalier des Arts et des Lettres by the French Min-

"

istry of Culture, in recognition of his significant contribution to the arts.

Q2.

I wish for Singaporeans to be more passionate, spontaneous and visionary

"

What do you love most about being Singaporean?

What would you like to see improved or changed in Singapore?

I wish for Singaporeans to be more passionate, spontaneous and visionary. To be more playful and adventurous, and less averse to taking risks. To be more forgiving of failures and to value them as part and parcel of the success process. To be more imaginative in whatever they do. I wish that Singaporeans can work more collectively to bridge the gaps of difference so that we deepen our respect for one another and be open to one another as we work more meaningfully across our differences. We are a multicultural society. Can we work more interculturally (or intra-culturally) so that we create

environments conducive to spawn and nurture more cross-cultural experiments, which very few Asian countries are inclined to embark on.

Q3.

Do you still see yourself in Singapore in 10 years’ time, and why?

Yes, most definitely. My works require me to stay put in Singapore.

It is my home.

Q4.

How has your perspective on life changed since you were 18?

When I was 18, I was more idealistic than today. I'm more practical and pragmatic today. But I have still managed to preserve my idealism. But I've become more strategic and patient with outcomes. I've learned to hope for the best and expect the worst so I do not get disillusioned till I'm paralysed. I've learned to accept that I shall contribute to change but not have to reap the fruits of my labour within my lifetime. I am learning to trust my intuition and not just be reliant on what my mind tells me. At 47, I have learned that I'm a sentimentalist as I hoard physical, mental and emotional materials. I am learning to come to terms with the concept of letting go and know that I have to act on it soon.

DEMAND A BROADER PERSPECTIVE

41

PLEDGE EXAMINATION National Identity

Conversations:

Chia Yuan Jun Yvonne

Age 20, Member of the Young People's Action Party

The thing I like most about being a Singaporean is that the country constantly offers an array of opportunities, and as long as we make the effort to explore and discover these new paths, we will be able to fulfill our goals in life. From volunteering in community and grassroots activities to eventually joining the PAP as a youth member, the country has made these options available to me and to any other Singaporean. Singapore has in place a very fair, transparent and uncorrupt system and I was never hindered from fulfilling my dreams because of family or education background, age, race or gender differences. At times when I failed to fulfill my goals, it was certainly not because my country failed to cater to my needs, rather, I have yet to explore the many alternatives and options that will lead me to the successes that I want to achieve.

Q2.

What would you like to see improved or changed in Singapore?

I feel that Singaporeans should adopt a voice and become more opinionated. As long as our opinions are real, well evidenced, relevant to the society and we speak with responsibility, there is nothing to restrain us from adopting a voice of our own.

Singaporeans often use “political correctness” as a way to get away from offering personal opinions.

I feel that this will not only result in a very stagnated atmosphere with minimal exchange of views between the government and its people, it will also hinder the government from improving continuously.

BROADER PERSPECTIVES the singapore issue

Q3.

Do you still see yourself in Singapore in 10 years’ time, and why?

Definitely. Singapore has provided me with everything I need to thrive, from a clean and safe environment to a place with countless opportunities and challenges waiting for me to seize and overcome.

Personally, I do not deny that there are several practical reasons behind why I would want to stay here, but within me, this strong and powerful emotional attachment far outweighs those practical reasons. For all that Singapore has provided, I want to pay it forward and contribute to the country.

Q4.

Yvonne is an undergraduate reading Political Science and Public Administration at Peking University.

Helping out at weekly Meet the People Sessions and being part of Young PAP

How has your perspective on life changed since you were 18?

as well as the PAP Policy Forum Execu-

Before 18, my goals were to pass my examinations with flying colours and win fencing competitions.

people around her. She is indeed proud to

tive Committee have helped her realise how meaningful and beautiful life can be through caring, loving and reaching out to be a Singaporean and she wants to do all that she can to contribute to the commu-

"

Q1.

Indeed, a major component of the “Singapore Spirit” should be the enthusiasm of Singaporeans to share our views openly and responsibly, for honest opinions are crucial for the development of Singapore.

What do you love most about being a Singaporean?

