Social Conscience - Unlocking Our Positive Energy

These days, there isn't a day that passes without some tragic news. Terrorist attacks, mass killings and homicidal "lone wolves" are making newspaper headlines and every government is beefing up security measures to avert another tragedy. However, even the best security system cannot guarantee absolute protection against the fanatical forces that wreak havoc in the lives of ordinary folks and cause mayhem in peaceful societies around the world. Only recently, we were told to brace ourselves for the day when our security net may be breached (Read HERE). Besides concentrating our efforts on security measures and enhancing civil, police and military vigilance, we need to ask what else we can do in our struggle against the impact of ideological radicalisation and extremism.

In the deep recesses of our subconscious minds lie a powerful inhibitor of wrong-doings. Each time we are about to do something that we shouldn't be doing or hold back from doing something that we should, it makes us feel queasy. When this queasy feeling intensifies, we feel a prevailing sense of guilt or regret and then promise ourselves not to let it happen again. That natural inhibitory reflex inside us is our "conscience" and it also has the power to make us do good. In psychoanalytic theory, our conscience is identified as our "super-ego", that part of our subconsciousness that aims for human perfection.

As people live in communities sharing common values and aspirations, those innate feelings that restrain us from doing harm and spur positive behaviours in troubling situations, develop into a sort of social conscience. A moral compass that we rely upon to navigate through many moral dilemmas in our lives. This social conscience encapsulates social consciousness, the latter being a form of conscious awareness of our society's well-being that is merely knowledge devoid of the energising force of social conscience.

A strong social conscience will move us to respond to our sense of right and wrong. It makes us display our best human values, those that build the best traditions of a mature, peace-loving society. In one online dictionary definition, it is said that if you have a social conscience, you worry about people who are poor, ill, old, etc. and try to help them (Read More). It is more than that. Social conscience can be perceived as a form of positive energy that is sadly diminished in those of us who pursue selfish gains and fanatical idealism. The negative forces of greed, jealousy and hatred can only be subdued through unlocking that positive energy in each of us. In order to do so, we need to develop a strong social conscience that forces our humanitarianism to the surface. And the way to go about is to constantly learn and understand our own humanity and how decent human beings ought to treat each other.

Unlock that positive energy in you and help change the world for the better.

The Businesses of the State

The world is again caught in a state of flux and many changes which are beyond our wildest expectations are taking shape. From ISIS to Brexit, there is a looming picture of gloom and the impacts in socio-political-economic terms are wide and extensive. In the tiny state of Singapore, these tumultuous occurrences taking place in the middle east and Europe are far away from the minds of ordinary Singaporeans. Their immediate worries are about bread and butter issues. 

 

 

The economic slowdown does not seem to recover anytime soon and retrenchment exercises are back. In the early 60's when Singapore was emerging as a developing nation, the state took control of economic development and charted a course which had state-owned enterprises taking the lead in opening up new industries. State capitalism intensified even after Singapore ascended the ranks and became a developed nation in the 80's. In the next 3 decades, the state continued to expand and acquire substantial business interests either directly under its statutory boards or indirectly through state-linked companies. Today, it has become the biggest landlord and business owner. It is also the biggest employer in Singapore and a major international investor with an enviable sovereign wealth fund.

When every citizen is gainfully employed and is able to afford a roof over their head, no one really cares too much about who owns what and how much money is made by the businesses and their management. In the minds of a people deeply accustomed to letting the state take the lead in almost everything, the business of running our economy, including what investments to make overseas, belongs to the state and not the people or even private enterprises. However, as at every critical point in our growth as a nation, past solutions invite serious questions when they no longer appear to be effective in dealing with present day problems. Ever-rising rents and costs of doing business, increasing unemployment, retrenchments and slower economic growth have become recurrent topics in our daily news. When state capitalism in our past as an emerging economy could create jobs, homes, higher incomes and hopes for a better future, these times are considered hard times. A fundamental question relating to market economics has to be asked. Is a state-owned and controlled economy, with its current breadth and depth, still a viable solution for the challenges that Singapore faces, given that the dynamics of doing business today requires greater innovation and creativity?

