Proof that Singapore is tops!

[palden]

We got the only minister mentor in the world.

 

[Fook Seng]

We got the only minister mentor in the world.

So he is also the top minister mentor in the world. Are there other accolades to collect?

 

[Leongsam]

Building Capabilities: The Singapore Success Story


Sunday, March 7, 2010

http://wphr.org/blog/2010/03/07/building-capabilities-the-singapore-success-story/

By Andrew Jensen

Given the pervasive, grinding destitution that afflicts much of the world’s population, the study of world poverty and human rights necessarily focuses on the negative, on the “miles to go before [we] sleep.” (Frost) Thus, it is often all too easy to view the great narrative of 20[SUP]th[/SUP] century human development as a litany of tremendous opportunities squandered by bad governance, capitalistic avarice, institutional weakness, and merciless Cold War realpolitik, a broad tragedy broken only occasionally by hopeful examples of downtrodden nations who manage to institute enduring, holistic progress. The tiny city-state of Singapore provides us with just such an example and a pattern of success that many a chronically-underdeveloped nation would be wise to follow.

Nobel Prize-winning economist Amartya Sen’s assertion that the “enhancement of human freedom is both the main object and the primary means of development” is critical to understanding the successful basis of the Singapore model. (Sen 53) Sen identifies human freedom with the “‘capabilities’ of persons to lead the kind of lives they value,” and frames poverty in terms of “capability deprivation.” (18) This theoretical foundation supports the assertion that the nation which respects, protects, and promotes its citizens’ individual capabilities likewise strengthens human freedom within its jurisdiction, and by extension, furthers its own holistic development.

A strong commitment to its citizens’ capabilities undergirds Singapore’s tremendously successful trajectory from an overcrowded, ethno-linguistically schizophrenic, resource-poor and reluctantly independent Third World city state to a First World, highly educated globalized economic powerhouse. A look at the Singaporean government’s efforts at combating three of the capability deprivations endemic to poverty-stricken nations (as mentioned in Professor Stephen Marks study, “Human Rights in Development: The Significance for Health”) illustrates this point.


1. Premature mortality. Premature mortality is a stark indicator of any nation’s ability to provide its citizens with adequate health care, and in this regard the numbers don’t lie. Infant mortality in Singapore has dropped ten-fold since independence, from 30 per 1,000 births in the period 1960-1965 to 3 per 1,000 births in the last decade. (UNData: Infant Mortality) Likewise, average life expectancy for both sexes has risen steadily for the past 6 decades, from 65.8 years at independence to the current 80.3, nearly a 23 percent lifespan extension. (UNData: Life Expectancy) These statistics reflect the unqualified effectiveness of Singapore’s National Health Plan in providing “the highest attainable standards of health” in terms of availability, accessibility, acceptability and quality. (United Nations) International observers are quick to point out that while the Plan provides for subsidized universal health care coverage, it manages to maintain low costs by retaining a measure of individual responsibility. Singaporeans themselves are ultimately responsible for selecting and financing a significant portion of their own health care. (Kaiseredu.org)

2. Undernourishment. Chronic malnutrition is attributed to a variety of causes: low agricultural yields, high food prices, inadequate access to water resources, and a lack of dietary education, to name a few. Ethnic strife and social instability far too often arise from, and exacerbate, these factors in a downward spiral that condemns nations to a cycle of miserable poverty. In 1965, a newly independent Singapore constituted the perfect recipe for just such a disaster: a hodgepodge of mutually antagonistic ethnic groups pressed together on an island with insufficient arable land, no significant natural resources, a dearth of potable water, and potentially hostile neighbors on all sides. Yet as the above statistics indicate, Singaporeans today enjoy a world-class level of nutrition. This achievement is due in large part to pragmatic government diplomacy that has secured friendly relations (and a steady stream of water and food imports) from neighboring Malaysia, in addition to the active fostering of a robust, liberal market economy, the resulting purchasing power of which has all but eliminated dire financial poverty on the island.

3. Illiteracy. This outstanding financial growth, aided by Singapore’s proven ability to reinvent its economy according to changing global conditions, is rooted in the city’s substantial investments in educating its own citizenry. The promotion of English as an official, ethnically neutral language of education has provided an effective means of communication among the island’s diverse linguistic groups (Mandarin, Malay, Hakka, Cantonese, Tamil, Bengali, and Gujarati, among others). At the same time, the Singaporean system mandates bilingual instruction in students’ native languages, striking an acceptable balance between socio-linguistic cohesion and cultural diversity. In short, the city’s educational investments facilitate literacy and world-class employment preparation while mitigating the threat of internecine social strife that stifles the progress of so many other developing nations.

When speaking of development, it is easy to get caught up in the numbers, reducing an incredibly vast mosaic of individual life stories into an impersonal statistical model. In our quest for analytical expediency, we risk losing sight of the individual. Yet individual empowerment is the key to Singapore’s victory over each of the capability deprivations listed above. In his argument for “placing the perspective of freedom at the center of the [development] stage,” Amartya Sen asserts that “the people have to be seen…as being actively involved—given the opportunity—in shaping their own destiny, and not just as passive recipients of the fruits of cunning development programs.” (Sen 53) This investment in the individual is more than Singapore’s success story. It is a model for any nation or organization which seeks to seriously alleviate world poverty and assert human rights.


Works Cited
Frost, Robert. “Stopping By Woods On A Snowy Evening.” Poetry X. Ed. Jough Dempsey. 16 Jun 2003. 27
Feb. 2010 <http: poetry.poetryx.com="" poems="" 247="">.</http:>
Sen, Amartya. Development as Freedom. New York: Anchor Books, 1999.
Stephen P. Marks. “Human Rights in Development: The Significance for Health,” in (Sofia Gruskin,
Michael Grodin, George Annas, and Stephen P. Marks) Perspectives on Health and Human Rights. Taylor and Francis, 2005, pp. 95-116.
No author. “Infant Mortality Rate (per 1000 births).” UN Data: A World of Information 27 Feb 2010. 27
Feb 2010. <http: data.un.org="" data.aspx?q="Singapore&d=PopDiv&f=variableID%3A77%3BcrID%3A702#PopDiv">.</http:>
No author. “International Health Systems: Singapore.” Kaiseredu.org 28 Feb 2010. 28 Feb 2010.
< http://www.kaiseredu.org/topics_im_ihs.asp?imID=5&parentID=61>
No author. “Life expectancy at birth, both sexes combined (years).” UN Data: A World of Information 27
Feb 2010. 27 Feb 2010. <http: data.un.org="" data.aspx?q="Singapore&d=PopDiv&f=variableID%3a68%3bcrID%3a702">.</http:>
United Nations Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. “General Comment 14: The right to
the highest attainable standard of health.” UN document. 4 July 2000.

© 2010, Andrew Jensen. All rights reserved.​

 

[StinkiePeasants]

Singapore is Asia's 'most liveable city'

Singapore has been ranked the world's most liveable city for Asian expats, trumping rival Hong Kong which now has one of the worst levels of air pollution.

By Justin Harper

9:44AM BST 24 Apr 2012

Singapore has been ranked the world's most liveable city for Asian expats, trumping rival Hong Kong which now has one of the worst levels of air pollution.

A study by human resources consultancy ECA International reveals that Singapore tops the table due to its consistently good air quality, world-class health care, excellent infrastructure and low crime rate.

