Kenneth
Jeyaratnam
The crisis - and reforms
In the wake of government's record in past few years, it
will be hard for it to claim it alone can solve Singapore's
economic problems, says the new Reform Party leader.
July 7, 2009
The
following is a speech by Kenneth Jeyaretnam, Reform Party
leader, at the Foreign Correspondents Association Lunch
on July 2, 2009.
Good
afternoon ladies and gentlemen. Thank you for inviting me
to this luncheon today. The Foreign Correspondents Association
has been here in Singapore even longer than I have and like
my father has played a significant and historic role in
the story of our region’s history.
It is
surely no less an historic moment for Singapore’s
newest political party, The Reform Party to be given this
exciting platform.
I am
very proud to join the ranks of such prominent figures as
our Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong and his father Minister
Mentor Lee Kuan Yew and from the opposition Jaswant Singh
of India, Malaysia’s Anwar Ibrahim and so many other
statesman, politicians and even Nobel Prize winners.
Not least of these is my dear late father JBJ. I really
do feel unworthy but then again, maybe July is a quiet month
for the press.
You
have asked me to discuss my hopes and visions for The Reform
Party and how I see the current political situation in Singapore.
However as an economist I shall insist on boring you with
my views on the current economic situation and the economic
future for Singapore.
I hope
you won’t mind if I start by adding a bit of background
to my emergence on the political scene. It seems to me that
the ladies and gentleman of the press are in dire need of
a bit more information about me.
I say
this because despite being Singaporean, I am always referred
to in the press as ‘British-trained economist’,
Kenneth Jeyaretnam.
Hmm..I wonder why I have never read in the Singapore press,
British-trained mathematician prime minister Lee Hsien Loong
or British trained-lawyer, Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew.
Naturally
I suspect that the mainstream media want to light up a subliminal
marker in the people’s minds that a)I’m a foreigner
and b) that my economics is suspiciously left-wing because
it’s from a country associated with economic failure
and the welfare state.
In actual
fact I’m much less British than, my father, who spent
many more years than I as a British subject. So I went to
University in England but I was born here, I went to school
here, excepting two years, and I completed National Service.
And I always say that if I’m fit to die for my country
then I’m fit to stand for it.
I’m
not ashamed of being a patriot. On the second point I have
always believed by and large in free markets, though governments
may need to intervene to prevent undesirable or suboptimal
outcomes.
Indeed at Cambridge, I often used to have economics discussions
with our current Finance Minister, Mr Tharman, who was there
doing a masters, and at that time he was far, far to the
left of me on most economic policy issues.
In addition
to British-trained the other appendage to my name is usually
“Son Of.”.. JBJ. That one is of course entirely
true. I’m just grateful my father’s name wasn’t
Sam!
There’s
no arguing that the Reform Party and indeed the very notion
of an active opposition, was my father’s legacy to
Singapore.
He always
strove, at great personal cost, to get the people to realise
they had the power to change things just by exercising their
democratic rights - Hence his call at the inauguration dinner
to the people to arise from their slumber.
Unfortunately many here wear ear plugs when they slumber
but luckily for me there’s nothing like a recession
for waking people up.
My father
named his new party The Reform Party for a reason. He believed
that the way forward, for freeing the people of Singapore
was through political Reform.
It’s
a legacy which I’m proud to continue but also to extend
and adapt to the current needs of Singapore.
We have always been told that the current authoritarian
framework has benefited us economically - I feel we’re
victims of the approved version of history.
In fact Singapore’s growth record is good but not
spectacular.
It hardly
compares with nations such as Taiwan and South Korea - Nations
that started considerably poorer and are now at comparable
levels of per-capita real incomes. Nations which moved away
from authoritarianism and are now much freer than Singapore-so
that authoritarian framework is clearly no longer beneficial.
The
task I have set myself for the Reform Party is to get across
the message that the Faustian bargain the electorate thought
they had struck in surrendering liberty for economic prosperity
didn’t have to be so.
In some
of my economic articles for the Party I have talked about
an outmoded economic model which doesn’t really improve
the welfare of the bulk of Singaporeans.
While
the GDP growth rate over the last few years looked impressive,
fuelled globally by an unsustainable growth in US imports,
the productivity of the workforce first stagnated and then
fell sharply.
Growth
was built upon the addition of seemingly inexhaustible inputs
of cheap labour from abroad with concomitant dire consequences
for the real wages of those at the median and below.
Domestic
consumption has been driven down to a level that is on a
par with China and countries at a much earlier stage of
development.
The savings rate rose to 47% in 2008 which given what little
we hear about the decline in value of our external investments
is manifestly excessive.
Yet
all we hear from the government is that we need to have
more of the same policies of cutting business costs and
just wait for the inevitable return of the US consumption
binge.
So whilst
the need for Reform in the field of democracy and civil
rights is an integral part of the Party’s platform
I believe that there are equally fundamental reforms that
need to be made in the economic sphere.
In essence
The Reform Party has become the double Reform Party.
These
are indeed exciting times for Democracy and the Opposition
in Singapore. Given its record over the last few years it
will be difficult for the government to continue its claim
that it alone has a monopoly on good economic management.
Or at least we hope to make it difficult for the government
to go on claiming that monopoly.
Unfortunately
it is also a very challenging time for the Opposition. After
many years of conditioning, Singaporeans think very differently
to those who have been brought up in a liberal western democracy.
There’s
little point, I’ve found, in talking about the European
Convention on Human Rights to people who think that expressing
an opinion will lead to mob rule and rioting.
Or, as we were told often in the past, that foreign investment
and MNCs would flee Singapore if there were significant
numbers of Opposition MPs in Parliament.
The
latest parliamentary changes proposed by the government
don’t help promote democracy - amounting to no more
than smoke and mirrors.
It’s a cheap parlour trick that will have no impact
at all on The Reform Party’s strategy - but clearly
gives the government a legitimate excuse for changing constituency
boundaries yet again.
The
silent and peaceful protesters in Iran summed up our feelings
best when they held up notices saying simply, “election
not selection”
Throughout
all, I maintain my belief in the people of Singapore. We
are its greatest resource. We are a uniquely talented and
situated nation and we deserve prosperity and emancipation.
In time
we will come to the realisation that these are not mutually
exclusive but actually are dependent one upon the other.
I believe that The Reform Party is the party to bring that
to the people of Singapore and my modest hope is that this
will be achieved if not in the next five years than in my
lifetime.
http://www.thereformparty.net/?p=267