It is not suggested that state capitalism per se is undesirable. For instance, state capitalism in China has brought sterling economic growth for the Chinese economy in the last 20 years and it would be hard to find any no pure free market economy in the world today. The state is always involved in some economically strategic matters, such as regulating the banking system and lending activities and ownership of what are considered important national assets. However, to the extent that state capitalism is essential in order to protect its people from a wayward economy, the logic falls short when it goes beyond that. Heavy-handed state intervention in free market forces creates serious distortions of the market, generating misinformation and unrealistic expectations. Extensive business interests of the state also unwittingly compromises good political governance when the state chooses to protect its business interests over the rights of the people . Unfair competition may also breed disenchantment and stifle entrepreneurship in areas seen to be dominated by state-linked businesses .  

Is it time for our economy to be driven more by real private enterprises than by state-owned businesses? If so, how can we achieve a better balance between state capitalism and free capitalism? These are questions that need a rethink at higher levels.

God Save Our President

A recent opinion expressed by the Straits Times (in ST, Tues, May 17, 2016) on “Understanding the President's role” spoke about the review of aspects of the Elected Presidency and the traditional role of our President and. It struck a cord with the following comment:

"The main tension arises from the grafting of a custodial role to the traditional unifying role in a Westminster system of parliamentary government. The latter is arguable the predominance for the Head of State in a participative democracy as he or she would stand above the fray and be a symbol of the dignity and continuity of the nation - an authoritative upholder of the aspirations within the National Pledge. The President represents all of the people, including those who are disadvantaged or lack a voice, and not just those who voted for thin. That is what lends moral authority to the office."

Indeed, our President has always been a symbol of national unity and political neutrality. He represented the ideals of ordinary Singaporeans and the belief that it was possible for an ordinary Singapore to rise to the highest office in the land. The country’s first four presidents, who held office between 1965 and 1993, were appointed by parliament. Yusof Ishak, Benjamin Sheares, Devan Nair and Wee Kim Wee were largely ceremonial heads of state with limited powers who acted mainly on the advice of the cabinet. Our President speaks at the opening of parliamentary sessions, attends state functions and receives foreign dignitaries. And on National Day, every citizen waits patiently to see the arrival of our President at the parade to recite the national pledge together. Sadly, this symbolic role of our President in a young republic like ours, was made to stand on its head following amendments to our constitution in 1991 to provide for the election of our President.

The Elected President's key role is to act as a guardian of our past national reserves. The Elected President is endowed with oversight powers on government expenditure using such reserves. Many have criticised the changes as politically motivated and this is criticism does not seem to be entirely without basis. Only a select few qualify to be candidates under the changes which are more stringent than those who wish to be elected as Members of Parliament. The candidate must be a former senior political appointee, high-ranking civil servant or someone with strong financial management experience. These changes did not merely graft a custodial role to the traditional role of the President. In fact, it subverted our President's traditional role and politicised his office.

Every presidential election puts the candidates under the spotlight of political parties who have come to view these elections as another political contest for them besides the general elections. The impact resulted in the incumbent having won the 2011 presidential elections with 35.20% of the votes, with a narrow margin of only 0.34% over the second-placed candidate. Consequently, not only has the traditional role of the President been substantially diminished, the standing of the office of the President has also been lowered in the eyes of the general public after the political mud-slinging that has become commonplace during elections. One wonders why the Auditor General was not considered for that custodian role. Alternatively, it would have been more feasible to set up a new administrative office equipped with a strong secretariat to undertake the demanding task.

The expansion of the role of our President to include the protection of our nation's reserves is as undesirable as the expansion of the role of our Members of Parliament to manage town councils. The additonal responsibilities undermine the more important traditonal roles and the task of ensuring that our national reserves are not misused should have been assigned to someone else. As Head of State, our President must continue to be a symbol of unity and to undertake the tall order of keeping the financial expenditure of an elected government in check will compromise his symbolic status. Elected or not.

Troubled Souls

As our society learns to recognise that more could be done for those who are physically impaired, there seems to be a corresponding rise in social vigilantism that springs up quickly to condemn anyone who seem to show little consideration for the less able-bodied.

Not long ago, there was an impassioned plea in parliament for a better understanding of those who suffer some form of physical disability. There are many small voices that cry out to the able-bodied for more of their patience and understanding. It is important that we learn to hear these voices which are quietly tugging at our heartstrings as we strive to become a more compassionate society.

In sparing thought for those who are physically impaired, we need to realise that there are also many amongst us who do not suffer from any obvious physical impairment but need our patience and understanding no less. They are the ones suffering quietly from emotional distress who do not display the outwards signs of physical impairment that would have otherwise drawn to themselves the spontaneous help from concerned bystanders. Very often, these troubled souls are mistaken by social vigilantes as people who are cold and dispassionate in responding timely or appropriately to the needs of a less able-bodied person standing close to them. And they are caused to suffer from public ridicule and condemnation, adding on to their untold frustration and emotional torment and pushing them to breaking point.

