- Joined
- Jan 13, 2009
- Messages
- 131
- Points
- 18
Seriously, folks, were there ANY doubts at all as to him saying "No"? 
ST forum: Feb 19, 2009
USE OF PAST RESERVES
President Nathan did the right thing
I REFER to yesterday's report, 'Use of past reserves - Why I said yes'.
President S R Nathan has exhibited exemplary leadership at the highest level in our nation, when he exercised his independence and the authority of his office to consider and ultimately decide to draw on past reserves to resuscitate a rapidly declining economy.
Some have made the criticism that the important and unprecedented decision was taken hastily, but as Mr Nathan has clearly explained, he had at his perusal all the essential information he needed, with access to the objective and professional advice of members of the Council of Presidential Advisers.
There is no empirical evidence to show that the more time taken to arrive at a decision, the better its outcome. It is contingent on the circumstances of each situation and, in this case, 11 days was not too short a time to arrive at the decision. A prolonged and wavering process would have done untold damage to the economy.
This draw on past reserves to fund the Jobs Credit scheme and the Special Risk- sharing Initiative are no panacea for our economic problems and probably much more will need to be done.
But this by no means indicates that it was a wrong decision by the President. To use a metaphor, we are only a small boat in a stormy sea and, while we can try to strengthen our sails to the best of our ability, much depends on the weather ahead over which, sadly, we have little control.
Dr Edmund Lam
ST forum: Feb 19, 2009
USE OF PAST RESERVES
President Nathan did the right thing
I REFER to yesterday's report, 'Use of past reserves - Why I said yes'.
President S R Nathan has exhibited exemplary leadership at the highest level in our nation, when he exercised his independence and the authority of his office to consider and ultimately decide to draw on past reserves to resuscitate a rapidly declining economy.
Some have made the criticism that the important and unprecedented decision was taken hastily, but as Mr Nathan has clearly explained, he had at his perusal all the essential information he needed, with access to the objective and professional advice of members of the Council of Presidential Advisers.
There is no empirical evidence to show that the more time taken to arrive at a decision, the better its outcome. It is contingent on the circumstances of each situation and, in this case, 11 days was not too short a time to arrive at the decision. A prolonged and wavering process would have done untold damage to the economy.
This draw on past reserves to fund the Jobs Credit scheme and the Special Risk- sharing Initiative are no panacea for our economic problems and probably much more will need to be done.
But this by no means indicates that it was a wrong decision by the President. To use a metaphor, we are only a small boat in a stormy sea and, while we can try to strengthen our sails to the best of our ability, much depends on the weather ahead over which, sadly, we have little control.
Dr Edmund Lam
