104
CHANGING MINDSETS, DEEPENING RELATIONSHIPS The Report of the Remaking Singapore Committee

Remaking Singapore (2003)

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

Page 1: Remaking Singapore (2003)

CHANGING MINDSETS,DEEPENING RELATIONSHIPS

The Report of the Remaking Singapore Committee

Page 2: Remaking Singapore (2003)
Page 3: Remaking Singapore (2003)

C h a n g i n g M i n d s e t s , D e e p e n i n g R e l a t i o n s h i p s 1

CHANGING MINDSETS,DEEPENING RELATIONSHIPS

The Report of the Remaking Singapore Committee

Page 4: Remaking Singapore (2003)

C h a n g i n g M i n d s e t s , D e e p e n i n g R e l a t i o n s h i p s

Page 5: Remaking Singapore (2003)

C h a n g i n g M i n d s e t s , D e e p e n i n g R e l a t i o n s h i p s 3

Page 6: Remaking Singapore (2003)

C h a n g i n g M i n d s e t s , D e e p e n i n g R e l a t i o n s h i p s

Dr Ng Eng Hen

Mr Raymond Lim

Mr Hawazi Daipi

Dr Vivian Balakrishnan

(Chairman)

Mr Cedric Foo

Dr Balaji Sadasivan

Page 7: Remaking Singapore (2003)

C h a n g i n g M i n d s e t s , D e e p e n i n g R e l a t i o n s h i p s 5

Mr S Iswaran

Mr Ong Kian Min

Mr Bambang Sugeng

Ms Goh Sin Hwee

Ms Eleanor Wong

Mrs Lim Hwee Hua

Mr Sin Boon Ann

Mr Warren Fernandez

Dr Tan Chong Kee

Page 8: Remaking Singapore (2003)

C h a n g i n g M i n d s e t s , D e e p e n i n g R e l a t i o n s h i p s

Page 9: Remaking Singapore (2003)

C h a n g i n g M i n d s e t s , D e e p e n i n g R e l a t i o n s h i p s 7

Page 10: Remaking Singapore (2003)

C h a n g i n g M i n d s e t s , D e e p e n i n g R e l a t i o n s h i p s

Page 11: Remaking Singapore (2003)

9C h a n g i n g M i n d s e t s , D e e p e n i n g R e l a t i o n s h i p s C O N T E N T S

Executive Summary 10

Chapter 1: Overview 14Why Remake Singapore ? 16What Is A Remade Singapore ? 18How Should We Remake Singapore ? 19

Chapter 2: A Home For All Singaporeans 22A Enhancing Identification With The Ideals Of The Nation 24B Strengthening Cohesion Between People Of Different Races, Languages And Religions 27C Enhancing Our Ability To Integrate New Singaporeans 29D Developing Global Networks of Singaporeans 30E Education – Harnessing Diversity In Talent 32

Chapter 3: A Home Owned 40A Enlarging Space For Expression And Experimentation 42B Encouraging Participation 45

Chapter 4: A Home For All Seasons 52A A Gracious, Compassionate And Cohesive Society 54B Enabling The Full Participation Of All Segments Of Society 57

Chapter 5: A Home to Cherish 62A Promoting Equal Opportunities 64B Strengthening Families As The First Line Of Support 66C Preserving Memories, Building Shared History 68D Improving The Environment For Participation And Fun 73

Chapter 6: The Way Forward 78A Network of “Community Champions” 80A Closing Word: Of Mindset Changes, Good Governance And Stout Hearts 81

Annex: Proposals Without Consensus 84

Credits 90

CONTENTS

Page 12: Remaking Singapore (2003)

10 C h a n g i n g M i n d s e t s , D e e p e n i n g R e l a t i o n s h i p s

Why Remake Singapore?

Singapore is at a critical juncture of its history. Our

survival depends on how we face several

simultaneous social and economic challenges in

the future. The social, cultural, political

and economic dimensions of our nation are

inextricably intertwined, and must be addressed

comprehensively. Four fundamental developments

carry profound implications for Singapore’s future:

• Our economy is at a turning point. The

enormous challenges facing us are described

in the report of the Economic Review

Committee, together with the opportunities and

threats they pose, and the path we must take.

In summary, Singapore’s economy and society

must restructure, and do so quickly. Failure to

do so will cost us our economic relevance and

our livelihood.

• Restructuring will come at a price. Some

Singaporeans may not be able to

cope with these disruptive changes. This will

strain our social compact and sense of

cohesion. Our systems, constructed in a time

of full and secure employment, will need a

thorough review given the new realities.

• Tribal fault lines have been accentuated.

Although race, language and religion have

Executive

Summary

always posed challenges in Singapore’s

context, recent global trends point to an

escalation in religious and ideological

extremism. Even as we protect our country

from potential physical danger, we need to

ensure that these globalised ideological

battles do not threaten our social fabric.

• Singapore’s success has also engendered a

more educated, sophisticated and mobile

citizenry. Singaporeans increasingly seek not

just higher-order outcomes, but also

involvement in the process. At the same time,

such involvement is imperative if our citizens

are to have a continued sense of belonging and

ownership in Singapore.

The Remaking Singapore Committee has set out to

address these challenges through a review

of social, cultural and political policies, programmes

and practices.

What Is A Remade Singapore?

The Committee offers a vision of how a remade

Singapore will look and feel:

“Singapore is remade through Singaporeans. A

remade Singapore will be filled with Singaporeans

actively pursuing our dreams, taking different roads

to success, and reaching our destinations through

our own efforts. We will embrace a diversity of

peoples and ideas, yet we are also committed to

growing our commonalities. We will give back to

society and we will make a difference to others. We

will lead full and fulfilling lives in a Singapore that

we proudly call Home.”

Page 13: Remaking Singapore (2003)

11C h a n g i n g M i n d s e t s , D e e p e n i n g R e l a t i o n s h i p sE X E C U T I V E S U M M A R Y

How ShouldWe Remake Singapore?

The Committee has identified four themes for

renewal and change:

A Home for All SingaporeansSingaporeans come in various shades, hold to

various faiths, speak a variety of languages, have

a wide range of talents and passions, and

increasingly, live in various places. This diversity,

while a source of tension, is also a source of strength.

It enriches the Singaporean identity, makes us a more

vibrant and creative society, and endows us with the

instincts to get along in a multi-cultural setting. Most

importantly, a Singapore that accepts diversity is one

which all Singaporeans can instinctively call home.

At the same time, the foundation of commonality

must be strong if our society is to be viable. This

is particularly so as we bring in new Singaporeans

from beyond our shores. We need to reaffirm

and promulgate shared values, find and grow

common spaces, share collective experiences

and strengthen emotional bonds among

Singaporeans. Singapore must be a place where we

can pursue a collective search for happiness,

prosperity and progress.

There will be constant tension between common

space and diversity. The key to finding the right

balance is accommodation. Diversity need not be

incompatible with forging a strong national identity,

if all parties consider our shared fortunes and

future as Singaporeans, and are committed to

realising that future together.

The recommendations under this theme focus on

enhancing identification with the nation,

strengthening inter-communal cohesion, integrating

new Singaporeans, developing global networks of

Singaporeans, and harnessing diversity in talent

through education.

A Home OwnedThe post-Independence generation desires greater

choice and flexibility, more avenues for expression,

and opportunities to participate meaningfully in

national and community life. In short, they

seek involvement and ownership. The relationship

between government and people will evolve as a

result. The government will have to play a less

prescriptive, more facilitative role. Concurrently,

Singaporeans must assume the responsibility that

comes with greater ownership. Singapore should

be a place where people can make informed

choices, and decide on the level of risk they are

comfortable with.

The recommendations under this theme aim to

enlarge space for expression and experimentation

through a lighter regulatory touch. Other

recommendations are targetted at encouraging

participation in national political processes and

community life.

A Home for All SeasonsOur transformation into a knowledge-intensive

economy will provide many opportunities for

people to add value through their skills and

creativity. However, there will remain a significant

segment that may lag behind. The volatility of the

global economy also means that workers at all

levels may find themselves more frequently

without or in between jobs.

Page 14: Remaking Singapore (2003)

12 C h a n g i n g M i n d s e t s , D e e p e n i n g R e l a t i o n s h i p s

If Singapore is to be a home, its citizens must know

that they can count on help if life has dealt them a

harsh blow. The balance to be struck is

how this can be done without eroding the spirit of

self-reliance so critical to our next phase of

economic development.

The recommendations under this theme aim to

promote a more gracious and compassionate

society through fine-tuning the social safety net,

providing holistic assistance to the structurally

unemployed, and enabling the full participation of

all segments of our society.

A Home to CherishOur maturity as a nation is reflected not just in our

economy but also in the way our society and culture

have advanced. What created value, fulfilment and

rootedness in the past may not do so now. We need

to examine which aspects of our quality of life can

be advanced. For one, the patriarchal model

of family should change to recognise that

many women are already valuable economic

contributors and significant wage earners in their

own right, and more will join the workforce in the

years ahead. The stresses of urban life in a

globalised world will need to find their relief,

whether through family, friends or recreation.

Finally, we should strive towards a balanced

conservation of heritage icons and natural features

that uniquely define a Singaporean experience for

our people.

The recommendations under this theme aim to

promote equal opportunities, strengthen families

as the first line of support, preserve and build

shared memories and improve the environment for

participation and fun.

The Way ForwardThe recommendations in this report are not merely

short-term tactics aimed at Singapore’s immediate

survival. Taken collectively, these recommendations

attempt to address comprehensively the long-term

challenges confronting Singapore, by focusing

on transforming the mindsets and relationships of

our citizens. This will result in corresponding

downstream changes in the social, cultural, political

and economic operating environment.

Nonetheless, the process cannot end here,

particularly in the context of relentless change.

The Committee therefore encourages “community

champions” to step forward to adopt selected

recommendations, and to work with the

government to move them forward. These

“community champions” can form a network to

keep track of the progress and implementation, and

continue the exchange of information and ideas,

both among themselves and with the government.

This is one way to ensure that the engagement that

underlies the Remaking Singapore Committee

process continues. On its part, the Committee is

confident that the government will reciprocate and

remain engaged in remaking Singapore.

Although the Committee’s focus has been on

implementable recommendations, the underlying

challenge is a long-term one: to remake

Singaporean mindsets from one of expectation

to one of aspiration. Expectation-oriented

Singaporeans are passive and dependent on the

system to deliver and measure their success.

E X E C U T I V E S U M M A R Y

Page 15: Remaking Singapore (2003)

13C h a n g i n g M i n d s e t s , D e e p e n i n g R e l a t i o n s h i p sE X E C U T I V E S U M M A R Y

Aspiration-oriented Singaporeans drive themselves

to achieve success, and are prepared to go beyond

the comfort zone offered by a familiar system;

they will benchmark themselves against

external yardsticks, or against measures of their

own devising.

Aspiration-driven Singaporeans will increase the

dynamism of Singapore society. But they are also

less likely to look to the government to improve

their well-being. In such a situation, the relationship

between the government and people will

necessarily be reshaped. The government will play

a less direct role in determining the well-being of

Singaporeans, focusing instead on creating

opportunities and facilitating the efforts of

aspiration-driven Singaporeans to achieve success

themselves. At the same time, some fundamentals

of the relationship will remain: decisive government

action, close people-government cooperation,

trust, and open communication channels.

Remaking Singapore must be an ongoing process.It is a process that calls for commitment and

an unquenchable desire to want Singapore to

succeed. And it will involve everyone who calls

Singapore “home”.

Page 16: Remaking Singapore (2003)

14 O V E R V I E W C h a n g i n g M i n d s e t s , D e e p e n i n g R e l a t i o n s h i p s

Page 17: Remaking Singapore (2003)

15O V E R V I E WC h a n g i n g M i n d s e t s , D e e p e n i n g R e l a t i o n s h i p s

C h a n g i n g M i n d s e t s , D e e p e n i n g R e l a t i o n s h i p s

OVERVIEWC H A P T E R 1

Page 18: Remaking Singapore (2003)

16 O V E R V I E W C h a n g i n g M i n d s e t s , D e e p e n i n g R e l a t i o n s h i p s

WHY REMAKE SINGAPORE?

Singapore has experienced close to four decades of

nationhood. During this time, we have achieved a

degree of material and social success that has made

us the envy of many around the world. We withstood

Separation, Konfrontasi and the communist threat.

From that tumult we forged a nation based on the

principles of meritocracy, religious freedom, racial

harmony, and the pursuit of excellence. We educated

and housed a growing population. We built an

economy that has been consistently ranked among

the world’s most competitive.

The metamorphosis of our country from backwater

city to busy metropolis has dramatically improved

the lives of many Singaporeans. The journey has

bonded a generation of Singaporeans to the nation.

Yet our transformation efforts cannot cease. The

world around us is changing relentlessly, as are

the needs and aspirations of our own citizens.