Materialism and elitism have been the twin evils that have come to occupy our minds from the decades spent in a national pursuit for global excellence in every undertaking. Sky-rocketting property prices which are grossly disproportionate to the rise in income levels have shattered the dreams of many young Singaporeans and pushing them into migrating overseas. Keen competition with foreigners for jobs, housing and transport in our own land has displaced many individuals and families and severely dampened morale. Divorces are constantly on the rise and more children are left to the care of domestic helpers as dual incomes from their parents become indispensable. Rising business costs have closed the curtains on many local enterprises and constant skills upgrading have not brought about better jobs. Endless new legislations and regulations have raised the pressures of living in this small city-state and there are many people who look perfectly normal on a perfect day but are too stressed out mentally and emotionally. They are already at wits' end.

For all these troubled souls who appear as normal, healthy- looking people, they too have small voices crying out for patience and understanding as well.

"If I am not giving you my seat, it's not because I am unkind;  I am just lost in my thoughts."

"If I am not giving way, it's not because I don't care; I just do not have much time left."

"If I am not paying any attention to you, it's not because I am cold; I just don't know what I am going to do anymore."

"If I am going too fast, it's not because I am reckless; I am just worried that I may not make it."

"If I don't answer you, it's not that I want to be rude; I just don't know what is happening to me."

"If I don't see you standing in front of me, it's not because I am pretending to sleep. I am just very, very tired."

Let's all learn not to be too quick to point our fingers without sparing a thought for someone who may be one of these troubled souls. He or she needs our patience and understanding too.

CMIO- For Better or Worse

Singapore's cultural identity is a unique composition of the different beliefs and practices of our major ethnic groups, classified under the Chinese, Malays, Indians and Others ("CMIO") model.

From our food, costumes, music, art, festivals, etc., including our pidgin Singlish, our cultural identity binds us together as one people in a multi-racial, multi-religious society. Wherever we may be, we can easily identify another Singaporean.

However, with the rapid increase in the number of new citizens each year, we are beginning to see a potential cultural crisis looming, with the rising influence of new cultures. There are already calls for the CMIO model to be abolished and the argument is that it fails to encompass the increasing cultural diversity in Singapore.

Our intake of new citizens has reportedly increased from an average of 8,200 per year between 1987 and 2006, to about 18,500 per year in the last 5 years (Read More). Going by these numbers, it is not surprising to see the CMIO model already coming under threat.

It is said that the CMIO model does not capture the numerous heterogenous sub-communities in Singapore and the diversity that resulted from immigration and inter-community marriages (Read More). Some have proposed that Singapore should emulate New York City, for example, where there is no fixed preconception of people (Read More). The momentum to abolish the CMIO model seems to be accelerating.

On the other hand, opponents to the abolition argue that the CMIO categorisation sets the minority communities at ease and should not be jettisoned too quickly (Read More). Their worries are that without the CMIO model, not only will the culture of the majority ethnic group dominate, the culture of the minority ethnic group will lose protection. These worries are not completely unfounded but there is a greater worry.

Over the last 50 years, the CMIO has been the invisible scaffolding that has shaped the cultural identity of our nation. Although it started out as a simplistic and racist way of managing the interests of the different ethnic groups in Singapore, which is not much different from the way the British colonialists did it, the CMIO model has become so structurally entrenched in our social make-up that to abolish it now is to uproot the racial markers that has made Singapore unique in the eyes of the world. Its abolition will be followed by a potentially virulent clash of all the cultures that are found in our land today and which will lead to a major transformation not only in our nation's 50 year-old cultural identity but in our socio-political structures as well.

It bears reminder that in a global city, the inhabitants come and go and their interests are purely economic. For a nation to be truly able to hold on to its people's hearts and minds, the people need to feel a strong sense of belonging beyond their economic interests. Their strong cultural identity as a nation of people is what holds them together in one place. Despite its racial overtures and inadequacies, the CMIO has been a necessary evil that has worked so far to maintain the peace and stability in our tiny island nation. Before we tear it down, we should ask ourselves if we are ready for what comes next.

SOCIAL: Keeping Our Environment Clean And Green

More people we know seem to be stricken by cancer and more young people are dying from  explainable  illnesses. What has gone wrong?