At the age of 18, I began volunteering at Meet the People Sessions and I truly saw great meaning in interacting with people from different walks of life, understanding their concerns and helping them out in ways I was capable of. The smiles they had at the end were emotionally rewarding. Overnight, I saw my goals in life widen in scope and I was motivated to make an even bigger difference to the lives of those around me. My perspective and definition of a meaningful life has since transformed from one in which I was solely concerned about satisfying personal goals to one in which I am fulfilling not just my dreams in life but also helping others fulfill theirs. Life becomes much more beautiful because I have learned to give.

nity and to her country.

For all that Singapore has provided, I want to pay it forward and contribute to the country.

"

PLEDGE EXAMINATION National Identity

Conversations:

Bernard Chen Jiaxi

Age 22, Member of Young Workers' Party

What do you love most about being Singaporean?

I am a Singaporean and I am glad to have been born in an island nation-state that is peaceful, stable and prosperous in a world of angry strife. I feel that in Singapore, politics is a calling, not a need. In a country of peace, political stability and economic prosperity, there is no need to serve. But I choose to be of service to my people. I serve to bring about fairness and social justice in this country because I love Singapore. The fact that I am given this privilege to contribute to the political development of my country and be a part of the nation-building process is what I love most about being a Singaporean.

Q2.

Q3.

Q4.

Bernard is currently an undergraduate at the National University of Singapore (NUS), majoring in History. He is also involved in civil society and was one of the main organisers behind the student campaign championing for fairer transport concession fares for tertiary stu-

What would you like to see improved or changed in Singapore?

dents from late November 2008 – March

I would like to see the legal voting age in Singapore reduced from the current age of 21 to 18. That's an issue I am most passionate about. At the end of the day, I hope to achieve a just, compassionate, righteous, fair Singapore society via responsible, rational and committed politics. My guiding mission in life is to put power, wealth and opportunity in the hands of many, rather than a few. At the end of the day, I am serving the common good, and hope to leave this nation better than the one that I inherited from my parents. A diverse, plural political system that accommodates the varied views of different interest groups would be a good starting point.

June 2006, and is currently the Secretary of

Do you still see yourself in Singapore in 10 years’ time, and why?

Yes. I would still see myself in Singapore in 10 years' time. This is my home, where else can I go! At times when I am overseas, there is always this tug in my heart whenever I reach the doorstep of this island nation. Singapore is where my family is, where my friends are and where my memories were made. I strongly believe that if I am serious about doing my part for Singapore, I need to be right here in Singapore, to touch base with the issues that concern ordinary Singaporeans and be able to look them in the eyes and say to them, "I understand your anxieties and fears, let me try my best to help you."

How has your perspective on life changed since you were 18?

Having taken the polytechnic route to a local university after having flunked my 'A' levels in 2003, I was able to see that in life, it is really not about yourself and the amount of material benefits you can amass. There is simply no end to it while leaving yourself unfulfilled. Having experienced a Polytechnic education, I can say that I have achieved more than a Diploma with Merit; I have built my character, enhanced my physical grooming, and acquired integral lifelong skills that I can apply across different disciplines and vocations. A Learning Journey Par Excellence. We often think that by being of service to others, it will take away our time and limit our potential to excel. I beg to differ. I would like to think that by being of service to others, by putting the interests of others before our own self-interests, we can achieve what we want to achieve and outdo our own potential in aspects of our lives that matter.

2009. Bernard joined the Workers' Party in the Workers' Party Youth Wing (WPYW).

In May 2010, he was appointed as the Legislative Assistant to Mr. Low Thia Khiang, Member of Parliament for Hougang.

"

Q1.

A diverse, plural political system that accommodates the varied views of different interest groups would be a good starting point.

"

DEMAND A BROADER PERSPECTIVE

43

Conversations:

Ng Ying Yuan

Age 34, Head, Human Resources Division, EDB

Q1.

Ng Ying Yuan is the Head of Human Resources at the Economic Development Board. Prior to her current position, she was Head, Biomedical Sciences, EDB where she spent a good 8

"

years spearheading and developing the Pharmaceuticals and Biotechnology industries in Singapore.

I see a role for myself in being part of that tremendous energy to create a much more brilliant Singapore for our future generations.

"

BROADER PERSPECTIVES the singapore issue

What do you love most about being Singaporean?