While the survey looked at Asians moving within the region, for example a Japanese banker moving to Hong Kong, it has implications for British expats in Asia.

Asians are likely to be more knowledgeable about the region so if they relocate to a country you are getting a local perspective on the best countries within Asia, according to experts.

More than 20 per cent Singapore’s population are now non-Singaporeans as more expats make the city state their home. A large number of these expats come from neighbouring China, India and Malaysia, highlighting its attractiveness to fellow Asians.

Satish Bakhda, general manager at Rikvin - which specialises in helping companies set up in Singapore, said: "Not only will talented professionals have a chance to grow their careers in Singapore but they will also get to enjoy the best of creature comforts offered in the city."

The only other Asian city on the global top 10 list was the Japanese city of Kobe which beat Hong Kong, which now ranks 11th. Pollution is Hong Kong's "big Achilles heel", according to Lee Quane of ECA International.

Alex Mann, a British expat living in Hong Kong, said: "While I have no plans to leave Hong Kong right now I do know other professionals and their families who are thinking of leaving because of the air quality. They are either looking to relocate to Singapore, within Southeast Asia or heading back to Blighty."

Sydney came in number two as Australian cities dominated the rankings. Adelaide and Brisbane tied for third spot while Perth came in sixth and Canberra seventh. Australia has seen a large influx of Chinese in recent years.

Hong Kong-based Quane said that while Singapore had overtaken the former British colony in terms of cost of living, the higher expenses may not always be borne by employers.

He added: "Companies are less likely to provide location allowances to attract people to accept a posting in Singapore."

Given huge job losses and cutbacks in Europe, many expats are happy to relocate to Asia without the traditional expat package.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/.../Singapore-is-Asias-most-liveable-cityEC.html

 

[StinkiePeasants]

Singapore Airlines wins Best Business Class Airline title at the 2011 World Airline Awards

Singapore Airlines was named the World's Best Business Class Airline for customer Product and Service Quality at the 2011 World Airline Awards, in a ceremony held in the French Air and Space Museum at the Paris Air Show.

The runners-up in this Best Business Class Airline category are Qatar Airways taking 2nd place in the category, ahead of Etihad Airways in 3rd position.


World's Best Business Class Airline

1 Singapore Airlines

2 Qatar Airways

3 Etihad Airways

Voted by over 18.8 million airline passengers from 100 different nationalities, the World Airline Awards™ are the most prestigious quality recognition of front-line product and service standards for the world airline industry. With 200 airlines featured, the awards measure customer satisfaction levels across 38 different items of airline front-line product and service.

Mr Edward Plaisted - CEO, Skytrax

“The award for the World’s Best Business Class is evidence that SIA remains a favourite amongst premium passengers providing the ideal balance of product and staff excellence.”

The Top 3 Airlines

No. 1 SINGAPORE AIRLINES

Singapore Airlines is one of the world's leading carriers, flying to 5 continents across the globe. It was the first airline to operate the A380, and flies to 62 destinations in 35 countries on six continents from its primary hub in Singapore. It has a strong presence in the Southeast Asian region, which together with its subsidiary SilkAir, connects Singapore with more international destinations in the region than any other Southeast Asian airline.

No. 2 QATAR AIRWAYS

Qatar Airways is the flag carrier of Qatar linking over 100 International destinations from its base in Doha. Using a fleet of 96 aircraft, the airline operates one of the youngest fleets in the world with an average age of less than 4.1 years, and it is one of the few airlines to fly to all six permanently inhabited continents. Qatar Airways is currently undergoing a major expansion and is one of the fastest growing airlines in the world.

No. 3 ETIHAD AIRWAYS

Etihad Airways is the National Airline of the United Arab Emirates. The airline was set up by a Royal Decree in July 2003, with Abu Dhabi, the capital of the UAE, as its hub. Etihad started commercial operations in November 2003. The airline operates more than 1000 flights per week to 66 destinations in 44 countries,[2] via a fleet of 57 aircraft. Its operation is heavily centered in Europe and Asia, as well as Oceania, Africa and North America. Its main base is Abu Dhabi International Airport.

http://www.worldairlineawards.com/Awards_2011/jclass.htm

 

[palden]

Flew etihad. What is SIA. Even the stewardess cannot be compared. Maybe it is the ah lians buzzing around the ANG mo that gives SIA the lead. Coffee tea or me?

 

[Leongsam]

http://www.scribd.com/doc/40966835/The-Singapore-Success-Story

The Singapore Success Story


The Effective Development State

According to the World Economic Forum’s ‘Global Competitiveness Report 2009 10’ Singapore’s public institutions are ranked as the best in the world (out of 133 countries studied); Singapore also has world class infrastructure (ranked 4th) , leading the world in the quality of its roads, ports and air transport facilities.

In addition, the country's competitivenessis propped up by a strong focus on education, providing highly skilled individuals for the workforce. Its quality of education, particularly of its science and mathematics education, is considered the best in the world. The economic success of Singapore, and that of its public service, is strongly driven by a government heavily involved in a number of key sectors, such as housing, education and industry through its bureaucracy, judged one of the least corrupt in the world.

What makes the Singapore government so effective, and how? What are the policy choices that Singapore has made, the institutional arrangements it has put in place, and the investment decisions that have allowed Singapore to be an island of excellence in the area of management and delivery of public services?

How has it created an enabling environment that empowers public service institutions to cope with and manage change? How has the capacity of the civil service been developed and enhanced to remain at the cutting edge? We seek to highlight here the lessons and best practices on governance and service delivery from Singapore's public service experience and analyse the links between the quality of civil service and national development, a subject that has remained relatively under explored analytically.

Focus on Development

From its independence in 1965 the government was convinced that its survival depended upon providing the highest quality basic services, education, health, housing and livelihoods to the people. A sensitive post Independence geopolitical situation that included ethnic tensions,widespread unemployment, electricity, poverty and housing shortage, the government, in power since 1959, believed that its legitimacy for governance was to be proved by making Singapore and economically prosperous and politically stable entity. A combination of forces led to the emergence of this governing philosophy that focus on growth and development.Singapore's geographical size, strategic location and lack of natural resources were major sources of concern. The loss of the hinterland, due to its expulsion from Malaysia in 1965... continued....

 

[Borat]

LeongSam, I think you have won me over that Singapore is tops. Reading from a Malaysia website of which has been painstakingly put together, it appears Singaporeans has every right to to be proud of their country. Here is the piece which is pretty long and please read it through as it tells the wonderful story of how Singapore managed to be tops.

Source: http://forum.lowyat.net/topic/2334081

credit to mevotex @ lowyat.net

In economic case studies, Southeast Asian economists inevitably, have a penchant to compare Brunei and Singapore, the 2 smallest but wealthiest Southeast Asian states whom both shared a currency interchangeable agreement. A tale of 2 nations, Brunei and Singapore set out to diversify their economies 60 years ago, and diverged their path from there; one adopted an open, meritocratic system with emphasis to absorb the best and brightest foreign talents; another embraced a closed, ethnocentric structure which placed heavy restrictions on foreigners. The result is a real-life model lesson for other Southeast Asian states.