Four fundamental factors will have profoundimplications for Singapore’s future:

• The economy at a turning point. Singapore

is at a critical juncture of its economic

development. The challenges we face going

forward are unprecedented. Among them are

globalisation, the technological revolution,

new and formidable competitors, and the

realities of our current economic structure.

These are described in the report of the

Economic Review Committee, together with

the opportunities and threats they pose, and

the path we must take. In summary,

Singapore’s economy must restructure, and do

so quickly. This restructuring can only be

effective if it is accompanied by changes to

our society and culture. Singapore must be an

attractive place to the kinds of economic

pursuits and talents that we want.

Singaporeans must develop the values,

attitudes, skills, innovativeness and

entrepreneurship necessary for an

increasingly competitive and complex world.

If we succeed, we will survive and flourish. If

we fail, we risk losing our economic relevance,

and our livelihood.

• Fallout from restructuring. Not everyone will

be able to adapt quickly enough to these drastic

changes. Income disparities will, in all

likelihood, widen. The social compact and sense

of cohesion among Singaporeans will be

strained, particularly if social mobility is

perceived to have worsened. Many of our

systems were constructed on the assumption

of full and secure employment, but new realities

will necessitate a thorough review, especially

of our social safety nets.

• Accentuated tribal fault lines. As a diverse

society, Singapore has always had to build

internal cohesion in the context of powerful

and potentially divisive forces of ethnicity,

language and religion. But recent events have

highlighted the trend of escalating religious

and ideological extremism, invigorated by

globalisation and new technologies. We

cannot control external forces, but we can

fortify our internal defences against potential

rifts. We will work to protect our country

physically from the clear and present danger

of violence and force. At the same time, we

must fight with renewed vigour, the more

insidious globalised battle between extremist

ideas and the values our society holds dear.

The metamorphosisof our country frombackwater city tobusy metropolis hasdramatically improvedthe lives of manySingaporeans. Thejourney has bondeda generation ofSingaporeans tothe nation.

Page 19: Remaking Singapore (2003)

17O V E R V I E WC h a n g i n g M i n d s e t s , D e e p e n i n g R e l a t i o n s h i p s

• Complex loyalties and identities. Singapore’s

very success is also the genesis of a significant

challenge – that of a more educated,

sophisticated and mobile citizenry. “We the

people” are now more complex and

demanding. Our options have multiplied.

Increasingly, Singaporeans seek not only

higher-order outcomes, but also involvement

in the process. At the same time, such

involvement is imperative if our citizens are to

have a continued sense of belonging and

ownership in Singapore.

Crises, Lessons and Hope

To address these and other challenges, the

Remaking Singapore Committee (RSC) was formed

in February 2002, as the social, political and cultural

counterpart to the Economic Review Committee. A

large part of the Committee’s work was carried out

against the backdrop of a persistent economic

slowdown, and stresses on our social cohesion

caused by regional terrorist activities and the warin the Gulf. The RSC’s deliberations were also

punctuated by the chilling revelation of Jemaah

Islamiyah (JI) operations in Singapore, and the

horrific bombings in neighbouring Bali. All of these

served as powerful reminders of the fragility of the

life we enjoy in Singapore.

Just as the Committee was ready to begin

consolidating its final recommendations and report,

Singapore was hit by the SARS outbreak. Our work

came to a standstill as RSC Ministers, and many RSC

members, battled to contain and conquer the virus

on several fronts. It was a time of deep crisis for

the nation. Lives were being lost, schools were shut,

shops and streets were empty, business travellers

and tourists gave us a wide berth, and the economy

was hurting. Singaporeans were afraid for their

health, their loved ones and their livelihoods.

Yet through the SARS crisis, we discovered what we

were capable of. The public, people and private

sectors collaborated in unprecedented ways, as

traditional tensions and rivalries were put aside. The

government’s transparency in handling the crisis

engendered confidence, while Singaporeans

responded with maturity to the openness.

Singaporeans demonstrated their generosity and

compassion – the Courage Fund raised millions in

the space of a few weeks, and volunteers came

forward to help.

The events since 2002 have highlighted three

important lessons for the process of remaking

Singapore. First, Singaporeans look to the

authorities to act decisively to tackle major issues,

be they economic restructuring, the threat of

terrorist attacks or containing the spread of a virus.

It is therefore critical to recognise that even as weremake Singapore, there is a time and place for the

government to act decisively and to mobilise the

country as one. This capability is a valuable national

resource that should be preserved.

Second, surmounting critical national challenges will

require extensive cooperation between state and

society. Since the JI arrests, various ethnic and

religious communities have worked with the

government to publicly reject religious extremism,

to foster inter-communal confidence and to re-affirm

the importance of accommodation and communal

harmony in Singapore. The SARS outbreak also

witnessed individuals and groups from all walks of

life collaborating with the government and each

other, to contain the virus, provide aid and solace to

Page 20: Remaking Singapore (2003)

18 O V E R V I E W C h a n g i n g M i n d s e t s , D e e p e n i n g R e l a t i o n s h i p s

the affected, and strengthen the sense of individual

and social responsibility.

The lesson is clear: the relationship between the

government and the people should not be viewed

as a zero-sum game. The greatest benefits arise

when both parties work with one another. This is a

theme that permeates various parts of the Remaking

Singapore report.

Third, trust, whether between people and government

or between communities, is a hard-earned commodity

that can easily dissipate in periods of crises. One way

to earn and retain this trust is to keep the

communication channels between parties open. When

the Singaporean JI members were arrested, the

government kept the public informed about the

arrests, the JI activities in Singapore, and the various

security measures in place. During the SARS outbreak,

the government put out a lot of information about the

virus, the steps being taken to contain it, and frankly

admitted the shortcomings of some of its measures.

The transparency had risks, such as generating publicalarm and community disquiet. But there were

also important gains. The information helped

Singaporeans understand the nature of the threats,

engaged the public’s help in implementing measures,

and reinforced their confidence in public safety.

Singaporeans responded with maturity, resolve, and

even courage.

These three qualities – decisive government action,

close people-government partnership and open

communication channels – in recent crises have

helped Singapore to move swiftly and effectively as a

nation. Indeed, they helped us to stand out as a

country. They will remain key as we remake Singapore.

The RSC resumed its work in June 2003. Instead of

dismay, there was a strong sense of hope. The SARS

outbreak may have exposed our vulnerabilities as a

small and open economy. But it has also shown us

what we are capable of as a nation. Remaking

Singapore is not just about problems to be solved,

but possibilities to be exploited.

WHAT IS A REMADE SINGAPORE?

The Committee was enthused by the vision outlined

in the Economic Review Committee Report, to

make Singapore:

“…a leading global city, a hub of talent, enterprise

and innovation. Singapore will become the most

open and cosmopolitan city in Asia, and one of the

best places to live and work.

In another decade and a half, Singapore will

connect China, India and Southeast Asia, and

beyond. We will become an Asian centre of choice

for global talent, attracting skilled technicians,

managers, entrepreneurs and creative people from

all over the world. We will be a creative andinnovative society, always eager to try out new

ideas and change for the better, with a culture that

respects achievement in the sciences and the arts.”

(Economic Review Committee Report, Executive

Summary, page 5.)

We would like to complement this with a vision of

the social, cultural and political dimensions of a

remade Singapore:

“Singapore is remade through Singaporeans. A

remade Singapore will be filled with Singaporeans

actively pursuing our dreams, taking different roads

to success, and reaching our destinations through

our own efforts. We will embrace a diversity of

peoples and ideas, yet we are also committed to

growing our commonalities. We will give back to

“Singapore is remadethrough Singaporeans.A remade Singaporewill be filled withSingaporeans activelypursuing our dreams,taking different roadsto success, andreaching ourdestinations throughour own efforts. We willembrace a diversity ofpeoples and ideas, yetwe are also committedto growing ourcommonalities. Wewill give back tosociety and we willmake a difference toothers. We will leadfull and fulfilling livesin a Singapore thatwe proudly call Home.”

Page 21: Remaking Singapore (2003)

19O V E R V I E WC h a n g i n g M i n d s e t s , D e e p e n i n g R e l a t i o n s h i p s

society and we will make a difference to others. We

will lead full and fulfilling lives in a Singapore that

we proudly call Home.”

HOW SHOULD WE REMAKESINGAPORE?

As a response to the challenges highlighted earlier,

and to bring us closer to our vision, the Committee

has identified four themes for renewal and change.

A Home for All Singaporeans

We are not a homogenous people. Singaporeans

come in various shades, hold to various faiths,

speak a variety of languages, have a wide range of

talents and passions, and increasingly, live in

various places.

This diversity is often framed as a challenge to

national identity and social cohesion. But diversity

is also a source of strength. It enriches our

understanding of what it means to be Singaporean,constantly challenging us to negotiate and

embrace our differences, while celebrating our

commonality. It provides a fertile ground for

creativity, innovation and a more vibrant society.

It hardwires Singaporeans with the instincts

for interacting well with international cultures

and peoples. Most importantly, a Singapore that

accepts diversity is one which all Singaporeans can

instinctively call home.

At the same time, the foundation of commonality

must be strong if our society is to be viable. This is

particularly so as we bring in new Singaporeans

from beyond our shores. We need to reaffirm and

promulgate the concept of a Singaporean

Singapore, based on values such as tolerance,

Page 22: Remaking Singapore (2003)

20 O V E R V I E W C h a n g i n g M i n d s e t s , D e e p e n i n g R e l a t i o n s h i p s

meritocracy, opportunities, and social justice for all.

Singapore society must remain one where people

of different races, religions and backgrounds have

the freedom to express their heritage and beliefs,

while understanding and respecting those ofothers. It must be a place where we can pursue a

collective search for happiness, prosperity and

progress. We need to find and grow common

spaces, share collective experiences and strengthen

emotional bonds among Singaporeans.

There will exist a constant tension between cohesion

and common space on the one hand, and diversity on

the other. The key to finding the right balance is

accommodation. Some Singaporeans will hold strong

views, especially on matters of faith or ethnic identity.

These can be expressed as part of the dynamic

interplay between diversity and cohesion. Yet

advocates must also recognise that in a society of

many views, beliefs and identities, strongly asserted

views that appeal only to a limited segment of

Singaporeans will invariably lead to a backlash from

the rest, and possibly even marginalisation. Diversity

need not be incompatible with forging a strong

national identity, if all parties consider our shared

fortunes and future as Singaporeans, and are

committed to realising that future together.

One other dimension of diversity is geographical.

Globalisation requires us to think of Singapore

beyond its physical territory. Even as we are taking

in immigrants, Singaporeans are moving out to other

parts of the world. We need to find ways to integrate

the newcomers, and to facilitate the participation of

overseas Singaporeans in Singapore’s progress.

The strategic thrusts under this theme are:

• Enhancing identification with the ideals of

the nation

• Strengthening cohesion among people of

different races, languages and religions

• Enhancing our ability to integrate newSingaporeans

• Developing global networks of Singaporeans

• Harnessing diversity in talent through education

A Home Owned

The post-Independence generation desires greater

choice and flexibility, more avenues for expression,

and opportunities to participate meaningfully in

national and community life. In short, they seek

involvement and ownership. The relationship between

government and people will need to evolve as a result.

No matter how fast or slow, the direction of change is

clear: the government will have to adopt a less

prescriptive mode, and play a more facilitatory role.

Page 23: Remaking Singapore (2003)

21O V E R V I E WC h a n g i n g M i n d s e t s , D e e p e n i n g R e l a t i o n s h i p s

Concurrently, Singaporeans must assume the

responsibility that comes with ownership. As the

scope for expression increases, Singaporeans must

not only be prepared to accommodate a more diverse

range of views; they must also be sensitive to the

impact on the well-being of their local community

and of the wider society.

The strategic thrusts under this theme are:

• Enlarging space for expression and

experimentation

• Encouraging participation in national political

processes and community life

A Home for All Seasons

Our transformation into a knowledge-intensive

economy will provide many opportunities for people

to add value through their skills and creativity,

whether as employees or as entrepreneurs. However,

there will remain a significant segment that may lagbehind. The volatility of the global economy also

means that workers at all levels may find themselves

more frequently without or in between jobs.

It has been said that a society can be judged by the

way it treats its weakest members. If Singapore is

to be a home, its citizens must know that they can

count on help if life has dealt them a harsh blow.

The balance to be struck is how to do this without

eroding the spirit of self-reliance so critical to our

next phase of economic development.

The social safety net will need to be refocused in

the light of these new realities. In addition to the

government, social and civic organisations will also

have to play more conspicuous roles.

The strategic thrusts under this theme are:

• Promoting a gracious and compassionate society

• Enabling full participation of all segments of

our society

A Home to Cherish

Our maturity as a nation is reflected not just in our

economy but also in the way our society and culture

have advanced. What created value, fulfilment and

rootedness in the past may not do so now. We need

to examine which aspects of our quality of life can

be advanced. For one, the patriarchal model of

family should change to recognise that many

women are already valuable economic contributors

and significant wage-earners in their own right, and

more will join the workforce in the years ahead. The

stresses of urban life in a globalised world will need

to find their relief, whether through family, friends

or recreation. Finally, we should strive towards a

balanced conservation of heritage icons and naturalfeatures that uniquely define a Singaporean

experience for our people.

