 |
| Dissident Chia Thye Poh's picture hangs on the wall at SDP party headquarters in Upper Thomson. Ask Chia Thye Poh's family what they think of voting PAP.... |
I was asked about my thoughts on Lee Kuan Yew's "legacy". This was my response.
Lee Kuan Yew is respected by many Singaporeans, for what he has contributed to Singapore's
growth though I need to add that much of the development of Singapore
in the early years has to also be attributed to a team of people, who
have unfortunately been forgotten for their contributions. It might be
more meaningful to talk of the contributions of them as a group - Goh
Keng Swee, Toh Chin Chye, S. Rajaratnam etc - so that we can have a good
sense of how Singapore's success should be seen in perspective.
On the same note, Singapore's economic development in the first 20
years of independence, from the mid-1960s to mid-1980s was actually on
the right track, where wages were increasing, income inequality was
decreasing and interest rates on the pension funds were increasing. In
short, people's lives were getting better. In the first 20 years of
Singapore, the Singapore Model was working well because there was
"balance", where wages and the living standards were rising in tandem
with growth.
However, from the mid-1980s, the new policies became
decidedly less favourable towards Singaporeans, where the government
reduced health subsidies and where public housing and education prices
escalated by even several times over. From the mid-1990s, real wages for
the low-income workers started stagnating and for the middle-income,
this has been happening for the past 10 years. And some Singaporeans are
today beginning to feel that Singapore is seeing a reversal of our
fortunes in the last five to 10 years.
Rightfully or not, in the mid-1980s, when Lee Kuan Yew removed the "Old Guard" or first-generation leaders who has helped to build Singapore in the first 20 years and replaced it with the second-generation of leaders who were too eager to please, it caused the system to go out of balance, where we have reached a point today where wages are too low, prices are too high and where Singaporeans cannot save enough to retire, and poverty is estimated to have risen to even 30%.
As such, Lee Kuan Yew had a
good team of people in place in the first 20 years of Singapore who
worked with him to build Singapore but his team thereafter, from the
1980s, did not perhaps have the foresight and ethical beliefs as the
"Old Guard" had, and because of that, the system could not be
well-maintained.
As a result, this has contributed to the belief
that the current PAP leaders are in the business of politics for money,
also because they earn the highest salaries among politicians in the
world, as well as because they have pegged their salaries to the richest
in Singapore, who also earn the highest salaries among the developed
countries.
Thus if you ask me, Lee Kuan Yew could have a much
favourable legacy but his selection of people after the first-generation
leaders, as well as their obedience in an effort not to offend him have
resulted in a system which became lopsided, as they were too eager to
get into his good books. Thus Lee Kuan Yew's formidability and wrath
became a double-edged sword. Some Singaporeans believe that Lee Kuan
Yew's dictatorial leadership in the earlier years of independence was
necessary as it helped to fasten Singapore's development but it is also
this fear that has even stuck into the highest levels of governance that
has caused an unquestioning principle towards his way of working which
has also caused the policies to become skewed. At least the "Old
Guards"dared to challenge him and maintain that stability and balance
for Singapore.
I would say that Lee Kuan Yew's temperament was a
characteristic that moulded Singapore's initial growth but it was also
because of this unforgiving trait that has institutionalised fear into
the system which has become an unhealthy impediment for the growth, and
more importantly, sustainability of Singapore.
Thus moving
forward, what does this mean for Singapore? I think Singapore has to go
back to the basics. First, over the last 10 to 20 years (or even 30
years), policies that have been created have moved away from caring for
the people. When the People's Action Party (PAP) removed "equality" from
their constitution and replaced it with "self-reliance" in 1982, that
was when their policies became more selfish, if I may add. In a way, Lee
Kuan Yew was instrumental to this as he was still the Secretary-General
of the PAP when the constitution was changed and he was also the prime
minister who retired the "Old Guards" in the 1980s and brought in the
second-generation leaders who created the imbalanced policies.
 |
| Roy Ngerng |
What we need to do at this point is to undo some of these policies and
their effects and to bring balance back to Singapore. Thus we need to
increase wages to bring it parity, so that income inequality and poverty
can be reduced. The government also needs to increase health and
education subsidies so that all of Singaporeans can be uplifted, and not
just the select few in the elites. Also, pension returns need to be
returned to the people and transparently managed, so that Singaporeans
will be protected for their retirement. In that sense, we have to remove
or reduce a lot of the complications that have bogged down our system
and which are making the system less efficient. We need to streamline
the system and start making it more focused towards the people, and to
protect the people.
In short, the government has to stop pursing a
business/profit-motive and to start taking care of the people. The PAP
over the past 30 years have steered away from the objective of
governance - for the protection of the people, and so, either the PAP
has to regain a sense of ethical responsibility or Singaporeans have to
do what is right to for themselves and to vote in a new government that
will take care of and protect them. I think the latter is a more viable
alternative, seeing how the PAP has become rigid and entrenched in its
ways and is resistant to change.
Singapore cannot continue on the
current modus operandi that the PAP has taken for the past 30 years. We
either have to go back to where Singapore was in the first 20 years, in
terms of the balance that was attained, or to allow a renewal, where
Singaporeans are engaged and empowered to make decisions for the country
and partake in the country's growth. The very reason why the
first-generation leaders wanted to focus on educating the population was
precisely because a more educated populace will be able to help the
country grow.
The current development of Singapore is not
sustainable if we continue on a model of self-inflicted price escalation
and artificially-depressed wages where the growing inequality can tear
the social fabric apart. We need to focus on bringing our country back
to balance.
As such, is it to follow Lee Kuan Yew's approach or
is it to create a new approach? It really depends on which era and which
team you are talking about. Where Lee Kuan Yew had a good team in the
first-generation leaders, Singapore was progressing nicely. Where he
later transited into a second-generation (and then third-generation)
leaders who lack the gumption and who became submissive and less ethical
in their approach, it has instead thwarted Singapore's development
path.
So, is it to follow Lee Kuan Yew's approach or not? I
would say it is about putting in a team which has the heart for
Singapore and Singaporeans, as well as the other inhabitants on this
island, and which have the foresight and belief to start re-investing
back in Singaporeans, for our health and education, and retirement for
the elderly, so that with the right commitment to the people, we can
bring our country back on track. Where a dictatorial leadership might
work in the earlier years of consolidation and growth, a more equitable
and collaborative governance is needed now where the PAP does not
monopolise or hold onto power stridently, but where governance becomes a
shared and decentralised responsibility and distilled among the people.
Only with unity and equality, and justice and fairness, can we see
Singapore move towards a brighter possibility, and this also requires
Singaporeans to let go of the fear that the idea of Lee Kuan Yew has
created, and to be willing to restart our engagement with our country [by Roy Ngerng].
http://thehearttruths.com/…/my-thoughts-on-lee-kuan-yew-an…/
[This article was posted here with the kind written permission of Roy Ngerng.]
No comments:
Post a Comment