One couldn't imagine this was Singapore in 1960s, plagued with housing crisis and filled with slums and squatters


---------------------------------- 1950s -----------------------------------


By 1950s, Brunei had recovered from the ashes of World War 2. The destruction in war however, especially to its oil facilities, made Brunei aware of the needs to diversify its economy. At that time there was only one known reservoir in Seria, and the fear of it running out led the country to set forward and introduced the first National Development Plan (NDP) with an allocation of $100 million in 1953. The plan seek to lay the foundation for economic development by building infrastructure (communication systems, roads, water, electricity), and providing healthcare and education to all districts so to create a healthy, educated workforce.

Singapore suffered heavily in World War 2. The British boasted the island as the 'Gilbratar of the East', a fortress that would withstand any attack, so the Japanese blockaded it and gave it air bombings everyday to inflict maximum damages, until the surrender of the island in 1942. By 1950s though, Singapore had been stabilized enough to again focus on economic development.

Brunei: Seria 1950s, nation was undergoing mass infrastructure development

Emerged from the war in physical ruins, Singapore found itself with a large number of homeless residents whose homes were destroyed, and insufficient commercial activities to support them, leading to housing crisis, squatters and high unemployment which plagued the island throughout the 1950s. In 1947, the British Housing Committee Report noted Singapore had "one of the world’s worst slums - a disgrace to a civilized community", with the average person per building density was 18.2 by 1947 and high-rise buildings were rare. In 1959, the problem of shortage was still unsolved, and the people of Singapore was already not happy with the British as their leaders.

The British authorities granted Singapore and Brunei the power of self-government in 1959, but the colonial administration still controlled external foreign relations and shared responsibilities in matters such as police and defense.


---------------------------------- 1960s -----------------------------------


Going into 1960s, Brunei had became a livable place with booming economic activities, and a GDP per capita 3 times higher than Singapore. A second reservoir in South West Ampa field was discovered, further boosting oil revenues. Oil exports account for 92% of the economy while rubber exports 1.5%

A simple statistics in 1960, Brunei, with a population of slightly under 0.1 million, exported $326 million worth of goods, impressively compared to Singaporean (1.64 million population) exports of $543 million. The Sultanate was clearly way ahead of the Lion City at this time.

Singapore 1960s: Chinatown, a chaotic slums, common occurrence throughout the country.

Suffocated by high unemployment and housing crisis, Singapore in mid-1950s identified industrialization as the way to diversify and keeping the economy afloat. The entrepot trade accounted for 70% of the economy at that time, but was deemed shaky as Malaysia and Indonesia could commit themselves to build a rival port across the strategic Strait of Malacca anytime. This came true when Malaysia later built the Port Klang, eventually growing into the closest competition against the Port of Singapore in Southeast Asia.

The 1950-1960s was a completely different era for Singapore. There was little or no foreign investments, and if Singapore wished to industrialize, it must carry them out on its own, under limited budget. So serious was the economic problems that in 1963 Singapore decided to join the Federation of Malaysia in hope to solve its stagnated economy and other social issues.

Singapore began 'forced industrialization', building cheap factories in mass quantities and sent the unemployed to work there, setting up the Jurong industrial estate, its first industrial town. Singapore's industrialization programme began with factories producing garments, textiles, toys, wood products and hair wigs. The Housing and Development Board (HDB) was formed in 1960 to solve Singapore's housing crisis, and to clear up the squatters and slums. It began to construct what is known as HDB flats to resettle the population. Only after nearly 20 years, and the building of tens of thousands of flats, Singapore's housing problems was finally solved at late 1970s.

Brunei 1960s: Clearly a better place than Singapore

The merger with Malaysia did not go well, Singapore was rocked by racial riot in 1964 (Brunei was similarly hit by a revolt in 1962) and the increasing tension with Kuala Lumpur led to its expulsion from the Malaysian federation in 1965. By the time Singapore was ejected from Malaysia, its economy was in a very bad shape and Western analysts were predicting that the new country, with no resource at all, could not survive. No one at that time could had known that, in 2012 Singapore would be one of the most developed nation on Earth.


---------------------------------- 1970s -----------------------------------


The 1970s was a good time for Brunei. Angered by Western support for Israel, Arab nations launched the oil boycott, leading to the 1970s energy crisis and oil price shock. This gave Brunei a windfall and awashed it with petrodollar, followed by a sharp rise in living standard; for instance, just before the energy crisis in 1972, Brunei's per capita GDP was $2,926, but in 1973 it blossomed to $6,971 - even more than Japan's $4,157. By 1980, per capita in Brunei hit $25,538; the richest in Asia, compared to Japan's $9,034 and Singapore's $4,857. It was from here onwards the tiny Sultanate is to be forever associated with the word 'rich and wealthy'. It was also at here Brunei reached its greatest extent, never again in future would it had so wide a lead vis-a-vis Singapore and Japan.

Today, the 1970s golden age and the fact that Brunei was once Asia's richest in GDP per capita at that time, is rarely mentioned in the country, perhaps due to the embarrassment it might brought with the country's currently struggling economy.

Brunei 1970s: Good infrastructure, thriving commerce

Sudden boom in oil revenues allowed Brunei to enter a period of rapid economic growth, with oil income greatly expended to modernize the state. In 1974 it built the Brunei International Airport (1 year before Singapore Changi Airport was built in 1975), the country was able to connect itself with properly paved roads, commerce flourished and new wealth was created (many companies founded at this period went on to become the leading retailers in the country today), telecommunication greatly improved, infrastructure was better than Singapore, and education level rose sharply. The future of the Sultanate looked bright.

Despite that though, oil has given Brunei a sense of complacency. Other industries who once made up a considerable share of exports, like coal, rubber and cutch, were increasingly being neglected. Singapore was facing existential and survival threats, that forced it to act, while Brunei was able to sit comfortably on its oil revenues. Even though the 1970s was modern Brunei's best times, it also solidified its reliance on oil & gas.

After building factories continuously for 15 years, in 1970, Singapore finally got its high unemployment solved. There were some issues though, unlike Brunei who were rich enough to fund all developmental projects, the city-state was poor and could only afford to build flats and factories all these while.

Sorting housing crisis and high unemployment were the first priorities at that time, and infrastructure and education were left aside. In 1970, Singapore began to realize that no matter how much low-cost factories it built, it is only a tiny nation with tiny population, and neighboring Malaysia and Indonesia can eventually field a much larger labor force. There is no way it can compete if that occurred, but if Singapore has highly-educated workforce and high tech industries, it would be able to stay ahead.

Singapore early 1970s: Road much better and streets cleaner with slums cleared

Noting its poor infrastructure and low level of education, Singapore then stopped the mass-construction of factories, and instead allocated the funds to education, infrastructure development and factories upgrade. But the country wasn't rich and the budget couldn't support all the projects. Moreover it would take at least one decade before the new batch of highly-skilled workforce could be produced, something the city-state couldn't afford to wait. Singapore decided it wasn't plausible to do it by its own, and appealed to foreigners, opening up the country to foreign investments and skilled foreign immigrants.

The Singaporean leadership promised foreign companies what they loved to hear; the government would be incorruptible, the government would respect capitalism and all foreign investments, with no nationalization or seizure of assets would ever take place, and that Singapore would have regular and predictable law - many third World governments encourage investments but then change the rules at will, this would not be applicable to Singapore. The Lion City kept its promises and enforced them religiously. This differentiated Singapore with other third world nations, and successfully caught the attention of international businesses. Foreign investments began to flush into Singapore.