The strategic thrusts under this theme are:

• Promoting equal opportunities

• Strengthening families as the first line of

support

• Preserving and building shared memories

• Improving the environment for participation

and fun

It has been said that asociety can be judgedby the way it treats itsweakest members.If Singapore is to bea home, its citizensmust know that theycan count on help iflife has dealt them aharsh blow.

Page 24: Remaking Singapore (2003)
Page 25: Remaking Singapore (2003)

A HOMEFOR ALLSINGAPOREANS

C H A P T E R 2C h a n g i n g M i n d s e t s , D e e p e n i n g R e l a t i o n s h i p s

Page 26: Remaking Singapore (2003)

2424242424 C h a n g i n g M i n d s e t s , D e e p e n i n g R e l a t i o n s h i p sA H O M E F O R A L L S I N G A P O R E A N S

A ENHANCING IDENTIFICATIONWITH THE IDEALS OF THENATION

There are ongoing efforts to deepen Singaporeans’

sense of identification with the nation. These will be

enhanced by promoting a better understanding of

what being “Singaporean” means, and by liberalising

the use of national symbols.

Renew vision of a Singaporean Singapore. The

concept of a Singaporean Singapore, which

encapsulates the ideas of equal responsibilities,

diversity and belonging, still resonates with the

population and should continue to be celebrated.

It provides the raison d’être for Singapore: the

creation of a nation from diverse immigrant stock.

One possible formulation is shown below.

Encourage greater identification with and use ofNational Symbols. National symbols are powerful

icons representing a country. In Singapore, these

are the Flag, the National Anthem, the National Coat

of Arms, the Pledge and the Lion symbol. Their

use at appropriate occasions can be meaningful

and moving.

The Ministry of Information, Communications, and

the Arts (MITA) has produced and marketed a

National Symbols Kit to showcase Singapore’s

National Symbols. The kit contains the National

Flag, a VCD on the National Anthem, and a booklet

on the origins of and guidelines on the use of

the symbols.

However, such attempts at promoting

understanding of the National Symbols have not

been accompanied by corresponding efforts to

further facilitate their use. One notable exception

was the relaxation of guidelines on the playing of

the National Anthem. Previously, aside from a few

stated occasions such as local school assembliesand official State ceremonies, approval had to be

sought from the Prime Minister’s Office (PMO) to

play the National Anthem. Since 2000, public and

private organisations have been allowed to play and

sing the National Anthem on all occasions

pertaining to National Day celebrations and at

events of national significance e.g. sports,

community, government and corporate events.

Currently, restrictions still apply to the other

National Symbols:

• National Flag – At present, the display of the

National Flag is only allowed in government-

owned buildings. An exception is made during

the National Day celebrations period from 1 to

A Singaporean Singapore reflects the dreams andaspirations of Singaporeans. It has the power toevoke passion and pride in its people. It is whereemotional ties bring Singaporeans together to callthis their ‘home’.

A Singaporean Singapore is premised on the sharedbelief that:

• The will of a people and the will of the peopleto be a nation are founded on self determinationand self-reliance.

• Every Singaporean has an equal opportunityto be the very best he can be. He has the rightand is expected to participate and contributeto the nation in his own way.

• Every individual knows that he or she,regardless of race, language, religion, genderor age, is assured of justice and fairness.

• Anchored in shared experiences, we are asociety that values diversity and matureswith greater mutual appreciation and trust.

Page 27: Remaking Singapore (2003)

25A H O M E F O R A L L S I N G A P O R E A N SC h a n g i n g M i n d s e t s , D e e p e n i n g R e l a t i o n s h i p s

31 August, when homeowners and non-

government buildings are allowed to display

the Flag.

• National Coat of Arms/State Crest – This can

only be displayed by government bodies,

within their premises. PMO’s approval must

be sought for other uses.

• National Pledge – Organisations seeking to

use the Pledge in print or in any other medium

need to obtain approval from PMO.

• Singapore Lion Symbol – Organisations that

intend to use the Singapore Lion Symbol for

the purpose of identifying with the nation and

with the endeavour to achieve excellence for

Singapore, need to seek approval from MITA.

The proposal for the relaxation of guidelines on the

use of the National Symbols rests on the

importance of making a distinction between

prohibition of use and prevention of abuse/misuse.

To simply prohibit Singaporeans from using the

National Symbols is pre-emptive, and done at the

cost of denying Singaporeans the opportunity to

affirm their loyalty to the nation through acts like

flying the National Flag.

To engender a stronger sense of national identity

and rootedness among its citizens, the use of the

National Symbols should be vigorously promoted.

Instead of imposing a blanket prohibition on the

use of the symbols, citizens should be encouraged

to affirm their loyalty to the country by, for example,

being allowed to fly the National Flag at all times

of the year, and not just during the National Day

celebrations period.

To ensure that the dignity of the National Symbols

is not compromised as a result of the relaxation

of guidelines, the following measures could be put

in place:

• Clear guidelines on what is not permitted –

These could prevent abuse/misuse of the

National Symbols and ensure that the National

Symbols are treated with respect. The same

approach is used by the Americans to manage

the use of their flag.

• Graduated penalty system for abuse/misuse

– This would help to prevent abuse/misuse,

without deterring Singaporeans from using the

National Symbols due to fears of unintended

abuse/misuse. For example, a warning could

be issued for the first offence, followed by

a fine, and then harsher penalties for

repeat offenders.

Page 28: Remaking Singapore (2003)

2626262626 C h a n g i n g M i n d s e t s , D e e p e n i n g R e l a t i o n s h i p sA H O M E F O R A L L S I N G A P O R E A N S

Renewed emphasis on values and ideals forwhich Singapore stands. The National Symbols in

themselves have no intrinsic emotional content,and what meaning they carry lies only in the ideals

they represent. In promoting the use of the

Symbols, it is just as important to promote those

ideals represented by the Symbols.

One clear statement of those ideals is the Pledge.

There should be greater emphasis on promoting the

idea that the Pledge represents the values for which

Singapore stands, and which citizens should strive

to live up to and defend. Schools could hold

discussions and activities that enable students to

understand and practise the ideals in the Pledge.

Citizens should be encouraged to treat the Pledge

as a solemn promise, and debate whether

government policies are aligned with values

such as justice, democracy and equality as

espoused in the Pledge. Vigorous debate over the

meaning of the Pledge and whether Singapore is

living up to its Pledge should be welcomed as a sign

that Singaporeans are sufficiently attached to

their country to want to define what it means to

be Singaporean.

Enhancing National Education in schools andInstitutes of Higher Learning. The comprehensive

National Education (NE) programme has enabled

students to learn about the Singapore Story, as well

as the constraints and vulnerabilities that we face

as a nation. We should continue to enhance the

effectiveness of our NE programme. Providing

students with a broad sweep of Singapore’s history

from its early beginnings will help young

Singaporeans understand how we evolved into the

multi-racial society of today. NE is a crucial process

through which our young are socialised and

equipped to play active and constructive roles

as citizens.

Nexus (the Central National Education Office) andthe various NE agencies have been implementing

new programmes and delivery methods to increase

the effectiveness of NE, by making it more

experiential and less didactic. Going forward, NE

should play a bigger role in exposing our young to

the rights and responsibilities of citizenship. Our NE

programmes should equip young Singaporeans with

an understanding of the issues and constraints in

policy-making and familiarise them with the process

through which they can play an active and

constructive role in public affairs and make a

difference to society. Through a more open-ended

and discussion-based approach in NE, students can

be exposed to public policy dilemmas and be

encouraged to think about how they can contribute

to Singapore’s future. By helping to nurture a strong

Page 29: Remaking Singapore (2003)

27A H O M E F O R A L L S I N G A P O R E A N SC h a n g i n g M i n d s e t s , D e e p e n i n g R e l a t i o n s h i p s

understanding of the country’s constraints,

governance system and policy-making process, NE

would provide a strong foundation for future

generations of Singaporeans to engage in political

discussion and debate.

B STRENGTHENING COHESIONAMONG PEOPLE OFDIFFERENT RACES,LANGUAGES AND RELIGIONS

Every Singaporean has different facets of identity

based on ethnic heritage, language, religion,

education and social roles. Singaporeans must feel

confident that these identities will be nurtured and

protected by society in general. They must also see

that this can best be achieved by respecting and

protecting the different expressions of identity that

other fellow Singaporeans may express. For

example, having a deeply held sense of ethnicity,

strong religious convictions or linguistic preference

should be compatible with being Singaporean. The

challenge is to forge an inclusive common nationalidentity from these diverse building blocks. We have

to build a paradigm of respect for, rather than denial

of, differences. At the same time, we also need to

avoid over emphasising differences.

Set up a Self-Help Co-ordination Council. Self-Help

Groups (SHGs) have traditionally played the role of

looking after their respective communities. They

have achieved considerable success in ensuring

that their community is well provided for and

generally enjoys an improving standard of living.

However, many participants at dialogue groups on

race and religious matters have raised the point that

SHGs reinforce racial segregation and their

existence might run counter to national efforts

in integration.

SHGs remain relevant today. We recognise the

importance of retaining the current channels,

through SHGs, for outreach and communication

with individuals from the respective communities.

To retain the support of their respective

communities, SHGs should continue to have their

own identity and role.

However, the SHGs should move and be seen to

move towards facilitating cohesion and providing

support across communities as far as possible. It

is therefore proposed that SHGs establish an

umbrella Council with rotating chairmanship to

identify synergies and integrative opportunities in

their strategies, services and activities. These could

include working with each other and other

commercial or non-government organisations for

the delivery of common services, organising cross-

ethnic fund-raising efforts, providing career

guidance and planning their activities in such a way

as to reduce racial segregation and support racial

integration efforts. While some effort has been

made to collaborate on projects, the proposedCouncil will provide a platform for SHGs to

proactively seek out such opportunities.

Multi-ethnic/Religious education. A multi-ethnic/

religious national identity education programme

should be introduced in schools to generate greater

understanding of different races and religions in

Singapore. The Ministry of Education (MOE) should

introduce a general subject on race and religion to

help students better appreciate the rich diversity

of Singapore and the cultural sensitivities of

different races and religions, so that they will have

the confidence later in their lives to engage others

to build a better future together. There is currently

a subject in Secondary Three that can be expanded

to include other education levels as well as other

Page 30: Remaking Singapore (2003)

2828282828 C h a n g i n g M i n d s e t s , D e e p e n i n g R e l a t i o n s h i p sA H O M E F O R A L L S I N G A P O R E A N S

aspects of race and religion, e.g. elaborating on the

historical and sociological roots, as well as the

traditions and practices of each religion. Another

possible model to consider is the Partners-In-

Harmony programme conducted by the National

Community Leadership Institute for grassroots

leaders (see box).

language programme for students, and community

clubs should proactively promote conversational

third language courses for adults.

Apart from fostering better understanding and

communication between the races, such language

competencies would also give young Singaporeans

a competitive advantage when working in the

region. MOE’s plan to introduce more options for

third language studies from 2004 is a step in the

right direction.

Public education on religion. We encourage the

Ministry of Community Development and Sports

(MCDS), People’s Association (PA) and the Inter-

Racial Confidence Circles to undertake regular

proactive public religious education/awareness

programmes to promote better understanding of

people of different religions. We support the

development of a Declaration on Religious

Harmony. The Declaration should consolidate the

current practices and unspoken “out-of-bound

markers” that already exist. It could be used by thecommunity for reference when discussing

religious issues and during arbitration, rather

than as a regulatory framework.

Socialisation in SAP schools. MOE should create a

consciousness at the national level that SAP schools

can also accept non-Chinese students (who meet

their entry criteria), just as mission schools accept

students of other religions.

Religious schools. Whether madrasah or Adventist,

religious schools should have integrative elements

so that their graduates would have sufficient

common ground to share with others. Such

religious schools should also work towards

structuring their curriculum and examinations so

The Partners-In-Harmony programme includes:

• presentations on the customs and practicesof the Malays, Chinese, Indians andEurasians

• following the heritage trail of a traditionalethnic enclave

• a tour covering places of worship andpresentations on various religions

• sessions on the food, dances and costumesof the different races

• discussions on cross-cultural diversity andthe promotion of racial/religious harmony.

Students should begiven more flexibilityto choose as a secondlanguage one thatthey either believe isbeneficial to them infuture, or are moreconfident of mastering.

School camps should include activities that build inter-

ethnic understanding. At the tertiary level, universities

should introduce specialised religious courses and

comparative religions as academic fields, and

encourage students to pursue these areas of study,

with the eventual aim of developing potential leaders

and experts who can address divisive issues.

