Have you been reading this, Minister Tan?
The minister keeping up-to-date with voiddecker.com
The Singapore government has long taken pride in being firm to stick to what it thinks is right, rather than what’s in favour. Having to admit openly to heeding public opinion makers and the general populace is a hard pill to swallow, especially when the stance it once championed is proven wrong.
So when there are calls for policy changes, be it from experts, think tanks, opposition parties or ordinary Singaporeans, the government’s instinctive reaction is to dismiss the calls. Ministers and PAP MPs will caution us with doomsday scenarios. Right on cue, the local press will publish reports quoting other stakeholders and experts on why the proposed changes are a bad idea. Expectations are managed and the government maintains its wise and resolute image.
But if the calls get persistent and louder, it becomes increasingly difficult for the government to turn a deaf ear. Sometimes it becomes obvious that the government is wrong. Consequently, it faces a Catch-22: heed the calls and lose face/appear populist, or stand accused of being obstinate and disconnected with the ground.
The modus operandi of the government then is to take in the suggestions without admitting as much. Policy changes will be effected incrementally. Then it announces: We have long been monitoring the situation and assessing the need for changes, not because so-and-so called for it. It is not a U-turn but because the situation calls for it now. A case in point is Prof Lim Chong Yah’s wage shock therapy proposal, which I will touch on in a further post.
Regardless of how the government wants to put it, though, we must give credit when it’s due. So kudos to Acting Minister for Manpower Tan Chuan-Jin for announcing this week that there will be further tightening on foreign labour input. This appears contrary to, and came just shortly after, DPM Teo Chee Hean’s repeated defence for the longstanding lax policy.
The message seems to have finally gotten through, after calls from economists, think tanks such as the Institute of Policy Studies, netizens and bloggers, and the general public, that we can no longer rely on low-cost labour because of its detrimental effects on productivity.
We must be pro-business, yes, but not to the extent of jeopardising our efforts to address social issues. A balance has to be struck, and right now it is still heavily tilted on one side. On the economic front, addressing productivity levels has to be the government’s No 1 priority task now to alleviate depressed low wage levels and the income gap. It has to reach out to these SMEs, understand the difficulties they are facing, and expand current schemes to help them to do so. I’m sounding like a broken record but the government must stop the defeatist tone of saying productivity is hard to achieve and start addressing the problem head-on.
As a sidenote, there’s a part of Mr Tan Chuan-Jin speech that rings familiar (emphasis mine):
At the heart of this is our unique position – Singapore is both a city and a country. Global cities such as London and New York City, they are both cosmopolitan cities. But they are also part of larger countries. That means that if an American no longer likes staying in the city, he can move to the suburbs. But as a Singaporean, we do not have such a luxury. So we must find a way to operate, going forward, in a way that preserves our vibrant economy, our cosmopolitan society and our Singaporean home.
In an earlier post, I wrote:
As it is now, Singapore already has the dubious honour of being the densest country in the world with a population above 1 million (selective statistics, I know). Sure, there are cities in themselves which are more packed, but therein lies the difference. Singapore is both a city and a country. In London, when it gets too crowded, people move to Surrey for cheaper housing and a breather from urban madness. The daily commute into London is often quicker than travelling within London itself. In New York City, they move to New Jersey. Here in Singapore, our city and country, it is all there is. It is all we have. Where do we go? Where can we go to escape from all this?
As quoted in the papers, he also referred to our reliance on cheap foreign labour as a “race to the bottom” — a phrase I too used in another post (though I can’t claim to be the first or only one).
Minister Tan, have you been reading this blog?
Ha, I doubt so. There are probably dozens of blogs out there voicing the same thing. But my point is that the government does hear us — sometimes — even if it’s careful not to appear as succumbing easily to public opinion.
Seriously, do you think that this government has any credibility left to address the problem it causes ? Time and time again, they break their promise giving simpleton reason when it comes to benefit the PAP in profitability. Case in point, isn’t they promise to reduce foreigner intake during election, only to actually increase it afterwards , and when been discovered, give the same old reason that “we need foreigners” with tons of excuses and nonsense ? They will always come out one nonsense after another to justify their decision no matter how lame they sound, and trying their luck. Nonsense such as foreigners help to create job, foreigners bring economy, foreigners help increase population count, foreigners help to make babies etc …
http://theonlinecitizen.com/2012/09/population-relentless-rise-in-foreigners-continues/
A government that is governed mainly by LKY, LHL, Woody goh that has zero credibility, zero moral compass, zero integrity and zero honesty , bounded by human elite greed, and you expect the government to make good their promises ? We must be Alice in Wonderland to believe that.
Hi Mandy,
I agree that they are always giving us the same excuses, which was why I griped about it previously: http://www.voiddecker.com/2012/10/dialogue-or-broken-record-session/
And as I mentioned in that post, they lack courage to do what’s need because they are always afraid the economy will collapse (maybe it helps to have young ministers who are not stuck to old views). So immigration has been tighten only bit by bit. I think they were caught out by the immigration stats. Hopefully the numbers will really come down once they tighten further.
” I think they were caught out by the immigration stats. Hopefully the numbers will really come down once they tighten further.”
May I know who in the govt is accountable to ensure that ? The answer is NONE based on past indicators. Not any minister, definitely not PM, not those expensive useless old woods. They have never been accountable to the public, and still happily keep their million dollars job regardless. Why should they be accountable to us if nothing is going to happen to them anyway ? Remember that they can still happily gerrymandering in election, with shameless smearing and lies using state media bear by taxpayer’s money, abuse of authority. They spend countless millions of taxpayer’s money to have NATCON just to understand the public’s need superficially and yet has the cheek to selectively and wayangly address trivial concerns.