I will answer this question in a different way since the context matters. You don’t choose your parents, you don’t choose your children. But with the right values imbued, you learn to love your parents regardless of who they are, you learn to love your children regardless of how they turn out. Specifically for this question, I was born in Singapore, I was brought up in Singapore, I became, together with many other young adults, an unofficial Singapore ambassador during my university life abroad. My value system has taught me to love my country for what it has provided my family and myself. And fortunately for me, love for my country comes a lot easier because we have capable forefathers who had worked extremely hard to make Singapore a high-achieving country very much worthy of respect today. For these reasons, I am proud to be a Singaporean.

What would you like to see

Q2. improved or changed in Singapore?

On the economic development front, I would love to see Singapore as a thought leader on the world stage, where we have a point of view that is relevant and respected, where we are well-known not just for our horizon-scanning ability but also our ideas and solutions.

This is precisely what the EDB is currently working to bring Singapore towards, and I am confident that we will get there.

Q3.

Do you still see yourself in Singapore in 10 years’ time, and why?

Definitely. I see the growth path that Singapore is on and am confident of the wealth of opportunities that would be available for my family and friends in the long term future. More importantly, through my work at EDB, I see a role for myself in being part of that tremendous energy to create a much more brilliant Singapore for our future generations.

Q4.

How has your perspective on life changed since you were 18?

This is a complex question to answer, and my answer would depend on how you define it. On a more personal front, I have grown to be more reflective and introspective and less external outcomesoriented. I have also learnt to recognise that one’s perspective on life is always different from life in objectivity. Being able to balance between subjective and objective views has helped me take stock on what truly matters and what is not worth sweating over.

Conversations:

Dr Goh Wei-Leong Age 50, General Practitioner

Q1.

What do you love most about being Singaporean?

I love being Singaporean because I am part of a global and diverse community in a compact island. I am proud of many of the values that Singaporeans espouse i.e.

Swiss efficiency and German precision, infused with warm Asian values, colour and vibrancy.

I am proud of our Government, with its high level of integrity and stability, who looks after all aspects of my life and frees me to be a global citizen.

Q2. What would you like to see improved or changed in Singapore?

I was recently invited to an F1 party overlooking the F1 track with a dazzling showcase and night-time view of the changing Singapore skyline, complete with the din from the world’s fastest cars zooming the turns.

Dr Goh Wei-Leong, a general practitioner, helped found and currently chairs a not-for-profit company HealthServe Ltd that reaches out to fringe communities of the poor, foreign workers and commercial sex workers. HealthServe’s programs include a volunteer-run community clinic, a counselling service and a pro-bono legal clinic in Geylang.

The view was so good, that I immediately felt proud to be Singaporean.

The other friend, Ms Bridgette Tan, set up a shelter for abused foreign maids and is an active advocate for them. She courageously ditched the Singapore “Shopping Centre syndrome” which is all about individual wants, desires and self-indulgence to lifting up the last, least and lost in society.

So my dream is to see a changing of hearts and minds expressed through action.

Q3. Do you still see yourself in Singapore in 10 years’ time, and why?

Yes. Most of us are like turtles by nature. It is most natural for us to go back to the place we were born and grew up in. Singapore is where family and community is. It is about relationship, relationship, relationship. As Singapore becomes more cosmopolitan, with more elaborate “make-up” and “costumes”, more sleek and orchestrated “shows”, and perhaps losing some of her deeper Asian values, it will be the non-tangibles and deep relationships that will keep me here.

Q4. How has your perspective on life changed since you were 18?

I belong to the tail-end of the baby boomer generation. Striving for excellence, a good career and the 5Cs were the social norms. Over the years, my perspective on life has shifted from being more material to more human (I think!). In my 20s and 30s, it was about achieving my goals but now I am beginning to enjoy and celebrate the intangibles like community, friends and family. And this has become an adventure, albeit with more mess than order, more surprises than predictability, more community-focus than I-focus. And it has been very liberating! I would never have imagined myself engaging the world in the heart of the red-light district of Geylang through the work of HealthServe serving Chinese and Indian migrants, commercial sex workers, the poor, and ex-offenders, with a motley crew of professionals, students and housewives. Life has taken a simpler and deeper route, away from the more spectacular and powerful.

"

But the roar, fairytale lights and glitz went off soon after. What about the change?

In a recent Life! Section article, two of my friends and heros were featured. One of whom was Dr Wee Teck Young who started “Journey to Smile” in Afghanistan to help youths and promote love as the non-violent route to peace. He has moved away from the 5Cs to help victims of war.