Language competencies. Students should be given

more flexibility to choose as a second language one that

they either believe is beneficial to them in future, or are

more confident of mastering. They should also be given

the option of offering another local language as a third

language. Schools and communities should proactively

encourage conversational competence in local

languages. Schools should consider the introduction of

a mandatory non-examinable conversational third

Page 31: Remaking Singapore (2003)

29A H O M E F O R A L L S I N G A P O R E A N SC h a n g i n g M i n d s e t s , D e e p e n i n g R e l a t i o n s h i p s

that students who desire to switch to mainstream

schools can do so without difficulty.

Role of media. The media has an important role in

giving a more balanced presentation of racial/

religious stories so as to promote racial/religious

harmony. The media should be more sensitive and

avoid stereotyping in their coverage and portrayal

of minority races. Non-English language channels

and papers should broadcast or publish content

from other channels and papers to help their

viewers/readers know more about the other

communities. The media should also work towards

developing role models that can transcend ethnic

lines. The Media Development Authority could lead

and fund programmes which foster greater racial

and religious understanding.

C ENHANCING OUR ABILITYTO INTEGRATE NEWSINGAPOREANS

There are two approaches to helping foreignresidents and new Singaporeans settle in. The first

is to begin the process of integration well up-stream

before the foreigner even becomes a citizen,

while the second is to address the concerns of

Singaporeans holistically vis-à-vis the foreign

residents and new Singaporeans.

Up-stream integration. Two groups of long-term

foreign residents that merit special attention for

integration are foreign students and skilled

working adults.

Since 1993, the Singapore International Foundation

(SIF) has engaged over 400 top student leaders

from ASEAN universities on a semester in Singapore

programme, the SIF ASEAN Student Fellowship,

to enable them to get to know Singapore and

Singaporeans better. In 2002, SIF also started the

International Student Community Programme in

partnership with tertiary institutions to promote

stronger inter-cultural understanding between

Singaporeans and international students. These are

useful programmes that give foreign students a

taste of life in Singapore.

MOE has a buddy programme for ASEAN scholars in

Singapore. This can be complemented by some period

of home-stay with local families. Foreign students in

public schools can also be encouraged to take part in

similar programmes that help them and their families

adjust to life in Singapore. The positive experience of

these foreign students will not only contribute to their

willingness to reside long term, but also add to our

reputation as an educational hub of choice.

More resources can be given to employers to

provide opportunities for their skilled foreign

employees to interact with Singaporeans. These

activities are also good human resource practicesto maintain the morale of the company’s workforce.

Foreign residents have formed nationality-

based societies to help their fellow nationals settle

in Singapore upon their first arrival. Such

organisations, however, should not become social

enclaves for long-term foreign residents. Instead,

there must be a conscious effort for local groups to

engage such nationality-based societies. For a start,

long-term foreign residents and their families

should be encouraged to take part in community

or voluntary work to increase their emotional stake

in Singapore. Our social sector organisations and

volunteer welfare organisations can take the lead

in partnering foreign clubs to take on joint

community projects.

Page 32: Remaking Singapore (2003)

3030303030 C h a n g i n g M i n d s e t s , D e e p e n i n g R e l a t i o n s h i p sA H O M E F O R A L L S I N G A P O R E A N S

Addressing Singaporeans’ concerns. Singaporeans’

concerns about foreign residents and new citizens

generally centre around two major themes, namely

economic insecurity and the adverse impact on our

nascent national identity. Greater efforts must be

made to understand and address these concerns –

Singaporeans’ worries are not necessarily due to a

failure to understand rational arguments and

reasons, but could stem from more visceral causes.

The extent to which foreign residents and new

Singaporeans feel comfortable living here is a

function of both their personal experience, and the

extent to which they are made to feel welcome by

the wider society. Efforts to integrate foreign

residents and new Singaporeans therefore require

ground-level involvement, and a high sense of

ownership, among Singaporeans.

In addition to encouraging foreigners to participate

in voluntary and charitable work, talks and

published guides are also being explored as

avenues to help foreigners better understand andappreciate Singapore’s ethnic and religious

diversity. Employers of foreign staff could consider

these as part of the settling-in package for their new

employees. Singaporeans must also continue to be

assured that they have access to opportunities, and

are not being crowded out.

The Committee further proposes that the People’s

Association and the National Volunteer Center reach

out to nationality-based associations and

encourage them to proactively come forward to

make known their areas of contribution and offer

their assistance to the local community.

The associations taking the first step will go some

way in generating goodwill and trust among the

local community.

D DEVELOPING GLOBALNETWORKS OFSINGAPOREANS

The cross-border flows of goods, services and

capital have now extended to human talent, and the

number of overseas Singaporeans has increased

substantially over the years. These highly educated

and experienced overseas Singaporeans should not

be viewed so much as a “brain drain”, but rather

“brain circulation”. The challenge for Singapore is

to maintain their sense of Singaporean identity,

engage their hearts and minds, and leverage on

their expertise.....

There are 92 overseas Singapore clubs and

business associations around the world. Over the

past decade, SIF has been actively encouraging

the establishment of more of these clubs and

associations; helping to promote a sense of the

Singapore identity overseas and fostering a sense

of national identity and kinship among overseas

Singaporeans. One of the recommendations of theSingapore Overseas Network under the Economic

Review Committee, was the formation of the

Majulah Connection. This was launched in October

2002. The Majulah Connection is a welcome

addition to help link Singaporean businesses at

home and overseas. It is supported by Singapore

government agencies in cities where the latter exist,

and rides on the “heartware” supported by SIF.

Help Singaporeans acquire “global skills”. There

are some regional exposure programmes run by SIF

to provide opportunities for young Singaporeans

to work and network in the region. These include

the WorkAsia programme (which started in

1993 and was just brought to a close after 10 years)

and the Singapore-Australia Young Business

The cross-borderflows of goods,services and capitalhave now extended tohuman talent, and thenumber of overseasSingaporeans hasincreased substantiallyover the years. Thesehighly educated andexperienced overseasSingaporeans shouldnot be viewed somuch as a “brain drain”,but rather “braincirculation”. Thechallenge for Singaporeis to maintain theirsense of Singaporeanidentity, engage theirhearts and minds,and leverage ontheir expertise.

Page 33: Remaking Singapore (2003)

31A H O M E F O R A L L S I N G A P O R E A N SC h a n g i n g M i n d s e t s , D e e p e n i n g R e l a t i o n s h i p s

Ambassadors Programme. We recognise that

universities are also actively sending their students

on job placements in the region, and NUS Enterprise

has facilitative services in Silicon Valley, for instance,

for local businessmen to do business there.

It is proposed that a Committee to Globalise

Singaporeans or “COGS” be set up to co-ordinate

efforts to help Singaporeans acquire “global skills”.

Possible schemes under the co-ordination of COGS

include training or employment, facilitating student

exchange programmes at various levels, enabling

short-term work overseas for exposure or training,

setting up a financing scheme to facilitate overseas

studies, and creating a database of overseas

employment opportunities and information on

relocation, regulatory requirements, cultural and

other social issues to help Singaporeans minimise

the difficulties of an overseas move.

Re-thinking representation and franchise. The new

reality of our growing overseas citizenry might require

a review of our traditional notions of representationand franchise, if we are to retain and reinforce their

sense of national identity and stakeholdership. The

government has already introduced legislation to

allow voting by overseas Singaporeans. Other options

that could be considered include the appointment of

Nominated MPs from among overseas Singaporeans,

and even the creation of “overseas constituencies”

(as opposed to local constituencies that are physically

based in Singapore).

Re-integrating returning Singaporeans. Some

Singaporeans will have spent long periods abroad

because of studies, the need to manage their

business, or as a result of their companies’ posting

policies. SIF and Contact Singapore work to

maintain contact with overseas Singapore students.

Page 34: Remaking Singapore (2003)

3232323232 C h a n g i n g M i n d s e t s , D e e p e n i n g R e l a t i o n s h i p sA H O M E F O R A L L S I N G A P O R E A N S

SIF runs several programmes to prepare some

Singaporeans for their return, including pre-

departure orientation seminars (targetted largely

at returning students), and an annual Camp

Singapore for children of overseas Singaporeans.

SIF and Contact Singapore also produce a Welcome

Home Kit for returning Singaporeans that contains

concise information on various aspects of entering

and re-settling back in Singapore.

Singaporeans and their accompanying dependants

will need more help in re-settling upon their return

to Singapore. Some of the assistance that could be

extended to them include:

• Giving priority (or at least favourable

consideration) to their children when they

apply for entry into local schools.

• Allowing their children more leeway in

selecting and learning a Mother Tongue.

• Assigning a teacher in the school to help theirchildren adapt to the Singapore school system.

• Allowing their children to enrol in international

schools in Singapore.

• Setting up a job assistance programme to

help overseas Singaporeans look for work

back in Singapore, and to update them

on Singaporean work-place practices

and expectations.

Singapore education – replicating a crucial“Singaporean” experience. Currently, there are

schools for overseas Singaporean students in many

cities, e.g. Suzhou, Shanghai, Beijing, Bangkok and

Jakarta. Most, except for the school in Hong Kong,

are run privately without government/MOE support.

More Singapore-affiliated schools should be set up

among Singaporean communities overseas, and

these as well as existing schools should seek

endorsement by MOE. Such schools will help

maintain the educational standards of the

Singapore children abroad on par with the

education system in Singapore, while sustaining the

young people’s bonds with the country.

E EDUCATION – HARNESSINGDIVERSITY IN TALENT

Our strategies to create knowledge-intensive

industries, instil entrepreneurship and creativity in

our young, and compete internationally in the war

for talent are well advanced. Nevertheless, more can

be done to support these important strategic

economic thrusts.

Our education system has successfully provided good

quality mass education to most Singaporeans while

identifying and developing our brightest young

Singaporeans. However, this will not be enough to

assure Singapore’s future success and MOE has begun

to introduce greater diversity and customisation into

the school system. We need Singaporeans who,

regardless of their level of educational attainment,

possess adaptive, inquisitive minds, have appetites

for life-long learning, and who have had their talents

harnessed in a system which plays to their strengths.

The definition of talent should be broadened to include

non-traditional areas like the arts and sports.

The education system will need to be stretched to

achieve these ends for as many Singaporeans

as possible.

Allow schools and universities greater flexibilityto admit students. Students are generally admitted

Page 35: Remaking Singapore (2003)

33A H O M E F O R A L L S I N G A P O R E A N SC h a n g i n g M i n d s e t s , D e e p e n i n g R e l a t i o n s h i p s

into secondary schools and junior colleges on the

basis of their PSLE T-Score and L1R5 respectively.

Universities admit students based on A-level points

and SAT scores. English and Mother Tongue are also

compulsory components in moving up the

education ladder. Ranking students based on a

single aggregate score, and including languages as

a compulsory component, may be too rigid a way

of determining admission to schools and university.

Currently, autonomous schools have some flexibility

in admitting students (up to 5% of intake) who do

not meet their cut-offs but who excel in the school’s

niche areas. Universities also exercise some flexibility

– they do consider exceptional students with

outstanding singular talents on a case-by-case

basis for admission.

Schools and universities could look beyond

summary indicators and consider the students’

overall performance in school and admit singularly

talented students or students who have reached

proficiency in the most relevant subjects, but whoseaggregate scores may be dragged down by one or

two subjects.

Entry into Institutes of Higher Learning. In 1998, a

committee was set up to revamp the entry criteria

to Singapore’s universities (National University of

Singapore and Nanyang Technological University).

The committee highlighted that the old system

recognised academic results alone, and did not

consider other areas such as critical thinking

and reasoning abilities, as well as personal

characteristics. Following their findings and

recommendations, a new admission system will

come into effect in 2003. This new system moves

away from the traditional academic excellence as a

criteria and considers a variety of factors according

to various categories, viz. Category A (‘A’-Level

holders), Category B (polytechnic graduates),

Category C (mature applicants), and Category D

(international applicants with international

pre-university or tertiary qualifications).

While there is a move away from the emphasis on

academic results, its emphasis is still relatively

heavy. It is also noteworthy that polytechnic

students, mature applicants and international

applicants cannot gain entry into the universities

via having “outstanding singular talents”.

While the above makes higher education more

accessible to those with exceptional talents, more

can still be done. Specifically :

• The scheme should be expanded to include

polytechnic students, mature applicants and

international students with “outstanding

singular talents”.

• The universities should set aside a quota of

the available places for students with

“outstanding singular talents.” To maintain the

high standards of local universities, these

students should of course be required to fulfil

a minimum entry requirement.

Broadening the definition of success. The entry

criteria for university greatly influence society’s

values, and help shape the perception of what

success means in Singapore. However, “success”

cannot be limited to those who do well academically,

nor does possessing a university degree mean that

one has “succeeded” in life. Widening the definition

of success means changing Singaporeans’ mindsets

to acknowledge that success can take many paths

and forms, and that an individual’s talent and

We need Singaporeanswho, regardless of theirlevel of educationalattainment, possessadaptive, inquisitiveminds, have appetitesfor life-long learning,and who have had theirtalents harnessed in asystem which plays totheir strengths.