Much blame has been placed on our stress levels, lifestyles and the foods and drinks that we consume. These are undeniably contributory factors but there is something else that has an equally important, if not a greater impact on our health. Our living environment.

We generate as much as 1,370 kg of waste per person each year according to  Singapore 2014 Waste Statistics and that's a whopping total of 7,514,500 tonnes each year. Imagine producing so much waste and not knowing how to protect the environment that we live in. What will happen?

A healthy living environment is definitely important to help us to keep diseases at bay. Wash your hands before you eat and try to keep public eating places as clean as possible after you are done eating or drinking. Throw your litter into the refuse bin. Do not litter to create a breeding ground for rodents and pests. Learn to properly recycle waste and be environmentally friendly. Stop your engine from running when your vehicle is parked to reduce air pollution. Save electricity and water whenever you can as these are precious limited resources that we need for our daily living.

Keep our city clean and green always. Trees and shrubs not only beautify our landscape but add colour and vibrancy to a healthy living environment. Do not destroy our natural environment. If we do, we are harming ourselves. Take care of mother earth and mother earth will take care of you.

Let's work together to keep each other healthy. And happy.

Improvement Projects in NRP Constituencies - The use of CIPC funding

The idea of forming grassroots organisations like Residents' Committees (RCs) and Citizens' Consultative Committees (CCCs) was to enable volunteers in the community to help the government in implementing its policies and reaching out to residents. Those who manage RCs and CCCs are invariably identified as supporters of the ruling party though many may be motivated to volunteer by a desire to serve the people in their community.

It is often lamented that an MP from a non-ruling party (NRP) taking over the running of a constituency from a ruling party MP has to countenance difficulties from RCs and CCS in the implementation of their programmes. Both MPs and NCMPs have expressed that major obstacles still remain for opposition parliamentarians (Click HERE). One of these obstacles is in tapping on state funds which are set aside for improving infrastructural and recreational facilities for the benefit of residents in their constituencies which include covered walkways, footpaths, cycling tracks and playgrounds.

In one parliamentary session, the Minister for National Development ("MND") was asked for the guidelines for the utilisation of the Community Improvement Projects Committee (CIPC) funding (Click HERE). In his reply, the Minister answered that "CIPC funds are disbursed through the CCCs as they are close to the ground and will be better able to decide on the projects which will be most useful for the local residents. The CCCs are given flexibility to assess the relevance of any proposal and to prioritise them for implementation so that the CIPC funds are optimally utilised. The operating principle for the CCCs is to ensure that the approved CIPC projects are useful, functional, represent value for money, freely accessible to the community and properly planned." 

In short, CCCs have the power to decide if an elected MP may go ahead with his plans to improve infrastructural and recreational facilities for his residents. Given that CCCs are not apolitical in character,  this arrangement poses a serious obstacle to an elected NRP MP's programmes to benefit his constituents. The question that arises is whether funds meant for community improvements should be disbursed to CCSs if the CCC and the MP do not share the same political affiliation. Obviously, if all political contests are confined only to the election period and are not carried over into the term of whoever may be elected as MP to the detriment of the constituents, there will be no necessity for us to review the present arrangement. 

However, as we all know, political contests tend to spill into even the most mundane things that CCCs do for their residents. Until grassroots leaders learn to rise over politics and are no longer seen to be taking sides with the ruling party, there is a need to ensure that these community improvement funds do not become an instrument of politics. As a step towards developing a more positive political culture, why not let the MND decide on the applications to use such funds by all MPs?

SOCIAL: Sports - Nurturing True Sportsmanship

In the recent SEA Games, Singapore collected 84 Golds, 73 Silvers and 102 Bronzes with Thailand finishing top with 95 Golds, 83 Silvers and 69 Bronzes. This has been an impressive record and a fitting tribute to SG50. 

Our 259 medals have surpassed our precious haul of of 164 medals (50 golds, 40 silvers and 74 bronzes) in 1993, when the Games was last held at home. We are all absolutely thrilled that we have done well as a nation that seeks to excel in everything that we do. But let's pause for a moment to look at the results and ask some questions.

The medals tell us which sports we are good at. One report (Click HERE)  said as follows:

“Over the past 18 days in 36 sports, Singapore’s largest-ever contingent of 747 athletes also delivered 25 Games records, 29 national records, 74 personal bests, and many first-time medalists. 421 were also making their official Games debut. Of the 36 sports, the Republic’s swimmers achieved the highest medal count of 42 (23 golds, 12 silvers and 7 bronzes).