So my dream is to see a changing of hearts and minds expressed through action.

"

DEMAND A BROADER PERSPECTIVE

45

PLEDGE EXAMINATION National Identity

Conversations:

Nikki Draper

Age 47, Independent Film Maker & Lecturer at NTU

Q1.

I’m not Singaporean. I’ve retained my U.S. citizenship. But there are still things that I love about Singapore. Probably there are two things I enjoy the most about Singapore: one is the connection I have to the students at the university where I teach. I feel like I learn something new every semester about Singapore and life in Singapore from my encounters with the students at the school. The second thing that I like about being in Singapore is how living outside of my home country really broadens my world view. I like that my time overseas has given me a more complex view of the world. On a more superficial but also important level ― I also love the food and access to incredible food from all over the world. And I love how easy it is to travel to a lot of interesting places from here.

Nikki Draper is an independent filmmaker and a lecturer in the Broadcast and Cinema Studies division in the Wee Kim Wee School of Communication and Information, Nanyang Technological University (NTU). She moved to Singapore in 1998 from the United States.

"

probably the thing I’d like to see the most is more openness in allowing a variety of content and access to content.

What would you like to see

Q2. improved or changed in Sin-

"

BROADER PERSPECTIVES the singapore issue

What do you love most about being a Singaporean?

gapore?

As a filmmaker and media person, probably the thing I’d like to see the most is more openness in allowing a variety of content and access to content. For example, I can understand the desire to have a ratings system for films, but I would prefer a system similar to other countries where lack of rating does not mean you cannot screen at all, but rather that the audience you screen to is more limited.

Q3.

Do you still see yourself in Singapore in 10 years’ time, and why?

It’s a busy time for me right now, so it’s hard to think that far ahead.

But I suppose we could be here in 10 years' time. We love the international school our children attend (UWCSEA) and I’d be interested in them completing their education there.

Q4.

How has your perspective on life changed since you were 18?

ZOMG, yes! I think I’m still essentially the same person in terms of the kinds of basic values that are important to me. But what would that say about a person if she didn’t change and evolve based on experiences and knowledge? I think I definitely matured as I aged and, I would hope, have a more nuanced and rich perspective on people and life. I wish I could say 18 wasn’t that long ago. But unfortunately, I can’t! However, I remember being 18 and I remember how much it felt like being an adult. And in many important ways it was. But there are still so many more adult experiences ahead of you ― good and tough ones – that 18 is just the tip of the adult iceberg.

DEMAND A BROADER PERSPECTIVE

47

BEGINNING OF PULL-OUT COMPREHENSION SECTION

UNIVERSAL RESPONSIBILITY CONTENT

50

15

35

LANGUAGE

QUESTIONS ATTACHED. COMPREHENSION ANSWERS CAN BE RETRIEVED FROM: www.twitter.com/ThinkTankMags

BROADER PERSPECTIVES the singapore issue

TOTAL

Universal Responsibility 1

In this new millennium, we find that the world has grown smaller and the world's people have become 1 almost one community. Political and military alliances have created large multinational groups, industry and international trade have produced a global economy, and worldwide-communications are eliminating ancient barriers of language and race. We are also being drawn together by the grave problems we face: overpopulation, dwindling natural resources, and an environmental crisis that threatens our air, 5 water, and trees, along with the vast number of beautiful life forms that are the very foundation of existence on this small planet we share. To meet these challenges of our times, human beings will have to develop a greater sense of universal responsibility.

2

Universal responsibility is the real key to human survival. It is the best foundation for world peace, equitable use of natural resources, concern for future generations, and proper care of the environment. 10 Each of us must learn to work not just for his or her own self, family or nation, but for the benefit of all mankind. For whether we like it or not, we have all been born on this earth as part of one great human family. Rich or poor, educated or uneducated, belonging to one nation or another, to one religion or another, adhering to this ideology or that, ultimately each of us is just a human being like everyone else: we all desire happiness and do not want suffering. Furthermore, each of us has an equal right to pursue 15 these goals.

3

Today's world requires that we accept the oneness of humanity. In the past, isolated communities could afford to think of one another as fundamentally separate and even existed in total isolation. Nowadays, however, events in one part of the world eventually affect the entire planet. Therefore we have to treat each major local problem as a global concern from the moment it begins. We can no longer invoke the 20 national, racial or ideological barriers that separate us without destructive repercussions. In the context of our new interdependence, considering the interests of others is clearly the best form of self-interest.