Page 36: Remaking Singapore (2003)

3434343434 C h a n g i n g M i n d s e t s , D e e p e n i n g R e l a t i o n s h i p sA H O M E F O R A L L S I N G A P O R E A N S

potential are not in anyway delimited or defined by

only scholastic advancement. While we engender an

environment where non-academic attainments are

celebrated as much as academic achievements, we

also need to recognise that ultimately we choose our

own yardsticks of success.

Enhance diversity of the school curriculum throughelective modules. While we recognise the benefits

of streaming in schools i.e. to allow each child to learn

at his own pace, we also acknowledge that the

existing curriculum may be too narrowly focused on

a few academic subjects, particularly at the primary

level. As such, a child who is not strong in these

subjects would be marginalised despite

having other strengths, say in sports or the arts.

Elective modules in academic and non-academic

subjects should be introduced for a more flexible

school curriculum that can be customised to

develop the diverse talents of as many students as

possible. Whilst students would still need to take

mandatory courses to ensure a strong foundation

in English, Mother Tongue, Maths and Science,

there should be greater flexibility in the choice of

subjects beyond these core areas. Such elective

modules should include non-academic areas like

the performing arts, IT, design and visual art, sports

and entrepreneurship. This will give more room for

students to discover and develop their talents

within the education system.

The existing curriculum can be diversified by

allowing students to opt for a variety of elective

modules which include but transcend today’s core

academic subjects. Such a curricular framework

would comprise:

• Core Academic subjects – All students would

have to take a minimum number of core

subjects in primary and secondary levels to

ensure they have a strong foundation in key

areas e.g. a minimum level of English, Maths

and Mother Tongue. This core comprises the

fundamentals that are essential if students are

to achieve basic literacy and gain access to their

cultural heritage. Such a foundation would also

ensure that students are equipped to pursue

further education and learning.

• Elective Advanced Modules – While the core

academic requirements of the existing system

would largely be retained, the difference would

lie in the flexibility which allows students with

particular aptitudes to take higher-level

modules (known as Elective Advanced

Modules) in the subject. Such flexibility would

mean that increasingly, a child’s proficiency in

Page 37: Remaking Singapore (2003)

35A H O M E F O R A L L S I N G A P O R E A N SC h a n g i n g M i n d s e t s , D e e p e n i n g R e l a t i o n s h i p s

a particular subject would no longer be

constrained by his age and that a single child

would possess varying degrees of proficiency

in the respective subjects that he is pursuing.

Such Elective Advanced Modules would not be

limited to academic subjects but could include

non-academic areas such as the performing

arts and competitive sports, and could

commence as early as at the primary level,

especially for certain disciplines such as ballet

and gymnastics. Graduates from these modules

could proceed to the respective niche schools

e.g. the arts school or the sports school at the

secondary level to further their talents.

At the secondary level, students should be

allowed to configure their own selection of

Elective Advanced Modules from an array of

subjects instead of having to accept

standardised packages in the typical Science,

Arts and Commerce streams.

• Enrichment/Development modules – Currently,

other than co-curricular activities, the subjects

which students take are exclusively academic

in nature. This may not produce the well-

roundedness necessary to succeed in the new

knowledge economy. It is proposed that all

students take at least one enrichment module

at the secondary and junior college levels in

addition to the existing compulsory core

modules in national education, civics and

physical education. These modules would focus

on students’ interests in areas as diverse as

entrepreneurship, leadership development,

character building, art appreciation and basic

sporting skills. These can be assessed as pass/

fail or on a participation basis so as not

to introduce added stress on students.

Elective modules introduce the advantages of

diversity and flexibility by allowing the school

curriculum to be customised to meet the diverse

aspirations of our students, and to play to their

strengths. The introduction of non-academic

modules provides those who possess such talents

an avenue to pursue career paths as artists and

sportsmen, where today they might be streamed

into Normal (Technical) courses. To ensure that

these subjects do not become “softer options” for

academic progression, the non-academic modules

cannot be used as substitutes for academic ones

for the purpose of progression into higher linguistic,

science and technology courses.

Start a National School for the Arts and Music atthe secondary level. This will enable early

identification and nurturing of musical and artistic

talent. Currently, specialised education in art and

music are available only at the tertiary level.

Singapore should have its own programme to

develop our national talents in the arts and music.

Strong Foundations

Improve access to quality early childhoodeducation. Studies have shown that early childhood

education does matter for students’ performance

in schools. Early intervention is crucial especially if

there is a lack of home support. The first six years

of a child’s life are a critical window for growth,

development and learning. The desired end-state

is for every Singaporean child to have equal access

to quality child development programmes so that

the innate potential they possess can be

maximised. Pre-schooling should avoid over-

emphasising academic learning and focus more on

nurturing curiosity and the capacity to learn.

While core academicrequirements of theexisting system wouldlargely be retained,the difference wouldlie in the flexibilitywhich allows studentswith particularaptitudes to takehigher-level modules(known as ElectiveAdvanced Modules)in the subject.

Page 38: Remaking Singapore (2003)

Currently, there are three types of institutionalised

pre-school services offered in Singapore:

• Playgroups – catering to children aged 18

months to four years

• Childcare centres – catering to children aged

two months to six years; and

• Kindergartens – catering to children aged four

to six years.

There are two broad shortcomings in the current way

the pre-school services operate, namely, the lack of

a holistic approach to regulation, and the lack of

uniform subsidy support.

The quality and standards of the three types of pre-

school services vary substantially. Playgroups are not

regulated at all, while childcare centres and

kindergartens fall under the purview of the MCDS and

MOE respectively. Both Ministries currently monitor

minimum standards of health, safety and physical

amenities in the pre-school centres under their charge,

and provide guidelines on issues such as teacher

training, curriculum frameworks and best practices.

The current subsidy policy for pre-school children is

fragmented. Users of childcare centres receive

childcare subsidies from the government, applicable

to mothers from all income groups, with additional

subsidies for the lower-income group. About 14% of

children in the relevant age group attend childcare

centres and thus benefit from this scheme.

On the other hand, there is no specific subsidy for

users of kindergartens or playgroups. This is despite

the fact that 99% of each cohort of about 40,000

children attend kindergarten programmes before

starting formal schooling and the fees for kindergarten

are comparable to, if not higher than childcare centres.

Once formal schooling starts, each child “receives” a

state subsidy of about $3,000 annually.

There is a need for a coherent policy to maximise

opportunities for every child. As pre-school services

of higher quality generally tend to cost more, only

children of better financial backgrounds are able to

benefit. It is important for disadvantaged children

to access quality pre-school or childcare

programmes, to put them on equal footing with their

peers. Early intervention in the development of these

children would reduce the likelihood that the state

would have to support them later in life.

To ensure that all children get equal opportunities

to develop themselves at the pre-school level, we

propose that:

• A more comprehensive means-tested subsidy

regime at the pre-school level be introduced:

- Subsidies should be applicable not just

at childcare centres registered with MCDS

but at registered kindergartens and

playgroups.

- The government should set aside a larger

amount for subsidies. The amount of the

subsidy per child should be means-tested.

- The subsidies should be distributed

directly to parents in the form of

vouchers. The parents will then be able

to choose which centre to use the

subsidy. This would provide incentive for

centres to raise the quality of their

standards and facilities.

3636363636 C h a n g i n g M i n d s e t s , D e e p e n i n g R e l a t i o n s h i p sA H O M E F O R A L L S I N G A P O R E A N S

Page 39: Remaking Singapore (2003)

• A more comprehensive and coordinated

approach should be adopted to ensure the

quality and standards of the pre-school

sector, including developing an accreditation

system to help parents select centres:

- Re g i s t e r a l l p l a y g ro u p s w i t h t h e

g o v e r n m e n t .

- Develop an accreditation system that

would assess centres based on a set of

holistic criteria, from the physical and

health aspects of the centres to child

development and teacher training

aspects. The accreditation status should

be made known to the public, giving pre-

school centres the incentive to upgrade

their standards and facilities.

In addition, direct vouchers can be made

redeemable only at centres that are accredited. This

is to ensure that public money is spent wisely and

will serve to further encourage centres to upgradethemselves. The intention here is not to make all

pre-school centres uniform, but to ensure minimum

standards of quality, particularly in the area of

teacher training and core curriculum. The lead

agencies for these recommendations would be

MCDS and MOE, who may require an increase in

manpower and financial resources to take on

these roles.

Diversity

Introduce O-level Physical Education. Apart from

the mainstream academic subjects, students who

have a passion for other areas should, where

feasible, be given a chance to pursue them and be

formally recognised. Today, students who have an

interest in art or music can opt to pursue them as

an ‘O’-level subject, but this avenue is not available

for Physical Education (PE) and sports.

In line with an education system that is ability-

driven and provides a wider range of choices for

students, an avenue should be provided for

students who are good in PE and sports to take this

as an ‘O’-level subject that is officially recognised

for entry into post-secondary education. There is

already a Cambridge GCE ‘A’-level syllabus for PE

and sports studies that is offered in the UK which

covers topics such as muscular development and

physical activity, motor skill development,

kinesthetics, exercise physiology, sports and

exercise psychology, nutrition, and weight control.

Furthermore, PE teachers in school today go

through intensive training and have enough

expertise to teach the PE ‘O’-level syllabus. This will

make fuller use of their expertise instead of

deploying them to teach other academic subjects.

CCA recognition for outside school activities. Due toresource constraint, each school provides only a

limited number of arts and sports Co-curricular

Activities (CCA). As such, the variety and depth of the

sports and arts activities that students can participate

in are limited, and may not cater to the interests of all

students. The range of CCAs available to students can

be widened by tapping programmes that are

organised outside of the school. A key issue is

recognition. Currently, it is compulsory for students

to be involved in at least one school CCA. The CCA point

system also gives more recognition to participation

in school CCAs versus outside school activities.

The CCA points system should be reviewed to give

the same level of recognition to a broader range of

activities organised outside of school (subject to

In line with aneducation systemthat is ability-drivenand provides a widerrange of choices forstudents, an avenueshould be provided forstudents who are goodin PE and sports totake this as an ‘O’ levelsubject that is officiallyrecognised for entryinto post-secondaryeducation.

37A H O M E F O R A L L S I N G A P O R E A N SC h a n g i n g M i n d s e t s , D e e p e n i n g R e l a t i o n s h i p s

Page 40: Remaking Singapore (2003)

3838383838 C h a n g i n g M i n d s e t s , D e e p e n i n g R e l a t i o n s h i p sA H O M E F O R A L L S I N G A P O R E A N S

Page 41: Remaking Singapore (2003)

specific conditions), as participation in school CCAs.

This would give students a wider variety of arts and

sports activities to choose from without overly

taxing school resources, and enable the lifelong

pursuit of interests.

Maximising Talent

Provide access to coaching/counselling forstudents. Appropriate education and career advice

and counselling will help to maximise talent, surface

learning disabilities, and address social issues such

as youth esteem and family problems. We therefore

propose that all students have access to qualified

counsellors coaches once or twice a year to:

• Profile their strengths and weaknesses so as

to provide career and education advice;

• Identify talents at an early stage;

• Support teachers in identifying learning

disabilities for early intervention; and

• Address family, youth and esteem-related

problems.

Counselling resources can be provided through

partnerships with non-profit groups, alumni and

outsourcing. Investing in counsellors for all our

students from primary to JC level is a viable way of

ensuring that, short of reducing class sizes, all our

students receive more individualised attention.

Modification of the school ranking system. MOE

has introduced a comprehensive system of awards

to recognise the achievement of schools, whether

academic, co-curricular activities or organisational

best practices. However, it is the school ranking

system, based mainly on academic performance

that continues to draw disproportionate attention.

This is in part because schools are ranked

individually. Feedback has shown that the ranking

system can lead to unhealthy pressure on

principals, teachers, students, and parents.

We recognise the intended benefits of the school

ranking system to improve the quality of teaching

and learning in schools through friendly

competition. However, too much emphasis on

ranking and academic achievement could have a

negative impact which in some cases may outweigh

the intended benefits. We therefore propose that

the current system of school ranking adopt a

banded concept instead of assigning individual

ranks to each school. Ranking schools by bands will

still give schools an idea of their standing nationally

in relation to other schools. However, because there

is anonymity in the exact ranking within the band,

it will serve to eliminate some of the unhealthy

competition arising from jostling for a shift in a few

places. At the same time, parents will still be able

to gauge the standard of a school without fussingover individual differences in placing.

The Committee recognises that MOE already ranks

and assesses schools using criteria other than

academic performance. However, it is the academic

rankings that tend to receive the most media

coverage. We encourage the media to give non-

academic assessments more prominence, and the

public to take an increasing interest in these areas.

Only then can we truly re-define and broaden

notions of success in Singapore.

The Value-Added school ranking is a good system

that should be retained because it encourages

schools to improve the standards of their students

regardless of their initial capability. Parents are also

better informed about the schools that may best

meet the needs of their children.