Sensing that it had won foreign interests, Singapore moved to offer "goodies" like tax concessions, simplified immigration procedures, tariff protection and exemption from import duties, and finally the lifting of foreign exchange controls. This pleased multinational corporations even more and they flocked in en masses, whose capital helped sped up Singapore's development by at least 10 years ahead. The rapid industrialization of Singapore also greatly aided it attracts large pool of talented foreigners, with the skill inflow so massive that, by 2011, 40% of Singapore's population are immigrants (27% non-citizens and another 13% foreign naturalized citizens)

Singapore late 1970s: with mass influx of foreign investments, modern high-rise replacing old buildings

The Singaporean government adopted a business-friendly approach and actively adapt to their needs, for example, in 1970s, when high-tech industries abroad informed Singapore that they wanted labors with adequate technical skills, the city-state immediately launched free government training institutes which would train working adults twice a week for 3-hour sessions over a period of two year to meet that demands. IT companies like Apple Computers was satisfied and located its facilities to Singapore. The good governance, responsive and proactive economic policies of the island attracted even Shell and Esso, who constructed the world's third largest oil-refinery center on Singapore. The foundation to make Singapore a future first world industrialized nation, was planted in this period.


---------------------------------- 1980s -----------------------------------


Stepping into 1980s, the energy crisis had calmed and oil prices subsided. This hit Brunei hard and GDP fell sharply, a price to pay for failing to identify and develop alternate industries in the golden 70s. After Sultanate attained independence in 1984, economic diversification was again being raised. There were 2 economic paths Brunei could take; the nation's environment was ripe for rapid industrialization at the time, but would require the huge absorption of foreign workers. This was the developmental model later taken up by wealthy Gulf states like Kuwait, Dubai and Qatar in their industrialization progress.

Qatar absorbed so much foreign workers that in 2011 the Qatari only account for 20% of the population. Similar case can be applied to Kuwait where only 33% of its population at the moment is Kuwaiti. For Dubai, only 17% of its population are Emirati. Dubai however, has successfully diversified its economy with oil and natural gas currently accounted for less than 6% of the government's revenues.

Brunei 1980s: Seria, excellent infrastructure, living standard high, but very slow progress

Foreign worker absorption of such extent though, is rather impossible in Brunei due to the country's MIB (Melayu Islam Beraja: Malay Islamic Monarchy) philosophy that stressed the ethnic Malay, who make up the majority of Brunei's population, must always remain dominant race in the country. The conservative social and political nature of Brunei also played its role in the hesitation towards opening up the country; the fears that an influx of foreign elements may disrupt the nation's social customs, tradition and religion, together with the concerns that local Bruneian Malay entrepreneurs may not be ready for intense international competition, means the Sultanate would not be seeing the same kind of massive foreign participation like in Singapore.

Plan for industrialization was dropped (which it came to regret later) in favor of investing Brunei's huge foreign reserves overseas. Among Brunei's investments include luxurious hotels in North America and Europe frequented by top ranking Bruneian officials (which later merged to form the Dorchester Collection), the Willeroo Cattle Farm in Australia, which itself is larger than the entire Brunei, and various property assets across the world. The dependence on oil hence continued, though the fisheries and retail industries saw significant expansion at this time.

On the other hand, as a result of massive foreign investments and rapid industrialization, Singapore had emerged as an Asian economic tiger by 1980s. Its industries at this time had been upgraded and equipped with sophisticated technologies way ahead of all other ASEAN states. The country's capital-intensive industrial base had been setup and was ready to transform itself into an advanced, high tech economy. Around this time, as part of its high-tech drive, the island successfully attracted Southeast Asia's first wafer fabrication plant, which by 2011 would help Singapore produced 10% of the world's silicon wafer. The dependence on foreign firms was also noted, in 1980, foreign-owned firms accounted for 73.7% of Singapore's gross output, and 84.7% of its direct exports.

During the 1980s, Singapore's industries had expanded to electronics, computer, shipbuilding and repairing, oil rig construction, chemicals, petroleum refining, and raw materials refining like rubber processing. The first ever economic recession since independence however, took the country by surprise in 1985, devastated Singaporean economy and sent its rapid growth into negative.

The government quickly identified the problems and responded by freezing wages, lowering taxes, and reducing Central Provident Fund contributions. The island was able to nurse itself back to health by 1988, but learnt the painful way that while trying to diversify the economy, it focused too much on high-tech manufacturing. Such lesson would forever changed Singapore, and the country decided to further diverse into service industries as the 'second growth engine', concentrating on the likes of IT, telecommunications, engineering, banking & finance, and medical, while adding more varieties to manufacturing. In 1987, the country built its first MRT line.

 

[Borat]

---------------------------------- 1990s -----------------------------------


With little industrial development, the Bruneian economy began to slow down in 1990s. Increasing emphasis on MIB as a state ideology has also resulted in the banning of alcohol, nightclubs, public celebration of Christmas, and commercial pig farming in 1991. The period also marked a critical time for Brunei; Singapore per capita GDP had grown dangerously near Brunei, while other ASEAN states like Malaysia, Indonesia and Thailand were waking up from their economic slumber.

Brunei 1990s: modern high-rise over capital

Realizing the mistake of not taking part in industrialization earlier on, and being aware that the country might fall behind if industrialization still doesn't take place, the 1991-1995 Brunei's NDP called for industrial promotion and expansion. A number of industrial estates were identified, this include those in capital Bandar Seri Begawan and the Beribi industrial estates, with factories focusing on furniture, pottery, tiles, cement, chemicals, plywood, glass, textiles, food and electrical.

Brunei's push for industrialization came 40 years late. It was something Singapore had done in the 1950s. By that time the wages in Brunei were already considered too high, the industrial base too limited, and technological edge too low to compete with larger neighboring state in terms of scale and cost (ironically, this was the exact concerns in Singapore during the 1960s which led it to shift into high-tech industrial platform)

Moreover, bureaucratic difficulties, poor coordination between government departments, and lengthy approval process deterred foreign investments, which mean the country couldn't count on foreign multinationals unlike Singapore to develop its underdeveloped industrial sector. The country must proceed on its own instead.

Brunei then began a period of 'state-led construction growth' (similar to Singapore's 1960s 'stated-led industrial growth'), initiated a plethora of construction phases and plans across the entire country, leading to the 1990s construction boom to diversify from an oil-reliant economy to one that is service- and tourism-oriented (it was also what Dubai did since 2000) The restriction on foreign workers were temporarily relaxed to allow large-scale projects and landmarks to be constructed, among them were a theme park, a magnificent hotel, and a giant power station.

Singapore 1990s: rich, robust and modern

All these however, was abruptly disrupted in the Asian financial crisis 1997-98. It is not clear if Brunei could have achieved a similar kind of development like in Dubai shall the construction plannings were to be continued. Soon after the construction spree took off, Dubai enacted a law in 2002 that allows non-nationals of the UAE to own property, leading to an inflow of foreign professionals and real estate boom. This was not seen in Brunei, who remains staunchly opposed to foreign ownership.

The Asian crisis shattered Brunei's economy, wiped out half its foreign reserves it never recovered from, and put it to sleep. After that, the country seemingly lost its ambition and economic direction, which would later saw it descended into the slowest-growing economy in the region by next decade.