What make them so different this time ? They really think Singaporeans are really daft as the old man think ?
To be blunt, are they any difference from crooks who siphon money and get caught red-handed, and then pretend nothing happen and even has the cheek to tell the victim that they will do better next time ?
I too was surprised to read TCJ’s remarks.
But haven’t we see this saga before? Whenever a NEW minister comes to town, he bristles with ideas and supposed openness. “No sacred cows !!”, “Less teaching, more learning!!”. Yes, that was KBH, VB, Tharman, many others. And notice that such pronoucements of openness always come SOLELY from the new kid, and rarely ever (in fact, never) from the Old Guards. In fact, they say the opposite. In this case, Old Guards mean LHL, and most importantly, TCH.
After a while, the new kid learns the rules. If you don’t, like David Lim, you’ll be out quickly. You learn that you only hold a particular ministerial position for a few years. Better to “not jerk it” and in the words of a brilliant ex-minister, “go with the flow”. Why jerk it when after a few short years, you’ll be posted to another ministry anyway? If you scratch the right backs, you’ll be taken care of for life — pensions, a cushy directorship position with the TLC (Lim Boon Heng is a good example). But if you “can’t fit in”, you’ll be like a David Lim, banished to oblivion.
So the new kid learns to preach the importance of the sacred cows, instead of fighthing it. Of going with the flow. And then the next election comes, and that new kid becomes a seasoned pro and another new kid becomes the latest flavor in town. And he gets the limelight, he tries to make his own stamp (“Focus on moral values, not just academic results”), he learns the rule of the game, he sits it out, he’s posted to another ministry .. life goes on.
Essentially, every minister evolves to be come an administrator, albeit a good administrator, of the status quo. Its impossible to change – not just because your peers, including the elderly Old Guards who are the inner circle decision makers, do not buy those radical ideas. Its the entire system. You parachute into a ministry, you’re a green horn. Your right hand man is the PS and there’s an array of Admin Service scholars — every single one of these are groomed from within the system. Every idea you raise, a book has been written about why there are lots of pitfalls, why its not doable. After a while, you realise that notiwithstanding you as a Minister, you’re essentially just the figurehead. The heart of the ministry is the PS & Admin Service scholars. They know more about the ins and outs than you. You basically CANNOT effect change, without their buy-in and drive to make it happen. You’re like the Emperor Pu Yi with the rest of the elderly eunuchs in your court.
Its only when you leave the system that things become clearer. Like what Ngiam How Tong and a few others who dare, have publicly opined from time to time. But what’s the use? When you’re in power to effect change, you duck it. When you’re outside, you claim to be in support of it. “Its only words and words are all I have to take your heart away …”
You’re right — it’s always the young ministers who are saying all the right things. Let’s see how long before the fire in their bellies burn out. To think that I used to quite like TCH when he first came out of the navy… now he is one of the biggest culprits of defending the status quo.
It’s interesting your take on the perm secs and admin service people. I tend to think that there are some of them, like Ngiam Tong Dow, who saw what’s wrong but hands were tied. That’s why when they leave the system they start to openly criticise the policies.
Of course their hands are tied. But that’s when they could have effected the change. If they sat on a position of influence and power and claim that their hands are tied, then this vicious cycle will continue with their successor and their successor’s successor.
If they missed their opportunity to get something done when they could, then be a man and apologise, not criticise (or offer suggestions like shock-therapies). Perhaps their successor will be more enlightened.
“yi shuo cao cao, cao cao dao” — Did you notice today’s headlines : “Tharman all for revamping PSLE”? Now, lets see, who is Tharman … oh, I almost forgot .. he’s the ex-Education Minister!!!! So the guy who could have effected change in the PSLE system, didn’t do it when he’s in charge. When he’s out of it, he suddenly brims with lots of ideas on how the PSLE system could be improved!!! That’s why I have NO RESPECT for many of these ministers. Talk is cheap. When you have the AUTHORITY to effect change, you didn’t do it. When you’re out of it, you suddenly have lots of ideas. Hypocrites!!
Looks like he’s passing the buck and trying to sabo his successor!
[…] – guanyinmiao’s musings: Our Grand National Conversation; My Little Contribution – A Juggling Mum: Motivational Monday- Making time for date nights – ED Unloaded: OCBC PSLE Leave – Of Kids and Education: Making the reluctant case for tuition – Diary of A Singaporean Mind: Understanding why PSLE needs to be changed… – Thoughts of a Cynical Investor: Scandis, Dutch, Germans & Poles speak better English than us! – The Void Decker: Have you been reading this, Minister Tan? […]
[…] Skip to content HomeAbout the Void Decker ← Have you been reading this, Minister Tan? […]
[…] – guanyinmiao’s musings: Our Grand National Conversation; My Little Contribution – A Juggling Mum: Motivational Monday- Making time for date nights – ED Unloaded: OCBC PSLE Leave – Of Kids and Education: Making the reluctant case for tuition – Diary of A Singaporean Mind: Understanding why PSLE needs to be changed… – Thoughts of a Cynical Investor: Scandis, Dutch, Germans & Poles speak better English than us! – The Void Decker: Have you been reading this, Minister Tan? […]