Ranking schools bybands will still giveschools an idea of theirstanding nationally inrelation to otherschools. However,because there isanonymity in the exactranking within theband, it will serve toeliminate some of theunhealthy competitionarising from jostling fora shift in a few places.

39A H O M E F O R A L L S I N G A P O R E A N SC h a n g i n g M i n d s e t s , D e e p e n i n g R e l a t i o n s h i p s

Page 42: Remaking Singapore (2003)

40 A H O M E O W N E D C h a n g i n g M i n d s e t s , D e e p e n i n g R e l a t i o n s h i p s

Page 43: Remaking Singapore (2003)

41A H O M E O W N E DC h a n g i n g M i n d s e t s , D e e p e n i n g R e l a t i o n s h i p s

A HOMEOWNED

C H A P T E R 3C h a n g i n g M i n d s e t s , D e e p e n i n g R e l a t i o n s h i p s

Page 44: Remaking Singapore (2003)

42 A H O M E O W N E D C h a n g i n g M i n d s e t s , D e e p e n i n g R e l a t i o n s h i p s

A ENLARGING SPACE FOREXPRESSION ANDEXPERIMENTATION

To be a vibrant hub for talent and innovation, we

need to provide an environment and lifestyle that

matches the expectations of a better-educated,

more discerning population. As society shifts its

preferences, it is inevitable that the restrictions that

govern expression and define society’s tolerance

level will have to be adjusted as well. As we make

these changes, two key questions will need to

be confronted:

• Where should the limits be? Singapore

society, given the still substantial presence of

traditional cultures and value systems, and our

multi-racial mix, cannot change its restrictions

on expression too abruptly. Those wishing to

expand the limits of expression must

acknowledge the discomfort of other

Singaporeans who prefer a more gradual shift.

• Who sets the limits? In the spirit of remaking

Singapore, the government can adopt a lighter

touch in its regulatory approach. This will need

to be accompanied by a higher level of

individual and communal responsibility in

determining what is and is not acceptable.

Lighter Touch in Regulation

Singapore currently offers many advantages, but

suffers from a perception of being tightly regulated.

Regulations on public meetings, entertainment,

performances and associations of people are

necessary in Singapore’s multi-racial and multi-

religious society to limit the risks to public and

social order. The approach relies on the government

as the sole gate-keeper, with a heavy burden to

sieve out potentially objectionable events. In

discharging this responsibility, the authorities quite

naturally err on the side of caution, and may not

exercise the discipline of distinguishing between

“high risk” and “low risk” events, with the result

that only events that bear “no risk” are allowed.

Although the majority of applications for public

entertainment licences and formation of societies

are approved,1 the process tends to take a long

time. There is also a perceived lack of clarity in

the screening criteria. This approach limits

experimentation and results in activities not

being given a chance to grow.

Whilst law and order concerns remain valid, it is

timely to calibrate the government’s approach

towards public expression to promote a more

creative and innovative society and culture. We

need to find a new balance that maintains law and

order and yet does not stifle the creativity of

our people. Any relaxation of the rules must be

accompanied by corresponding increases inaccountability on the part of the performing groups

themselves, as well as in the responsibility of the

wider community to take ownership and signal

displeasure when the threshold of tolerance has

been breached. Ultimately, a healthy civic immune

system would be a far more effective shield than

any government-imposed mechanism.

Adopt a green/red lane approach for publicentertainment licensing. Except for a few exempted

activities, most public entertainment requires prior

licensing. We propose that this situation be

approached differently. Instead of a “catch-all”

clause and a short exemption list, the Ministry of

Home Affairs (MHA) could consider listing down the

types of activities that are less likely to be approved,

To be a vibrant hub fortalent and innovation,we need to provide anenvironment andlifestyle that matchesthe expectations of abetter-educated, morediscerning population.

1 Figures from the Ministry of Home Affairs show that between 1998 and2001, only six out of 888 applications for formation of societies wererejected (less than 1%). The approval rate for ad-hoc licence (i.e. for once-off public entertainment events such as theatre performances and publictalks) is also 99% for 2000 and 2001.

Page 45: Remaking Singapore (2003)

43A H O M E O W N E DC h a n g i n g M i n d s e t s , D e e p e n i n g R e l a t i o n s h i p s

and would need to go through the licensing process.

Activities not on this “red lane” list would be given

automatic licensing (i.e. “green lane”). This is a

significant shift from the current approach, which is

perceived as lacking in transparency, to one that

specifies explicitly what is not allowed and those not

specified are deemed permissible. The

performances that pass through the green lane

would in any case not be exempted from prosecution

if they were subsequently found to be of an

objectionable genre or to infringe upon certain pre-

specified conditions (e.g. the maintenance of

religious harmony).

Designate performance venues for relaxing rules.Singapore already has “designated spaces” where

specific rules have been relaxed to facilitate

expression and experimentation, such as the

Speakers’ Corner (outdoor public speaking). The

“geographical divide” in the application of rules has

also been adopted for movies, with the screening

of R(A) movies permitted only in the city area. The

concept can be taken further by designating

“spaces” where rules could be relaxed further to

facilitate artistic expression and experimentation.

Artistes could perform without the need for a

public entertainment licence.

Law and order could still be safeguarded by

measures such as a simple registration process,

explicit rules prohibiting content that could cause

racial/religious enmity and limiting indoor

seating capacity.

Review treatment of performance art and forumtheatre. Following the 1994 Josef Ng incident, the

National Arts Council (NAC) has ceased to fund

performance art and forum theatre, both unscripted

forms of drama. A $10,000 bond is imposed on

groups that wish to perform forum theatre. The 1994

incident should be viewed as an isolated case. We

Page 46: Remaking Singapore (2003)

44 A H O M E O W N E D C h a n g i n g M i n d s e t s , D e e p e n i n g R e l a t i o n s h i p s

propose that the $10,000 bond requirement be

removed, and that performance art and forum

theatre be considered for government funding along

with other art forms, based on merit of content. This

would be a clear signal of greater government

tolerance for more unconventional art forms.

Set up PEMA Appeals Advisory Committee.A Public Entertainment and Meetings Act (PEMA)

Appeals Advisory Committee comprising lay

Singaporeans could be set up to review cases where

performances are deemed to have violated the

guidelines and make recommendations to the

regulatory authority. This approach is similar to the

appeals mechanism adopted by the Media

Development Authority for television programmes.

Cease prior vetting of play scripts. Currently,

except for certain exempted theatre groups

with proven track records, all play scripts would

have to be submitted to MITA/NAC for vetting before

they can be staged. The contents and suitability of

the scripts are assessed, so that plays withobjectionable contents are censored and would not

be staged.

In line with the principle of having a more

green-lane rather than red-lane approach, it is

recommended that the authorities remove the

requirement for prior vetting of all play scripts, and

instead set out clear guidelines on what constitutes

objectionable content. This approach is based on

the premise that the arts groups would be subject

to the dynamics of self-regulation. (Fundamentally,

it is in their interest to do so if they want to maintain

a long-term relationship with their audience.) Arts

groups that consistently violate the guidelines i.e.

have a proven record of putting up objectionable

performances, would be penalised by having to

submit all future scripts to NAC for vetting.

Relax rules for busking. Currently, those who wish

to busk are required to apply for a permit and

undergo an audition. All proceeds from donations

must be given to charity and a $10,000 fine is levied

for breach of conditions. There is more room to relax

the rules on busking to allow artistes to showcase

their talents and to promote a more vibrant arts

culture. We propose to do away with the

requirement for buskers to donate all proceeds to

charity. The $10,000 fine could be replaced with first

a warning, with the fine coming into effect only if

the warning is not adhered to.

Extend rating system to more forms of media.Currently, the degree of censorship varies according

to the type of medium as the different media

influence their readers and viewers differently. Free-

to-air television programmes are subjected to the

most stringent censorship as they can penetrate

into homes, followed to a lesser degree by movies,“live” performances and sound recordings.

Publications are treated less strictly and within

this category, printed words are treated more

leniently than pictorials.

In the long run, the advent of information technology

will render the existing differentiated controls on

different media meaningless, given that the Internet

will be more and more pervasive. It will not be

possible for government to continue the current

system of mandating what Singaporeans are allowed

to read or view. A more sustainable approach is for

the public to be educated and make informed choices

on the materials that they access.

Page 47: Remaking Singapore (2003)

45A H O M E O W N E DC h a n g i n g M i n d s e t s , D e e p e n i n g R e l a t i o n s h i p s

The governmentshould move towardsplaying a guiding ratherthan a gatekeeping rolein determining mediacontent.

In line with the removal of the prior vetting of play

scripts, the government should move towards

playing a guiding rather than a gatekeeping role

in determining media content. This can be achieved

by extending the informative rating system

beyond movies to cover other forms of media, and

educating parents on how to protect their children

from undesirable materials and on the use of the

rating system.

The government should also facilitate the formation

of citizen watch groups, for example, by removing

the requirement for them to register as societies.

Such watch groups would generate greater levels

of public awareness.

Define “political” OB markers. There is much

ambiguity as to what constitutes being engaged in

the discussion of “political” issues. This has created

the impression that the discussion of political

governance is tantamount to engagement in

politics. One proposal is for the government to

define “political” clearly to mean action and speech

that directly engage in electioneering and party

politics, that is, within the arena of the contest

for political power. Discussions in all other

contexts should be allowed so long as they do

not compromise sovereignty, security and

religious/ethnic harmony.

Encouraging academic research on public policy.To address any misperception that academics

based in Singapore are being restrained in their

writings and apply self-censorship, academics

could be explicitly encouraged to conduct research

and publish papers on public policy in Singapore,

no matter how critical. In addition, a pool of funds

could be set aside for such research.

B ENCOURAGINGPARTICIPATION

To complement the widening boundaries of

expression, the Committee also recommends

enabling the people and private sectors to organise

themselves more easily, so that these groups can

work with like-minded groups/individuals on

issues that concern them, thereby developing a

stake in the overall well-being of our society.

Enhancing Platformsfor Participation

Easier registration of groups/associations. The

formation of, and participation in groups and

associations indicate a Singaporean’s interest in

his surroundings and his desire to contribute. By

exercising this interest and desire, his attachment

to the country will deepen.

The current approach treats all societies as

homogeneous, and steers would-be registrants to

a gateway for checking and clearance. We propose

adopting a differentiated approach, based on a new

assumption that the majority of people organise for

the common good. Instead of requiring all societies

to seek prior approval, an alternative would be to

list down explicitly the types of societies that would

require prior approval. Those that fall outside

the list would be ‘automatically’ approved and

registered. The registration of such societies could

still be revoked if they are subsequently found to

use the society for unlawful purposes.

Page 48: Remaking Singapore (2003)

46 A H O M E O W N E D C h a n g i n g M i n d s e t s , D e e p e n i n g R e l a t i o n s h i p s

To further facilitate theformation of groups, wepropose leveraging onthe e-Citizen portal tocreate a one-stopinformation and e-services centre toassist groups inregistering, organisingevents and otheradministrativeprocesses.

• e-Citizen portale-Citizen portale-Citizen portale-Citizen portale-Citizen portal<http://www.ecitizen.gov.sg>– Information on setting up a society is

found under Safety & Security Town andinformation on setting up a residentialbased social group is found underBusiness Town’s start-up e-advisor.

• National Council of Social Service (NCSS)National Council of Social Service (NCSS)National Council of Social Service (NCSS)National Council of Social Service (NCSS)National Council of Social Service (NCSS)website.website.website.website.website.<http://www.ncss.org.sg/ncssindex.asp>– The site contains information on social

service volunteering, how to become avoluntary welfare organisation and howto obtain charitable organisation status.

• National Volunteer Centre (NVC) website.National Volunteer Centre (NVC) website.National Volunteer Centre (NVC) website.National Volunteer Centre (NVC) website.National Volunteer Centre (NVC) website.<http://www.nvc.org.sg>– The site provides a volunteer e-matching

service to match volunteers withorganisations that require volunteerhelp and promotional stories ofvolunteer experiences.

One-stop registration. Volunteers who want to

organise themselves face the complicated task of

figuring out how to go about registering themselves

as a formal group and getting the relevant permits

and licenses to organise activities and events.

Specifically, the volunteers lack easy access to

comprehensive information on common procedures

and government regulations; and have encountered

slow approval processes and inhibitory rules.

There are websites that provide some information on

volunteering and the setting up of societies (see box).

However, such information remains piecemeal and has

not been consolidated effectively. Registered

volunteer groups also lack information and guidance

on navigating government regulations and procedures

for fund-raising and applications for licences and

permits for organising events and activities, etc. It is

significant to note that some volunteer groups have

chosen to register themselves as companies limited

by guarantee, instead of societies. The feedback has

been that the different rules and fees governing a

society impede the work of volunteer groups, who

have limited financial and manpower resources to

begin with.