Swimmers Joseph Isaac Schooling and Quah Zheng Wen were the most bemedalled athletes, winning one in every event they competed in. Schooling won nine gold medals and set Games records in all nine events, while teammate Quah finished with 12 medals (7 golds, 4 silvers and 1 bronze).”

One piece of glaring information comes across from the wins. A great majority of the medals were won by local-born Singaporeans.  And we are able to clearly identify the sports that we can be really good at. So, do we still need foreign talents to buttress our sports achievements when we could save our money on them and groom our own talent pool from young in the sports that we are potentially good at?

Say what you like, there can be no real pride in winning medals through the Foreign Talent Scheme which started in 1996. One sport that relies heavily on the scheme is table tennis. Even after 20 years, we are still relying on table–tennis players from China to win our medals. If we are unable to produce local-born table-tennis players to lead our nation in this sport after all these years, we need to ask whether the scheme has usurped the need to nurture our local talent or is table-tennis not really our cup of tea?

We also need to ask ourselves whether it is necessary for us to excel in every sport? To-date, more than 60 foreign athletes have been granted citizenship since the Foreign Talent Scheme started in 1996 (Click HERE). We do not know exactly how much we have spent in the scheme but it should run into the millions which could have been used more productively and meaningfully. 

Since we can now identify a number of sports where our potentials lie, wouldn’t it be make more sense to save our money on foreign athletes and invest in our local sports talents instead? We can bring in foreign coaches instead of foreign athletes? Afterall, sports is not about winning medals alone. It's about the spirit of true sportsmanship.

SOCIAL: Culture - Saving our Food heritage

One of the unique features of Singaporean culture is its food heritage which began with itinerant hawkers peddling on the streets. With the erection of hawker centres, Singaporeans found their favourite foods like char kway teow, laksa, mee siam and roti prata prepared behind more hygienic stalls which were leased from the government at cheap rentals. And the majority of Singaporeans take their daily three meals at these hawker centres which offer a great variety of affordable local food options.

Unfortunately, stall rentals escalated after the government's economic policies went on high gear. The National Environment Agency ("NEA"), which currently manages 107 markets and hawker centres, began selling the stalls in 1994 with takeover fees that ran into hundreds of thousands of dollars. About 2,000 stalls in 15 centres were sold in four phases between 1994 and 1997, and their leases were slated to expire between 2014 and 2017 (Click HERE) .These stalls were sold at between S$26,000 to S$ 141,000 each, depending on their location and size and owners re-sold and pocketed huge profits only to buy more stalls when they were allowed to sublet their stalls. The costs of running a hawker stall invariably shot up. So did food prices at these hawker centres.

Rental costs escalated even further for food stalls when the government stopped building hawker centres for some 26 years while air-conditioned food centres in shopping malls sprouted up like mushrooms. The impact on food prices was significant and families on tight budgets had to forgo at least one meal. Many Singaporeans eat out at coffee-shops too. These are located in housing estates and are the regular venues for many family dinners. With liberal policies on coffee-shop ownership (which attracted foreign investors looking for capital gains) and higher and higher tender prices for coffee-shops in new housing estates, stall rentals in coffee-shops shot up as well. High turnover of business owners in coffee-shops are now a regular feature and the quality of food has suffered. Old food stalls with huge followings and customers who grew up on their menu begin to close down one after another.

After GE 2011, the government announced in October 2011 that it will restart the programme of building of hawker centres after 26 years with a new policy direction (Click HERE). There will be 10 new hawker centres to be built over 10 years. These new hawker centres are to be run on not-for-profit basis instead of by commercial operators. This was a tacit acknowledgment that food prices in our iconic hawker centres have gone up too high. The first of these new hawker centres is now operated by NTUC Foodfare in Bukit Panjang with 28 cooked-food stalls offering at least two low-cost main dishes.This new policy direction in letting only social enterprises and co-operatives manage hawker centre has already led to disgruntled hawkers who were unhappy with the price-caps on the food they sell and that the centres are operated more like food courts which require them to pay plate collection and dishwashing collection and dishwashing fees, use common utensils and wear uniforms (Click HERE).

The idea of bringing down food prices in hawker centre is applaudable but the new management model of hawker centres looks set to have another negative impact on our heritage food culture as hawkers think of ways to cut costs. Why can't we go back to the old model of leasing out hawker stalls at low monthly rentals with a government agency managing the hawker centres? Such a model was working perfectly fine until they started to tinker with it. As they say, if it ain't broken, why fix it?