This, in fact, is a source of hope. The necessity for cooperation can only strengthen mankind, because it helps us recognize that the most secure foundation for the new world order is not simply broader political and economic alliances, but rather each individual's genuine practice of love and compassion. 25 For a better, happier, more stable and civilized future, each of us must develop a sincere, warm-hearted feeling of brother-and-sisterhood.

4

However, this is not to suggest that each individual has a direct responsibility for the existence of, for example, wars and famines in different parts of the world. Clearly certain things, such as the poverty of a single village 10,000 miles away, are completely beyond the scope of the individual. What is entailed, however, is 30 not an admission of guilt, but, again, a reorientation of our heart and mind away from self and toward others.

To develop a sense of universal responsibility, the universal dimension of our every act and of the equal right of all others to happiness and not to suffer, is to develop an attitude of mind whereby, when we see an opportunity to benefit others, we will take it in preference to merely looking after our own narrow interests.

5

Hence, I do not believe in creating movements or espousing ideologies. Nor do I like the practice of 35 establishing an organization to promote a particular idea, which implies that one group of people alone is responsible for the attainment of that goal, while everybody else is exempt. In our present circumstances, none of us can afford to assume that somebody else will solve our problems; each of us must take his or her own share of universal responsibility. In this way, as the number of concerned, responsible individuals grows, tens, hundreds, thousands or even hundreds of thousands of such people will 40 greatly improve the general atmosphere.

6

But how should we go about developing the responsibility needed to tackle the challenges of this world?

Adopting an attitude of universal responsibility is essentially a personal matter. The real test of compas-

DEMAND A BROADER PERSPECTIVE

49

sion is not what we say in abstract discussions but how we conduct ourselves in daily life. Still, certain fundamental views are basic to the practice of altruism. Though no system of government is perfect, 45 democracy is that which is closest to humanity's essential nature. Hence those of us who enjoy it must continue to fight for all people's right to do so. Furthermore, democracy is the only stable foundation upon which a global political structure can be built. To work as one, we must respect the right of all peoples and nations to maintain their own distinctive character and values.

7 In particular, a tremendous effort will be required to bring compassion into the realm of international 50 business. Economic inequality, especially that between developed and developing nations, remains the greatest source of suffering on this planet. Even though they will lose money in the short term, large multi-national corporations must curtail their exploitation of poor nations. Tapping the few precious resources such countries possess simply to fuel consumerism in the developed world is disastrous; if it continues unchecked, eventually we shall all suffer. Strengthening weak, undiversified economies is a 55 far wiser policy for promoting both political and economic stability. As idealistic as it may sound, altruism, not just competition and a desire for wealth, should be the driving force in business.

8 We also need to renew our commitment to human values in the field of modern science. Though the main purpose of science is to learn more about reality, another of its goals is to improve the quality of life. Without altruistic motivation, scientists cannot distinguish between beneficial technologies and 60 the merely expedient. The environmental damage surrounding us is the most obvious example of the result of this confusion, but proper motivation may be even more relevant in governing how we handle the extraordinary new array of biological techniques with which we can now manipulate the subtle structures of life itself. If we do not base our every action on an ethical foundation, we run the risk of inflicting terrible harm on the delicate matrix of life.

65 9 Nor are the religions of the world exempt from this responsibility. The purpose of religion is not to build beautiful churches or temples, but to cultivate positive human qualities such as tolerance, generosity and love. Every world religion, no matter what its philosophical view, is founded first and foremost on the precept that we must reduce our selfishness and serve others. Unfortunately, sometimes religion itself causes more quarrels than it solves. Practitioners of different faiths should realize that each reli- 70 gious tradition has immense intrinsic value and the means for providing mental and spiritual health. One religion, like a single type of food, cannot satisfy everybody. According to their varying mental dispositions, some people benefit from one kind of teaching, others from another. Each faith has the ability to produce fine, warmhearted people and despite their espousal of contradictory philosophies, all religions have succeeded in doing so. Thus there is no reason to engage in divisive religious bigotry and intoler- 75 ance and every reason to cherish and respect all forms of spiritual practice.