To further facilitate the formation of groups, we

propose leveraging on the e-Citizen portal to create

a one-stop information and e-services centre

to assist groups in registering, organising events

and other administrative processes. The

information /e-services centre could contain the

following essential items/services:

• A directory listing of existing volunteer groups

with a short description of each one – this listing

would allow volunteers to ascertain whether

there are existing groups with similar causes as

theirs or whether there is a need to start up

a new group.

• A step-by-step guide to common procedures

faced by volunteer groups.

• Insights on common issues related to the work

of volunteer groups, e.g. the implications of

IPC status and how to draft constitutions.

• A repository of FAQs on common procedures

faced by volunteer groups.

• Registration as a society, company limited by

guarantee or charity.

• Request for funding.

• Registration with the National Volunteer Centre.

• Application for licenses and permits to

organise events.

Page 49: Remaking Singapore (2003)

47A H O M E O W N E DC h a n g i n g M i n d s e t s , D e e p e n i n g R e l a t i o n s h i p s

The forum shouldprovide opportunitiesfor the participants todeepen theirunderstanding of therationale behindvarious governmentpolicies, and to thinkthrough and putforwardrecommendations forchanges that theywould like to see innational policies.

2 Central Singapore CDC has introduced the Singapore Youth Forum, whileNorth-West CDC has introduced the Civic Leadership Programme in 2002.

MCDS, NVC and the Public Service Online Team from

the Infocomm Development Authority can take the

lead in developing the above. NVC’s website can

be expanded to include the above essential items.

This is in line with NVC’s mission to “promote

volunteerism as a way of life across all sectors and

all levels of society.” IDA can assist in linking NVC’s

website to the e-Citizen portal and in setting up a

Community Town to provide integrated e-services

for volunteers. In addition, MCDS can assist in

bringing together the various regulatory agencies.

MCDS should also work with the relevant regulatory

bodies to simplify processes, rules and fees to

encourage the formation and work of volunteer

groups in Singapore.

Set up a National Youth Forum. Currently, there are

existing forums for youths to express their views on

national issues. The Kent Ridge Ministerial Forum,

Polytechnic Forum and ITE Students’ Seminar offer

opportunities for tertiary students to discuss national

issues. In addition, there are seminars and camps

organised by various youth groups where youths are

brought together to exchange views. Central

Singapore and North-West Community Development

Councils (CDC) have also introduced programmes2 to

encourage active youth involvement in issues

concerning the local community and Singapore

at large.

Notwithstanding, it would be useful to encourage

cross-institutional interaction so that young

Singaporeans are exposed to the wide spectrum of

views that exist in different segments of society. In

addition, the forum should provide opportunities

for the participants to deepen their understanding

of the rationale behind various government

policies, and to think through and put forward

recommendations for changes that they would like

to see in national policies. Key elements of

this learning process would include debating the

merits of their proposals, securing the support of

their peers, as well as addressing the concerns

of various stakeholders.

Held on an annual basis, each NYF cycle wouldlast two to three months and comprise thefollowing phases:

• Foundation phase – selected youths arebriefed on the structure and processes ofgovernment, and on community andnational issues.

• Conceptualisation phase – participants breakup into smaller groups to do research, gatherfeedback, and have internal debates on aparticular national issue of their choice. Eachgroup will be linked up with mentors andresource people in the public, private andpeople sectors who would guide theparticipants and facilitate the work of thegroups. Participants will also be encouragedto organise forums and feedback sessionsin their respective institutions to seek theviews and comments of their peers. Theyshould also consult major stakeholders whomay be affected by any changes in the policy.

• Debate and decision phase – the variousbreakout groups will gather for a wrap-upforum to debate the findings and vote onthe resolutions. The resolutions adopted byeach NYF cohort will be publicised, but theresolutions will not have any legal status.

• Follow-up phase – resolutions that areimplementable could be provided with seedfunds from NYC. If the recommendationsaffect government policy, they will besurfaced to the government forconsideration.

Page 50: Remaking Singapore (2003)

48 A H O M E O W N E D C h a n g i n g M i n d s e t s , D e e p e n i n g R e l a t i o n s h i p s

4 This would include:(i) Uniformed groups such as the National Cadet Corps, the

Singapore Scouts Association;(i) Youth/civic organisations such as People’s Association Youth

Movement; and(i) Ethnic/faith-based/voluntary welfare organisations such as

Young Men’s Christian Association of Singapore.

3 The NYC considers a youth to be anyone aged between 15 to 30.

We therefore propose that a National Youth Forum

(NYF) be established under the auspices of the

National Youth Council to provide a formal platform

for youths from a variety of backgrounds to study

policy formulation and debate national issues.

The aim is to develop in our youths a deeper

understanding of policy-making and governance in

Singapore, thus enhancing their“band-width”

and ability to be active and engaged citizens in

the future.

The NYF could target youths of post-secondary

school age, i.e. from ages 17 to 21. Because of the

differing levels of maturity, it would not be effective

to include youths of all age groups,3 as the priorities

and concerns of a 15-year-old would be significantly

different from a 29-year-old. We should therefore

start with one group from a fairly narrow age band.

If the NYF programme for 17 to 21 year-old youths

is successful, we could consider introducing

similar programmes for youths in other age groups.

The NYF can serve as the national caucus of youthleaders. It could comprise about 200 to 300

representatives drawn from various educational

institutions (JCs, polytechnics and ITEs), youth groups

and community organisations.4 As the intention is to

include youths from all walks of life, the NYF could

also be open to other youths in the 17 to 21 age group,

but who do not belong to any group or organisation.

Such participants could apply through the CDCs. The

box describes what the NYF process might look like

The NYF is not a Youth Parliament and its

resolutions will not have any legal status. However,

they can be publicised and (if they affect

government policy) forwarded to the government

for consideration.

Draw up a government Code of Consultation. The

desire of citizens to contribute must also be matched

by willingness on the part of the government to

share information, listen and accommodate.

Presently, information sharing and consultation on

government policies and programmes are left to the

discretion of government agencies, leading to a

variety of practices and standards. Public feedback

suggests that although there has been a shift

towards a more consultative approach of policy

formulation, there is still room for improvement. For

example, feedback on the 2002 bus fare hike

indicated that the public felt that more extensive

consultation with all stakeholders should have been

done prior to the decision to raise bus fares. The

government’s decision to stick to raising fares

despite appeals from the public also caused some

to perceive that the government does not listen to

feedback, once it has come to a decision.

The perception that the government is really not

interested in listening or responding to feedbackmay be sufficient to cause many Singaporeans to

become disengaged. And if the silent majority

continues to remain silent, the government, and

eventually the nation, will lose out as it will not be

able to hear the good,constructive ideas that they

may possess.

To address this, it would be useful for the

government to institutionalise a process by which

government agencies clearly indicate, as part of any

announcement on policy changes, which groups

have been consulted, what views were expressed,

which suggestions have been adopted, and the

reasons why some suggestions have not been

adopted. Singaporeans generally accept that the

Page 51: Remaking Singapore (2003)

49A H O M E O W N E DC h a n g i n g M i n d s e t s , D e e p e n i n g R e l a t i o n s h i p s

Page 52: Remaking Singapore (2003)

50 A H O M E O W N E D C h a n g i n g M i n d s e t s , D e e p e n i n g R e l a t i o n s h i p s

government cannot implement every suggestion

made, but there are some who feel that the public

sector could do better in closing the feedback

loop, by documenting the consultation that

had taken place prior to decisions being taken.

At the moment, there is also no institutionalised

process by which consultation is carried out in local

communities. In some instances, consultation is

carried out, either formally or informally. For

example, when colours are proposed for an

HDB block, the residents may be consulted

through their RCs; or when HDB’s upgrading

programme is proposed, residents will be polled

for their support.

These efforts tend to be piecemeal. As each

community is unique, it is appropriate to provide

residents with more opportunities to give feedback,

make suggestions and influence decisions on

issues that affect the local community. The

government can do more to enhance grassroots

democracy by deepening the consultation process

and devolving more autonomy to the local level. For

example, local communities should be engaged on

decisions relating to the enhancement of the

physical infrastructure and living environment in the

neighbourhood. Also, schools should be managed

in close consultation and collaboration with local

communities. In essence, the approach is to

encourage stronger ownership of local issues by

encouraging residents to play a bigger role in

managing local institutions and projects, and

influencing decisions at the local level.

It is proposed that the government draw up a Code

of Consultation. This should be a public document

providing guidelines and minimum standards

on when and how the public should be consulted.

Some areas the code could cover are:

• Areas in which consultation should take place -

e.g. physical infrastructure such as HDB and

other public amenities, transport routes;

community programmes; and government

policies targetted at a large segment of

Singaporeans.

• Who should be consulted -

e.g. professional groups,NGOs,residents

and other stakeholders.

• What information should be provided-

e.g. briefs on current policy frameworks,

surveys, data.

• How the consultations should be carried out -

e.g. focus groups and other fora, websites,

solicitation of formal submissions, publication

of White Papers.

Set up Management Committees to manage HDBestates. Most HDB residents leave the management

of the estate common property entirely to the Town

Councils. There is also an expectation among them

that the government/HDB will help them to

maintain their flats. There is scope for HDB dwellers

to take greater responsibility for the management

of their own estate. This would instil a greater sense

of belonging and pride in their living environment,

and equally important, foster a self-reliant, creative

and entrepreneurial community. The process

can start with encouraging HDB residents to

participate in and take ownership of developments

Page 53: Remaking Singapore (2003)

51A H O M E O W N E DC h a n g i n g M i n d s e t s , D e e p e n i n g R e l a t i o n s h i p s

There is scope forHDB dwellers to takegreater responsibilityfor the managementof their own estate.This would instil agreater sense ofbelonging and pridein their livingenvironment, andequally important,foster a self-reliant,creative andentrepreneurialcommunity.

in their neighbourhood. Greater participation and

community involvement by residents would also

serve to create a friendly social living environment,

hence improving social cohesion.

A Management Committee (MC) consisting only of

residents can be set up to manage the common

property within a sizeable estate comprising about

1,000 dwelling units, instead of having the Town

Council to directly manage the common property.

The current Residents’ Committees may evolve into

these future MCs. Some functions of the Town

Councils can be devolved to the MC.

HDB currently owns the common property in

HDB estates. To instil a greater sense of

responsibility in estate management and as an

incentive to residents, flat owners could also own

the common property in their estate, e.g. strata-

titled ownership. HDB could consider the above

options or any other methods to promote

participation, ownership and responsibility among

the residents of the HDB estates.

However, the following issues need to be taken

into consideration in the implementation of

the proposal:

• Government housing subsidies for such

‘strata-titled’ flat types.

• Maintenance grants (Service and Conservancy

Charge).

• Social considerations e.g. relations amongst

residents in surrounding existing HDB flats

and possible social stratification occuring.

Page 54: Remaking Singapore (2003)

52 A H O M E F O R A L L S E A S O N S C h a n g i n g M i n d s e t s , D e e p e n i n g R e l a t i o n s h i p s

Page 55: Remaking Singapore (2003)

53A H O M E F O R A L L S E A S O N SC h a n g i n g M i n d s e t s , D e e p e n i n g R e l a t i o n s h i p s

A HOMEFOR ALLSEASONS

C H A P T E R 4C h a n g i n g M i n d s e t s , D e e p e n i n g R e l a t i o n s h i p s

Page 56: Remaking Singapore (2003)

54 A H O M E F O R A L L S E A S O N S C h a n g i n g M i n d s e t s , D e e p e n i n g R e l a t i o n s h i p s

A A GRACIOUS,COMPASSIONATEAND COHESIVE SOCIETY

For Singapore to be a home, every citizen must

feel that he or she matters – they must feelunderstood and respected by those whose

abilities differ from their own, and they must feelcared for when they are dealt a bad hand by

circumstances. These are the hallmarks of a FirstWorld society as well. The recommendations that

follow suggest ways in which Singapore canprogress towards that ideal.

Fine-Tuning Safety Nets for theNew Economy

Our current social safety net5 provisions weredesigned for a full-employment situation and cater

primarily to those in the lower income group. As oureconomy restructures, there will be greater job

uncertainty and Singaporeans at various incomelevels could experience intermittent unemployment

at different stages of their lives. Furthermore, socialand demographic trends such as an ageing

population and smaller family sizes couldexacerbate pressures on the safety net. There could

be greater reliance on support beyond one’s ownfamily, from the community and state.

Our recommendations focus on making our social

safety nets relevant to the new economy. Theobjective is to address the employment

uncertainty and to better target those affectedby economic restructuring while promoting a

good work ethic. Avenues should also be madeavailable for Singaporeans to tap their own

resources, so as to promote greater independenceand self-reliance.

Economic Relief Scheme. Currently, there are manysources of government relief support through

different agencies. We recommend that these berationalised and consolidated into an “Economic

Relief Scheme” to provide holistic assistance forthe structurally unemployed. Given that

structural unemployment is likely to bea long-term problem and the numbers affected are

likely to grow, there is a need for assistancethat is holistic, better structured, and more

efficiently delivered.

