Remaking Singapore
Still far to go
Strictly assessed, only education has been totally restructured, not much else. By Seah Chiang Nee.
Nov 21, 2005

THREE years ago, there was hardly a newspaper in Singapore without the word "restructure" in the headlines.

The press was taking the cue from the government's launch of a two-year exercise to thrash out, with views from a cross-section of citizens, a plan to remake the country - and the economy - to face the 21st century.

Of their 74 proposals, 60 were accepted last year. So how much of Singapore has been restructured?

On hindsight, some commentators now believe that the word "restructure" was an over-statement and this had resulted in public over-expectation.

It is a matter of perception. During the overzealous reporting, Singaporeans had taken it to mean a dramatic transformation of society - or the economy - and are somewhat disappointed with what has emerged.

"No cows are too sacred to be slaughtered" was the pledge. People had come to expect a brand new Singapore.

So far, few - if any - of the sacred cows - outside education - have been killed.

The changes are, they say, merely cosmetic, a tinkling with the system rather than restructuring.

But realists who had believed that the People's Action Party would never tear down what it had built for a completely new one (especially when Lee Kuan Yew is around), thought the changes were significant.

At any rate, it is a worthwhile operation because the public had participated in mapping the state's future. Singapore today is better and more relaxed for it.

Impact there has been, including the following:

Education: Impressive. The biggest restructuring lies in this area. The Ministry of Education has worked feverishly to move away from an exam-oriented, rote-learning system to one that produces thinking students with diverse skills.

Many schools have changed beyond recognition. Whether Singapore can evolve into a creative, high-skill services economy will depend on the exercise succeeding.

Economy: The exercise produced new ideas but with mixed outcome so far.

There was strong progress in developing a higher-skilled economy like hub activities in education, healthcare and business headquarters, especially in attracting biotech firms. Big plans for a tourism leap in coming years, including two casino resorts.

Poor: One centrepiece, getting Singaporeans to become entrepreneurs (less than 5%) has failed.

Stifling government hold on business in Singapore remains, despite an announced intention to reduce domestic to concentrate on foreign investment. In a few places, it had even increased.

Social life: Fair progress, nothing very dramatic. Life is a little less boring.

New measures to free up the lives of its citizens. Homosexuals are now welcome in the public service; busking is encouraged and bar patrons can dance on table tops; some nightclubs can open 24 hours and censorship relaxed for the performing arts and movies. There's less crackdown on brothels, especially in Geylang.

Politics: Virtually unchanged. It has not led to a freer political environment involving elections, or a freer press or permitted political gatherings that liberals are demanding.

The government rejected a suggestion to define the so-called "out of bounds markers" in politics that inhibit public discussion of "sensitive subjects", saying they can shift with circumstances.

Changing mindsets

Is it enough to free the Singaporean mind for the 21st century? After 40 years of top-down rule, Singaporeans have remained a hardworking, disciplined lot - but this is insufficient for the New World.

"The problem is: we've been for too long stuck in a box. For too long we've not been able to develop a degree of mental exploration," said Dr Tan Chi Chiu, who runs the official Singapore International Foundation.

"We've been very formulaic in our approach to success, both as individuals and as a nation; and I think we've got to break out of all this, and think wildly ..."

American media personality Christopher Lydon describes "Remaking Singapore" as "a very strange and marvellous preoccupation".

He says: "It struck me as brave, intelligent, obsessive, inspiring, perhaps neurotic."

For it to work, this little city-state must leap free from robotic efficiency to defiant outside-the-box creativity, requiring a full new rulebook for the information age.

But that dream of self-liberation never gets clear of Singaporeans' dependence on their micro-managing state.

It could have been better. "Remaking Singapore is a project dominated not by civil society or a free press but by the government, as if an entrenched power network could free itself from itself," Lydon adds.

The chief executive of the Banyan Tree hotel chain Ho Kwon Ping, said: "We have to totally rethink the strategy to take vis-à-vis China and our opportunities in the world."

For 20 years, he said, the economic strategy of Singapore and South-East Asia was to strive to be a competitive production platform for multinationals around the world.

"China now has devastated that model, because China is going to be the lowest-cost highest-efficiency producer not only of low-technology products but even middle to high-technology products," Ho said.

"Formerly the factors of production are land, labour and capital. But this time we have got knowledge as one of the factors of production. And this is where the Remaking of Singapore comes in," said Chiam See Tong, opposition Member of Parliament.

Setting a new direction is easier than producing a creative, thinking Singaporean or a domestic entrepreneur under existing circumstances.

"Where do you produce your entrepreneurs from?" asks Mentor Minister Lee Kuan Yew.

"Out of a top hat? The root problem is 'an East Asian reverence for scholarship'."

The battle is far from over. It may well take another 40 years.

(This was published in The Sunday Star on Nov 20, 2005)