Singapore had became an exciting place in the 1990s, it had advanced into NICs (Newly Industrialized Country), and was regarded as the land of opportunities. The island had also matured to become the third most important financial center in Asia after Tokyo and Hong Kong. The development and industrialization of Singapore was so rapid at this time it warranted the needs of land reclamation to accommodate new industries. In 1960, the size of Singapore was 581.5 sq km, this had been expanded to 710 sq km in 2011. The country is in progress of adding another 20 sq km of lands from sea.

Singapore overtook the UK by GDP per capita in 1990, all done without natural resources

Explosive industrial growth also mean that the country, in a sudden, found itself having not enough skilled labors. The city-state sweetened its immigration policies; highly-educated foreign talents from anywhere around the world choosing to work in Singapore, would be granted fast-paced PR (Permanent Resident) The huge inflow of top talents gave Singapore a highly competent labor force. In 1996, Singapore was ranked by the World Economic Forum as the most competitive economy in the world. Business Environment Risk Intelligence has rated Singapore's workforce as the best every year since 1980.

An extremely skilled workforce further strengthened its high-tech manufacturing and domestic competitiveness. The country had bred a new generation of local entrepreneurs who successfully competed with and took back the Singaporean economy from foreigners, not by affirmative acts but meritocracy. In 1980, foreign firms contribution to the economy was 73%, but in 1998, Singaporean-owned companies contributed 55% to the economy.

The Asian financial crisis put Singapore into recession, but the government immediately worked out a solution to allow for a gradual 20% depreciation of the Singapore dollar, to bring forward in advance government programs such as the Interim Upgrading Program and other construction related projects, pre-emptively agreed to CPF cuts to lower labor costs, and made no attempt to directly intervene in the capital markets, allowing the Straits Times Index to drop 60%. In less than a year after crisis, the Singaporean economy fully recovered and continued on its growth trajectory.

By the end of 1990s, Singaporean firms are ready to go global. The country signed 13 Free Trade Agreements in order to expand its external trade ties, and advised local companies to go regional. The companies would later be among the largest investors in China, Vietnam, Cambodia, Myanmar and Indonesia.

---------------------------------- 2000s -----------------------------------


Even though the Sultanate did not witness social unrest as seen in neighboring Malaysia and Indonesia at the height of financial crisis, by 2000s, Brunei began to focus on social consolidation and Islamization to preserve 'stability and harmony'. Since 2000, the country's economic stagnation was confirmed, which would led it to become the ASEAN economic laggard later on.

If we adjust the GDP per capita to inflation, Bruneians are actually richer in the late 1970s than now

Singapore GDP per capita adjusted to inflation revealed that Singaporeans today are 4 more richer than in 1970s, compare that to the Bruneian charts above

The 1990s drive for industrialization did not create a thriving manufacturing industries like that of Singapore. Manufacturing in Brunei had never accounted for more than 3% of GDP (it occupied approximately 27% of the Singaporean GDP, 13% of Dubai GDP and 1% Bruneian GDP as of 2011) The government however, refused to accept that it failed on what others succeed (Malta, Luxembourg and Iceland, 3 countries having the closest population to Brunei, for instance, their manufacturing industries accounted for 18-27% while Brunei a mere 1%)

Brunei continues to make attempts for manufacturing, such as partnering with Heidelberg on cement production, Alcoa on aluminum smeltering, and finally the high profile Sg Liang SPARK project with Mitsubishi/Itochu to produce Methanol.

One of the challenges for Brunei though, is the failure to secure consecutive follow-up investments. In its pursue for a strong semiconductor industry, Singapore attracted its first silicon wafer plant in the 1980s, since then this is followed by investments from many other corporations and the island now has 14 silicon wafer plant, 20 semiconductor assembly and test operations center, and about 40 integrated circuit design centres, making it currently the world #2 silicon wafer producer after Taiwan. In Brunei, follow-up investments from other companies after the first, is rare.

Throughout 2000s, Brunei had also tried to expand into service industries such as offshore financial banking, and tourism, with little success. Efforts was also made in food & agriculture, however, the food sufficiency target has not been reached as of 2011. Recognizing that its industries could not compete without a higher level of technologies, Brunei established the iCenter, with aim to nurture the country's technical skills. This is however, again, 40 years late. It was what Singapore had done in the late 1960s.

SPARK - another project attempted to industrialize Brunei

Malaysia and Thailand, whose industries are getting more sophisticated and capital-intensive (i.e. the 1980s Singapore) possess a far advanced industrial technologies estimated 20 years ahead of Brunei, and while Indonesia and Vietnam, the 2 newly emerging economies, are considered low-tech, they have huge production base which Brunei couldn't possibly match.

The 2000s was a period of great economic leap for Singapore. Its diversification into service industries materialized. Singapore had became the medical hub for Southeast Asia, its technological and communication hub, with 50% market share of the region's datacenter capacity. The country's engineering feat is now world's renowned, being responsible for 70% market of global offshore rig construction and 20% of the world's ship repair market. The Port of Singapore surged to be the world's busiest (until it was overtaken in 2009 by Shanghai)

One of the challenges Singapore faced, is the increasing sophistication of industries in neighboring states such as Malaysia and Thailand, who are likewise getting more high-tech. By late 2000s, the computer peripheral industries had been largely lost to Malaysia who is able to produce it more cheaply, and electronics suffered decline, prompting Singapore to identify new industries to support its economy.

Port of Singapore at night

Tourism, biotechnology and gambling were decided. After 40 years ban on casino in Singapore, the prohibition was reversed, perhaps seeing how much surplus and development gambling industries had brought Macau. Singapore set a new tourism goal of 15 million visitors by 2015 (the figure had reached 13 million in 2011) The country aggressively promote and develop its biotechnology industry, investing hundred of millions of dollars were into the sector to build up infrastructure, fund research and development and to recruit top international scientists to Singapore. As of now leading drug makers, such as GlaxoSmithKline (GSK), Pfizer and Merck & Co., have set up plants in Singapore.

The country became a developed country in 2006. Singapore was hit by the global financial crisis 2008-2009 but again quickly rebounded. By the end of the decade, more than 3,000 multinational corporations (MNCs) from the United States, Japan, and Europe are investing in Singapore, in almost all sectors of the economy.


---------------------------------- 2010s -----------------------------------


By mid-2000s, Brunei has a new national vision, the 'Wawasan 2035 Negara Zikir', which called for a pure Islamic economy by 2035. Rapid Islamization then proceed, which include a compulsory Islamic studies for non-Muslim students. The central focus is on the 'Brunei Global Halal Brand', however it is not known how this would generate further revenues for the country. The 'Brunei Halal' actually humored Malaysia and Indonesia, with the two having a stronger Halal Brand and are among the biggest food producer in the Muslim world, but did not seek a global Halal authority like Brunei.

Brunei 2010s - lagged behind Kuching and Kota Kinabalu

The country enacted a sudden credit card regulations in 2009, and in 2012 closed foreign property ownership through PA (Power of Attorney), with all laws being retroactive. This spooked investors and confirmed the fears of third world irregularities, the exact character Singapore promised investors in 1960s it would not be, leading to mass industrialization.

While the state concentrated on development towards building a knowledge-intensive economy, it seems to allow and ignore the continuation of brain-drain and skill outflow from the country. Upon its independence, one of the government's most important priorities is to encourage the development of Brunei Malays as leaders of industry and commerce. Participation of local Malays is required on tendering for contracts with the government or Brunei Shell Petroleum. The ethnic implementation on economic policies effectively deterred foreign talents inflow. In addition, a huge proportion of the country's Iban and Chinese population are denied citizenship, making them stateless.