10 All this talk of universal responsibility may sound hopelessly idealistic. But the events of the twentieth century have engendered a worldwide increase in environmental awareness, and a growing recognition that neither individuals nor even whole nations can solve all their problems by themselves, that we need one another. There is at least clearer acknowledgment of the need to seek non-violent resolutions 80 of conflict in a spirit of reconciliation. There is also growing acceptance of the universality of human rights and the need to accept diversity in areas of common importance, such as, for example, in religious affairs. This, I believe, reflects a recognition of the need for a wider perspective in response to the diversity of the human family itself. As a result, despite the suffering that continues to be inflicted on individuals and peoples in the name of ideology, religion, or progress, or economics, a new sense of hope 85 is emerging for the downtrodden. Although it will undoubtedly be difficult to bring about genuine peace and harmony, clearly it can be done. The potential is there. Its foundation is a sense of responsibility on the part of each of us as individuals toward all others.

Adapted from ‘Learning Universal Responsibility’ & ‘Universal Responsibility’, speeches and writings by His Holiness, the 14th Dalai Lama

BROADER PERSPECTIVES the singapore issue

Comprehension Questions 1

In what ways have the world’s people ‘become almost one community’? (lines 1-2) Use your own words as far as possible. (4)

2

‘Universal responsibility is the real key to human survival’ (line 9). What does the use of the word ‘real’ suggest? (1)

3

Why should we ‘develop a sincere, warm-hearted feeling of brother-and-sisterhood’? (line 26-27) Use your own words as far as possible. (2)

4

Using material from paragraphs 2―5, summarise what the author has to say about the importance of universal responsibility, its cultivation, and the way it will meet the challenges of our times. (8) Universal responsibility is important because ……

5

(i) Using your own words, what would be a ‘real test of compassion’ (line 43-44)? (2)

(ii) What does the word ‘Still’ (line 44) suggest about the author’s argument? (1)

6

Give the meaning of the following words as they are used in the passage. Write your answers in one word or a short phrase. (5) meet merely essential expedient engendered

(line 7) (line 34) (line 46) (line 61) (line 78)

Comprehension Answers are available at www.twitter.com/ThinkTankMags DEMAND A BROADER PERSPECTIVE

51

Comprehension Questions 7

‘As idealistic as it may sound, altruism, not just competition and a desire for wealth, should be the driving force for business’ (lines 56-57).

Explain what the author means by bringing out the meaning of the italicised words. (3)

8

Explain why the author uses the word ‘obvious’ (line 61). (1)

9

‘Every world religion…is founded first and foremost…...’ (line 68).

How does the phrase ‘first and foremost’ affect the author’s claim here? (1)

10 How far do you agree with the author’s views on universal responsibility? Illustrate your view by referring to the ways in which you and your society view responsibility. (8)

Comprehension Answers are available at www.twitter.com/ThinkTankMags BROADER PERSPECTIVES the singapore issue

≼ SCHOOLS FOR SCHOOLS: PROVIDING CLEAN WATER TO 50 SCHOOLS IN RUHAAMA, UGANDA

BASIC PROBLEMS.

SIMPLE SOLUTIONS.

LACK OF TIME:

WATER SECURITY:

CHRONIC DISEASE:

HYGIENE EDUCATION:

many children spend all day helping their parents fetch water instead of going to school.

dirty water causes debilitating and life-threatening diseases like cholera, typhoid, and dysentery.

Your donation funds safe water for a child and her entire family... right on the school grounds.

We teach good hygiene. Clean water combined with handwashing can eliminate 70% of disease.

THE DREAM FOR EDUCATION. HELP IT COME TRUE IN UGANDA. www.water.cc

DEMAND A BROADER PERSPECTIVE

53

When you fill their cup, you don’t just fill their belly You fill their mind and feed their future

Fighting Hunger Worldwide century gothic font

life demands a broader perspective BROADER PERSPECTIVES the singapore issue

We began School of Thought because we were troubled by the indifference many young people showed towards the world and life in general. Since 2002, we have been constantly refining our core ‘A’ level and ‘O’ level tuition programmes to help students think more critically and broadly about both national and global affairs - without sacrificing good grades in the examinations. Part of our profits go into supporting an in-house Financial Aid Scheme that students may apply for if their families are experiencing severe financial difficulties and cannot afford classes. Join our movement to change the world - one mind, one heart, one step at a time. Drop by for a visit at 112 Middle Road, Midland House, #08-01, Singapore 188970, or call 6334 8773. www.schoolofthought.com.sg