With their future unsecured and not wanting the same nationality woes for their descendants, the Chinese, an economically active group in Brunei especially in the private sector, flee the country, taking with them their capital and skills to nations like Singapore, Australia and Canada. In 1960s, the ethnic Chinese accounted for 26% of Brunei's population, this had fallen to 18% in 1990s, and yet another plunge to an estimated 11% in 2010. By 2011, Brunei has 20,992 stateless population, amounted to 5% of its population. It is unclear if a knowledge economy could be fulfilled if the country is not willing to even embrace such percentage of its domestic-born population, exacerbating skilled labor shortages.

ASEAN business survey 2012

The rest of ASEAN seemingly have the same views and sentiment on Brunei's economic environment, now stagnated and slowest-growing in the region. In April 2012, the Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy (LKY School), the National University of Singapore, and the Singapore Business Federation (SBF), in association with the ASEAN Business Advisory Council, conducted a survey among businessmen, investors and executives across various industries from all ten ASEAN member economies. The survey asked them which ASEAN countries they and their businesses would invest in.

In the survey, Indonesia was ranked the most favored investment destination to its ASEAN peers, while Brunei the least favored. While Bruneians may have different views, the ASEAN business communities are perceiving it as a nation in decline.

Running into 2010s, Singapore has increasingly focus on knowledge and innovation-intensive activities, with R&D now a cornerstone of the country’s economic development. In hope to maintain its wide technological edge, by 2012 Singapore will be spending $8.8 billion in R&D, with the 9 other ASEAN states combined will spend $8.5 billion. Malaysia will spend $3.2 billion, Indonesia $2.4 billion, Thailand $1.5 billion, Vietnam $0.8 billion, Philippines $0.5 billion while Brunei $0.03 billion.

60 years of good governance and efficient economic planning is bearing fruit for Singapore. In 2010, the economy of Singapore overtook Malaysia, a country 5 times more populated and whom expelled it from the Federation nearly 50 years ago. But the greatest prize is perhaps, the GDP overtaking of rival Hong Kong, a dream Singapore harbored since independence.

Industries in Singapore now include electronics, chemicals, financial services, oil drilling equipment, petroleum refining, rubber processing and rubber products, processed food and beverages, ship repair, offshore platform construction, life sciences & biotech, and entrepot trade. Its innovative yet steadfast form of economics that combines economic planning with free-market has given it the nickname the Singapore Model. Strong export-oriented economy now provide more than enough revenues to purchase natural resources and raw goods which it does not have, a far cry from when it was still a poor and insecure state in the 1960s.

Again reviewing the export statistics, by 2011, the Singaporean (5.2 million population) exports was $409 billion compared to Brunei (0.47 million population) $10.7 billion, a sharp turn from 1960, it is now clear which country is way ahead of another.


Source:

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/commandingheights/...g_economic.html

http://emergenteconomics.com/2012/03/12/718/

http://www.guidemesingapore.com/blog-post/...es-in-singapore

http://www.sedb.com/edb/sg/en_uk/index/abo.../the_2000s.html

http://www.nationsencyclopedia.com/Asia-an...re-ECONOMY.html

http://books.google.com.bn/books?id=z1cpiE...tsec=frontcover

http://library.thinkquest.org/C006891/reclamation.html

http://www.nationsencyclopedia.com/Asia-an...am-HISTORY.html

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_hb02...ag=content;col1

http://www.ats-sea.agr.gc.ca/ase/5674-eng.htm

 

[Leongsam]

LeongSam, I think you have won me over that Singapore is tops. Reading from a Malaysia website of which has been painstakingly put together, it appears Singaporeans has every right to to be proud of their country. Here is the piece which is pretty long and please read it through as it tells the wonderful story of how Singapore managed to be tops.

Yes the Malaysians definitely appreciate what the PAP has done unlike the brain dead sinkies who populate this forum and take Singapore's progress and success for granted.

Ungrateful sinkies should try living somewhere else for a few years and they'll be singing a different tune.

 

[Leongsam]

http://dinmerican.wordpress.com/201...-of-corporate-efficiency-and-good-governance/

Singapore: A Model of Corporate Efficiency and Good Governance
4 Votes
April 21, 2010


Note: This piece (below) was carried on my blog in January, 2009. Given all the talk about the New Economic Model and the ruckus created by PERKASA and other ultra-Malay groups in recent months, I have decided that the tribute to Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew by Dato Ahmad Mustapha, the author of The Unmaking of Malaysia, should reappear here. May it remind us what it will take to rebuild Malaysia and create a rugged society with chutzpah.


Those who want to know the full story of Singapore should read Lee Kuan Yew’s two-volume set of memoirs: The Singapore Story (ISBN 0-13-020803-5), which covers his view of Singapore’s History until its separation from Malaysia in 1965, and From Third World to First: The Singapore Story (ISBN 0060197765), which gives his account of Singapore’s subsequent transformation into a developed nation.–Din Merican


Mahathir’s Nephew, Dato Ahmad Mustapha on Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew of Singapore


Singapore’s Minister Mentor, Lee Kuan Yew, who is Modern Singapore ‘s founding father, has always been very direct in his comments. This was the man who outsmarted the communists in Singapore (with the innocent help of Malaya then and the willing help of the British) and who later outwitted the British and outpaced Malaysia in all spheres.


Meritocracy Vs Affirmative Action (NEP)


Singapore practices corrupt-free meritocracy and Malaysia affirmative action. The former attracted all the best brains and the latter chased out all the brains. The Singapore cabinet consists of dedicated and intelligent technocrats whereas Malaysia has one of the most unwieldy cabinets. Not only that, brain wise it was below par not even good for the kampong.


With that kind of composition, one that is very brainy, naturally Singapore , with no natural resources could outstrip Malaysia in every aspect of development. Malaysia , on the other hand, was too much preoccupied with its Malayness and the illusory ‘Ketuanan Melayu’ and was also more interested in useless mega iconic development rather than real social and economic development.


Whenever Kuan Yew utters anything that deemed to be a slight on Malaysia , voices were raised admonishing him. Malaysia would never dare to face reality. That Singapore had shown that it could survive was a slap on those who believed that Singapore would fold up once it left Malaysia . Therefore it was natural that these doomsayers would try to rationalise their utterances to be in their favour to combat on whatever Kuan Yew commented. It is political jealousy.


Singapore achieved its development status without any fanfare. But here in Malaysia, a development that was deceptive was proclaimed as having achieved development status. It was trumpeted as an achievement that befits first world status. This was self delusion. Malaysians are led to believe in a make believe world, a dream world. The leaders who themselves tend to believe in their own fabricated world did not realise the people were not taken in by this kind of illusion.


Minister Mentor Lee : A Tough and Uncompromising Pragmatist


Lee Kuan Yew believed in calling a spade a spade. I was there in Singapore when the People’s Action Party won the elections in 1959. He was forthright in his briefing to party members as to what was expected of them and what Singapore would face in the future. Ideologically, I did not agree with him. We in the University of Malaya Socialist Club had a different interpretation of socialist reconstruction. But he was a pragmatist and wanted to bring development and welfare to the Singaporeans. Well! He succeeded.


Race Politics in Malaysia


Malaysia was so much embroiled in racial politics and due to the fear of losing political power, all actions taken by the main party in power was never targeted towards bringing wealth to all. Wealth was distributed to the chosen few only. They were the cronies and the backers of the party leadership to perpetuate their own selfish ends.


Seeing the efficiency and the progress achieved by Singapore caused the Malaysian leadership to suffer from an inferiority complex. That Malaysia should suffer from this complex was of its own making.


In a recent interview, Kuan Yew said that Malaysia could have done better if only it treated its minority Chinese and Indian population fairly. Instead they were completely marginalised and many of the best brains left the country in drove. He added that Singapore was a standing indictment to what Malaysia could have done differently. He just hit the nail right there on the head.


Malaysia recently celebrated its 5oth year of independence with a bagful of uncertainties. The racial divide has become more acute. The number of Malay graduates unemployed is on the increase. And this aspect can be very explosive. But sad to see that no positive actions have been taken to address these social ills.


Various excuses were given by Malaysian leaders why Singapore had far outstripped Malaysia in all aspects of social and economic advancement. Singapore was small, they rationalised and therefore easy to manage. Singapore was not a state but merely an island.


UMNO-nization of Government Institutions


There was one other aspect that Malaysia practises and that is to politicise all aspects of life. All government organs and machinery were ‘UMNO-ised’. This was to ensure that the party will remain in power. Thus there was this misconception by the instruments of government as to what national interest is and what UMNO vested interest is.


UMNO Vested Interest and Corruption


UMNO vested interest only benefited a few and not the whole nation. But due to the UMNO-ization of the various instruments of government, the country under the present administration had equated UMNO vested interest as being that of national interest. Thus development became an avenue of making money and not for the benefit of the people. The fight against corruption took a back seat.


Transparency was put on hold. And the instruments of government took it to be of national interest to cater to the vested interest of UMNO. Enforcement of various enactments and laws was selective. Thus a ‘palace’ in Kelang, APs cronies and close-one-eye umno MPs could exist without proper procedure. Corruption infested all government departments, the worse is the police and even in the judiciary.


National Interest First


Singapore did not politicise its instruments of government. If ever politicisation took place, it is guided by national interest. To be efficient and to be the best in the region was of paramount importance. Thus all the elements like corruption, lackadaisical attitude towards work and other black elements, which would retard such an aim, were eliminated. Singapore naturally had placed the right priority in its pursuit to achieve what is best for its people. This is the major difference between these two independent countries.


Habitual Cover-Ups


Malaysia in its various attempts to cover up its failures embarked on several diversions. It wanted its citizens to be proud that the country had the tallest twin-tower in the world, although the structure was designed and built by foreigners. Its now a white-elephant wasting away. It achieved in sending a man into space at an exorbitant price. For what purpose? These are what the Malays of old would say “menang sorak” (hollow victories).


Singapore: A Model of Corporate Efficiency and Good Governance


It should be realised that administering a country can be likened to managing a corporate entity. If the management is efficient and dedicated and know what they are doing, the company will prosper. The reverse will be if the management is poor and bad. The company will go bust.


There are five countries around this region. There is Malaysia , and then Indonesia . To the east there is the Philippines and then there is that small enclave called the Sultanate of Brunei . All these four countries have abundance of natural resources but none can lay claim to have used all these resources to benefit the people. Poverty was rampant and independence had not brought in any significant benefits to the people.


But tiny Singapore without any resources at all managed to bring development to its citizens. It had one of the best public MRT transport systems and airlines in the world and it is a very clean city state. Their universities, health care, ports are among the best in the world.


It is impossible to compare what Singapore has achieved to what all these four countries had so far achieved. It was actually poor management and corruption, and nothing more. Everything is done for the vested interest of the few.


Malaysia, Indonesia and the Philippines and the Sultanate of Brunei need good management teams. They would not be able to do this on their own steam. I would advise that they call on Lee Kuan Yew to show them what good governance is. Why look East to Japan when it is just next door across the causeway.

 

[Leongsam]

6 Responses to “Singapore: A Model of Corporate Efficiency and Good Governance”


LKY sets and maintains very high standards. He is scrupulously clean. He picks the best brains and inducts them into the Party before making them Ministers. Over the past 10-20 years hardly anyone from the Party itself has been made a Minister. Taking into view their earning power in the open market, he pays them top dollars to take care of their economic needs so that they can undertake the Ministerial duties and serve the nation to their maximum capacity without distractions.


What is the worth of his Ministers? I was told of this story. A Minister leading a small delegation to one of the Gulf countries had to brief a high-powered Arab audience on some policy issues, their rationale and implementation in Singapore. He spoke off hands for some 20 mins. No power-point set-ups, no referral notes. He just mesmerised them with his masterly fluid and fluent presentation with plenty of wit and animated gestures. He knew the entire spectrum of the subject matters at his finger tips.


That is the quality of LKY Ministers.


K Das - April 22, 2010 at 8:14 am

 

[Leongsam]

Ethnic strife and good governance – lessons from Singapore


By Dulip Jayawardena


With the end of the war, we should now focus on development attaining economic prosperity and social harmony. To this end the political leadership should emulate Singapore which was propelled from the Third World to the First World within a period of 35 years since independence (1965- 2000). A book written by Lee Kuan Yew the founding father of modern Singapore titled ‘From the Third World to the First’ will provide a lot of inspiration and guidance to the Rajapaksa government in its determination to make Sri Lanka the wonder of Asia.


It must be stressed that the success of Singapore was due to three basic principles of good governance: (1) Stability and cohesion in society, (2) A cultural drive to achieve a thrifty, hard working people always investing in the future with high savingsfor a rainy day and the next generation, and (3) A great reverence for education and knowledge.


I shall now delve into the past history of Sri Lanka and what went wrong during the 62 years since independence in 1948 to present day. There are various reasons for the origin of ethnic strife in Sri Lanka and most of the political analysts attribute it to the Sinhala only policy since 1956. It is a fact the minorities, especially the Tamils, felt discriminated with this language policy as they were disqualified to apply for employment in the state sector. Discrimination of minorities also was seen in education, especially in admission to universities. This gave rise to the evolution of minority political parties who wanted to fight for their basic rights and also to identify the areas in the north and the east of Sri Lanka as their traditional homelands.


Some Tamil political parties also advocated their right for self determination. Most of these political changes gave rise to tension among the Sinhalese and Tamils and this resulted in the Tamil youth taking to arms to fight the government in 1983. The events that took place in Black July led to the internationalization of our ethnic war and the sympathies were with the Tamils who were given refugee status to prevent what was identified as prosecution due to race and ethnic cleansing.


This was the beginning of the build up of the strong Tamil Diaspora in the west which was a formidable force that could influence western countries to bring economic sanctions against Sri Lanka. It is also known that the Tamil Diaspora funded the civil war led by the LTTE. It must be realized that due to the absence of political foresight we have gone through a period of turmoil.


Good, Clean Governance


A firm commitment to good clean governance should be the core of any government which should eschew corruption. In a recent Transparency International survey Singapore was ranked as the third least corrupt nation after New Zealand and Denmark. We should endeavour to at least come 10th in this list if we are to attempt to be a wonder of Asia. Singapore’s efforts to weed out corruption took about 50 years!


It must be stressed that a clean government makes its decisions in the public interest. It is a beacon of confidence to investors who know that the rules of the game are laid down in law and more importantly adhered to. They cannot be changed arbitrarily based on personal favours or relationships. In the absence of good governance people question the fundamental integrity of the system as what happened in Sri Lanka when the finance companies collapsed in 2008 due to the laxity of regulatory controls. It is important that such arrangements are in place in Sri Lanka if more foreign investment is envisaged in the future.


Integrity and Meritocracy


The paramount concepts of ‘Integrity and Meritocracy’ and ‘Good Clean Governance’ are closely intertwined and inalienable. Sri Lanka should emulate Singapore where public officers are selected and promoted based on merit and not on their connections or the favours they can extend in return. But merit and ability is one aspect and personal integrity is another. Only then can we be assured that government officials will act in the public interest. It is important that when mistakes are made by such officials, integrity ensures that these mistakes are acknowledged and responsibility taken for them, rather than covered with blame shifted to others.


Anticipate Change: Stay relevant


Another key principle of governance and leadership is ‘Anticipate change and Stay Relevant’. The Singapore government forecasts global economic variations and anticipates future trends and adjusts relevant policy frameworks in relation to their impacts on the country. Such ‘think tanks’ should be promoted in Sri Lanka who could give long term perspectives on the global market trends and other economic indicators.


Accordingly anticipating change and staying relevant, leaders must remain flexible to respond to such shifting environment and remain alert to opportunities. For instance the Rajapaksa government during the period of the Eelam War from 2006 to 2009 kept development activities going, particularly infrastructure development in the south and also opened its markets for foreign trade as well as promoted foreign investment.


This policy of the government has now reaped the benefits as it is in a very strong position after the war was won. The secret of winning the war was the delegation of responsibilities for decisions in the armed forces which acted in a responsive manner as a team and successfully coordinated all military operations and worked together to deal with issues holistically. With the focus on post war economic and social development, the government should delegate responsibility to individual teams with pre-determined targets and guidelines that work towards required objectives. The report card for ministers as suggested recently by an entrepreneur is one way of monitoring such endeavours.


The Sri Lankan Government should study the Economic Strategies Committee (ESC) of Singapore which was formed in May 2009 before the end of the downturn to develop strategies for Singapore to build the capabilities and capitalize on the opportunities in a new world environment.


Leadership is the key


Leaders must have the conviction to do what is necessary, even if they may not win political points. Leadership was critical during the war with the LTTE from 2006 to 2009 where there were so many uncertainties and criticism from local political opponents as well as internationally on issues related to suppression of human rights and other allegations such as use of excess fire power by the forces.


However, no one can deny that it was the strong political leadership which won the war and liberated the entire country from the world’s most ruthless terrorists.


President Mahinda Rajapaksa should articulate the long term vision for the country under the ‘Mahinda Chintanaya –Idiri Dakma’ and clearly mobilize their stakeholders and steer them to this vision but this will not be effective if he lacks credibility and the trust of the people he leads.

 

[crackhead]

http://videos.howstuffworks.com/adv...on-the-planet-videos-playlist.htm#video-40485

<iframe id="dit-video-embed" width="640" height="360" src="http://static.discoverymedia.com/videos/components/hsw/40485-title/snag-it-player.html?auto=no" frameborder="0" scrolling="no" allowtransparency="true"></iframe>

 

[Jimmy1978]

Propaganda anyone?

 

[Leongsam]

Propaganda anyone?

It would be if it came from SPH. However, our biggest admirers are ordinary folks around from around the world who have experienced how bad a govt can actually be.

Singaporeans who have not experienced life without the PAP are in no position to judge. No govt is perfect but the PAP certainly is a lot closer to perfection than most.

 

[cass888]

You were ahead until you showed this picture. Two architectural attrocities in Singapore - the Durian and the USS Enterprise Supreme Court. Thank god that the Singapore Flyer and MBS managed to mitigate that.

http://www.cnngo.com/singapore/none/worlds-greatest-city-50-reasons-why-singapore-no-1-399897

 

[pretender]

World class water management!

Singapore's standing as GTS hub goes from strength to strength
By Jane Cooper | Published: 01 March, 2012 on the Banker

"Fabulously Successful" - PM John Key's view of Singapore...
NZ PM heads home after Asia trade trip

What Australia can learn from Singapore
Gina Rinehart

Singapore’s model
for success was Philippines

blab blab blab . . . . . . .

no need to talk so much , here is the REAL reason why singapore is able to pull itself up.

first the big question : if the pilippines , the aussie and the kiwis think that they can learn from lky , so why are they still
not successful in running their government ?
for that matter , if our formula is so good why all the other poor countries in the world don't follow it ?

ok now here is the reason why we are able to improve (notice i did not want to say successful ).
sam my boy , you ready for the truth ? can you handle the truth ?

1] chinese is the majority race in this place .
so is taiwan and hongkong , and they are both successful
well developed towns in malaysia and indonesia are mosty
populated by large number of chinese.

2] this place is very tiny as compared to other countries.
makes it easier to run and control -- think of running a whole university and
just a class of primary 6.

3] this place has autocratic gov.
which make control and regulation as easy as abc.

4] the people of this cuntry is extremely obedient , not that they are good nature ,
rather because they are kia-si and kia-su , and totally brain washed since school days.

if the great leader of singapore were to try his tactics in other countries , he would be long gone by now.

sammy my boy , this is the hard truth.
we came this far certainly not due to some self proclaimed smart men, it it the concerted effort of each and everyone ,
especially those who were in their 20s and 30s during the 60s era.

 

[Cruxx]

I've an even simpler explanation

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(nominal)_per_capita

Look at those at the top: Monaco, Liechtenstein, Luxembourg - all tiny tax havens, just like Singapore. Kuan Yew can't even get a simple project like the Suzhou Industrial Park right. He was wrong about the price of oil. He was wrong about bilingualism. He was wrong about Lehman Brothers. He was wrong about the "golden period" that Singapore was supposed to be enjoying in 2007 at the same time when economists were warning about impending doom. The man is clearly out of his depth.

 

[Leongsam]

Singapore’s Economy Continues to Rise

On March 26, 2012, in Doing Business in Singapore,


Led by growth in the electronics and pharmaceutical sectors, Singapore’s exports posted a strong showing last month, offering strong evidence of a healthy economic rebound for the Asia-Pacific region. Singapore is Asia’s wealthiest nation and a bellwether for the region’s economy. Singapore’s non-oil exports jumped by more than 30 percent in February, compared to the same period in 2011.

Adding to the good news, last month Singapore’s electronics exports rose by 23.3% over last year’s figures, and pharmaceutical exports increased by an amazing 44.5%, more than doubling January’s 20.2% rise. According to economists, Singapore’s February export numbers indicate that the economy will likely show good growth during the first quarter, avoiding a recession. In spite of continued economic concerns around the world, Singapore’s economy grew by 4.9 per cent in 2011.

Looking to the future and given Singapore’s strategic location and business-friendly policies, perhaps the most important function served by the country is its role as a facilitator of trade and international capital flows. Global economic activity will continue to travel to the east and south, transferring significant klout from traditional economic giants such as North America and Western Europe to the emerging powers of China, India, Brazil and Indonesia. Increasing number of small and large companies are incorporating in Singapore and making the city-state as their corporate headquarters.