Under the scheme, employment assistance wouldbe the first line of assistance. This would

encompass job-matching services, information andreferral services on training and job placement

programmes, career counselling and the like.Financial assistance would be provided as the last

resort and would be conditional on the recipientactively looking for jobs and undergoing relevant

training and counselling. This assistance should notbe regarded as an unemployment benefit. The idea

is to strengthen the link between financialassistance and job assistance.

The Economic Relief Scheme could reside in the

Community Development Councils (CDCs), wherefinancial and employment assistance is already

parked. However, feedback suggests that thecurrent capacity and expertise in career and

motivational counselling is lacking, and a leadagency will have to be identified to build up

this capacity for deployment in the CDCs.

An integrated, centralised approach would be moreefficient and effective in targeting help at those who

truly need it, but it would be a departure from thecurrent mode of operation. However, it need not

necessarily detract from the Many Helping Hands

5 Social safety nets are designed to protect the real consumption ofindividuals and their families against an abrupt and sharp fall in livingstandards, in the event of unemployment, disability, sickness,incapacitation or retirement.

Page 57: Remaking Singapore (2003)

55A H O M E F O R A L L S E A S O N SC h a n g i n g M i n d s e t s , D e e p e n i n g R e l a t i o n s h i p s

philosophy, as volunteer and community groups

would continue to play a significant role inthe co-ordinated network.

Use of CPF in a prolonged recession. Unemployed

individuals could be allowed, on a very limited andexceptional basis, to tap available resources in their

CPF accounts to support themselves throughspells of unemployment. This would promote

self-reliance by allowing Singaporeans to usetheir own resources first before turning to other

sources for help.

There were concerns on whether therecommendation would run counter to the primary

purpose of the CPF, which is to provide for thehousing, health and retirement needs of

Singaporeans. In particular, the lower income groupfaces higher risks of having insufficient savings for

retirement. There was also a concern that thescheme would set a precedent, leading to other

demands to borrow from CPF, e.g. for medical orbusiness purposes.

Sufficient safeguards could be put in place so as

not compromise the intent of the CPF. For instance,the scheme would only be operational in a period

of prolonged recession (e.g. negative or poorgrowth for two to three consecutive years) and only

on CPF savings beyond a certain level. The amountto be disbursed could be capped and disbursed

monthly rather than in a lump sum. The amountwithdrawn should also be gradually replaced either

after the person has found employment andresumes monthly CPF contributions, or through

income earned from investment or sale of property.

Housing mortgages and the safety net. Given thatmuch of Singaporeans’ resources are tied up in

property, those who are caught in a cash crunch

should be allowed to tap this asset to meet urgentfinancial needs. This is in line with the philosophy

of promoting self-help and reliance.

Currently, HDB does not permit the re-mortgaging ofproperty to raise credit for other purposes, even

though new rulings (i.e. provision of housingloans from banks, at commercial rates and terms)

allow homeowners on commercial loans to havelonger mortgage repayment periods and customised

loan packages.

We recommend that HDB consider allowingSingaporeans to re-mortgage part of their assets to

meet urgent cash requirements rather than for themto be forced to sell their flats. Stringent safeguards

conditions could be put in place, for example:

• A “supervising authority” (HDB or commercialbanks) can be identified to determine

whether an applicant can be allowed tore-mortgage part of his assets to raise credit

in the first place;

• The bulk of the applicant’s existing loan shouldhave been paid up;

• The re-mortgaged amount should be repaid at

commercial interest rates;

• The disbursement of the re-mortgagedamount will be in monthly sums rather than a

lump sum (since the intent of the scheme is tohelp alleviate ongoing financial difficulties)

• The maximum allowable sum (e.g. 50% the

value of the property) is capped by HDB,depending on the amount of outstanding loan.

Unemployed individualscould be allowed, on avery limited andexceptional basis, totap available resourcesin their CPF accountsto support themselvesthrough spells ofunemployment.

Page 58: Remaking Singapore (2003)

56 A H O M E F O R A L L S E A S O N S C h a n g i n g M i n d s e t s , D e e p e n i n g R e l a t i o n s h i p s

HDB has put in place various financial assistance

measures to help HDB mortgagors who arein financial difficulties to service their mortgage

loans. These include deferred payment ofloan instalments, conversion to a reduced

payment, rescheduling of mortgage loan up to themaximum repayment period, and inclusion of

working family members as co-owners. HDB couldalso explore other means of helping financially

strapped Singaporeans.

Health insurance. Our current healthcare policiesare based on a combination of personal

responsibility and government subsidy to keepbasic services affordable. Medical services are

currently on a co-payment basis to deter over-consumption. While the current principles are

sound, there is scope for more risk pooling andupstream measures, as these will translate into

lower costs in the long run. First, with an ageingpopulation and rising healthcare costs, risk

pooling is a more efficient way of helpingindividuals handle major healthcare expenses.Second, risk pooling becomes more critical given

the government’s intention to move towardsa portable medical benefit system, where

employers may no longer cover medical expensesof employees but instead contribute an additional

1% of the employees’ Medisave account. Finally,risk pooling is in line with our philosophy of

self-reliance and provision.

MediShield was introduced in 1990 as a

catastrophic insurance scheme to cover high-endmedical bills, for which Medisave alone would not

be sufficient. However its benefits have not keptup with increases in healthcare costs. Its claimable

limits are relatively low today and cannot fullycover high-end bills. Patients have to fork out

additional cash as a result. As an indicator,

MediShield claims account for less than 2% of the

National Health Expenditure. This shows the verylimited scope played by MediShield as a catastrophic

insurance scheme.

We propose to expand the role of insurance inhealthcare financing. While it may not be feasible

(nor palatable) to impose compulsory coverage atthis point in time, initiatives and incentives

can be put in place to provide better coverage, viz.:

• To enhance MediShield by raisingclaimable limits;

• To provide financial assistance to low-income

individuals by co-paying MediShieldpremiums; and

• To facilitate employers to contribute towards

a portable insurance scheme in place ofexisting healthcare benefits.

Holistic Assistance forthe Structurally Unemployed

Extend Primary Care Partnership Scheme to thedisabled and chronically ill. Under the Primary Care

Partnership Scheme, elderly from lower- incomefamilies can obtain subsidised treatment and dental

care from private General Practitioners at polyclinicrates. This is to reduce the need for them to incur

travelling expenses when there is an availableprivate GP near their homes. This scheme should

be extended to other lower-income Singaporeans,particularly those with disabilities for whom

mobility can be problematic and costly, as well asto the chronically ill who require regular, though not

necessarily complex medical care. The eligibility ofthese families could be established through a one-

off means test.

With an ageingpopulation and risinghealthcare costs, riskpooling is a moreefficient way of helpingindividuals handlemajor healthcareexpenses.

Page 59: Remaking Singapore (2003)

57A H O M E F O R A L L S E A S O N SC h a n g i n g M i n d s e t s , D e e p e n i n g R e l a t i o n s h i p s

Eligibility criteria of assistance schemes. Currently,

different agencies adopt different means tests andeligibility criteria for the assistance schemes they

administer. The eligibility criteria of some schemeshave sharp cut-off points, eliminating those earning

marginally above the income cut-off.

As a general principle, all government agenciesshould adopt a graduated scale of eligibility for their

assistance schemes, rather than the current binaryapproach. The lowest income group would receive

the highest level of subsidy and this shouldtaper off gradually with rising income levels.

A lead agency (either MCDS or MOF) should be

responsible for determining the milestone incomelevels eligible for assistance or government subsidy.

All government agencies would adoptthe income criterion guidelines and where

necessary add in their specific criteria. However,these should also be based on the principle of

graduated levels of assistance.

Government agencies should also, as a matter ofroutine, consult key stakeholders when developing

or reviewing assistance schemes. A consultativeapproach would enhance transparency and help

policies gain acceptance and ownership,particularly by service providers who are at the

forefront administering the schemes.

B ENABLING THE FULLPARTICIPATION OF ALLSEGMENTS OF SOCIETY

MOE to play a more active role in special education.We have received feedback that special educationis positioned by the government as a welfare issue

rather than an education issue. The respondents

cited that, for example, compulsory education is notextended to disabled students. There are also

limited opportunities for integration intomainstream schools at an early age, even for

children with mild disabilities. This represents lostopportunities, as inclusion downstream would

be more difficult.

MOE could carry out research and planning forthe special education needs of children in

areas such as infrastructure development,teacher training and curriculum formulation.

In particular, more professional emphasisshould be placed in formulating the curriculum

and ensuring proper implementation, reviewand continuous improvement.

There is also a critical need to establish career plans

and a structured training and developmentframework for special education teachers. In this

area, NCSS and VWOs can continue to work closelywith the government in the operation of special

schools and service provision.

More teachers should be trained with the basicskills to handle the special needs of children with

mild disabilities, in order to support the integrationof more of such children into mainstream schools.

MOE could identify more primary schools in eachschool cluster (similar to what is being done

at the secondary school level) where facilities areavailable for disabled students.

Set up a National Council on Accessibility. The

ability to move around independently is a basicneed of all individuals, including less mobile groups

like the disabled, the elderly and those travellingwith young children.

Page 60: Remaking Singapore (2003)

58 A H O M E F O R A L L S E A S O N S C h a n g i n g M i n d s e t s , D e e p e n i n g R e l a t i o n s h i p s

Over the years, efforts have been made to improve

localised accessibility to such groups. For example,the Building and Construction Authority (BCA)

administers a Code on Barrier-Free Accessibility inBuildings which mandates minimum standards for

buildings and areas intended for public access. Inaddition, BCA has design guidelines for developers

who want to provide more than the minimumstandards. By 2006, all MRT stations will be

accessible to the elderly and disabled.

However, it is not sufficient to have isolatedbuildings and MRT stations that are barrier-free if

the connecting roads, buses and walkways are notaccessible to the disabled. Taxis are generally not

affordable to the disabled, even with the currentsubsidy schemes. Hence, more needs to be done

to ensure that there is full accessibility for the entirejourney, i.e. from doorstep to destination.

A National Council on Accessibility (NCA) should be

set up as a non-profit body, to coordinate efforts atimproving accessibility and to champion the

physical accessibility needs of the less mobile. TheCouncil could comprise members of the public who

share an interest in physical accessibility issues,such as planners, developers, architects and VWOs

as well as representatives from the relevantpublic agencies to serve as resource persons.

The NCA’s proposed scope of duties are:

• To survey and establish the size, scope and

physical accessibility needs of the less mobilecommunity in Singapore;

• To recommend specific improvements to

physical accessibility in the areas of buildingdevelopments, transport, public areas/

amenities and other areas so deemed asrelevant by the Council;

• To work with the relevant agencies to

coordinate efforts to improve physicalaccessibility, and to gather the resources and

support (e.g. grants, incentives, legislation,etc.) needed to implement the specific

recommendations; and

• To raise public awareness of physicalaccessibility issues and the need to provide

for the needs of the less mobile groups.

NCA could be set up as an independent advisorybody to agencies such as the Ministry of Transport

(MOT) and BCA. Once the Council and its scope ofwork are established, NCA could apply to the

government for some form of grant to coverits start-up and operation.

Transportation planning for the less mobile.Currently, there appears to be insufficientcoordinated planning for the transportation needs

of the less mobile. An authority with the necessaryclout, say MOT, should be appointed to coordinate

planning for the public transportation needs of theless mobile segments of the population, such as

the elderly and the disabled, to ensure integratedaccess for all. Similar arrangements exist in Hong

Kong, Japan and the United Kingdom. For a start,MOT could look into the feasibility of encouraging

the public bus operators to bring in disabled-friendly buses in the longer term, taking into

consideration cost and efficiency issues.

Facilitate employment for the disabled. AsSingapore moves towards a knowledge-based

economy, low value-added jobs that have

A National Council onAccessibility (NCA)should be set up as anon-profit body, tocoordinate efforts atimproving accessibilityand to champion thephysical accessibilityneeds of the lessmobile.

Page 61: Remaking Singapore (2003)

59A H O M E F O R A L L S E A S O N SC h a n g i n g M i n d s e t s , D e e p e n i n g R e l a t i o n s h i p s

traditionally provided employment for the disabled

are fast disappearing. The plight of the disabledis exacerbated by the economic downturn.

Like education, the government’s position onemployment issues for the disabled is

seen more as a welfare issue, rather than ageneral employment issue.

The disabled are likely to face prejudices in the

quest to find employment. Such prejudices stemfrom perceived or real limitations of disabled

employees such as a steeper learning curve, lowerproductivity, and the fact that they are “different”

from other workers and may cause problems interms of inter-employee relationships or

Page 62: Remaking Singapore (2003)

60 A H O M E F O R A L L S E A S O N S C h a n g i n g M i n d s e t s , D e e p e n i n g R e l a t i o n s h i p s

expectations. Higher healthcare costs and potential

higher health insurance premiums are alsodisincentives to employing disabled.

The approach to deal with existing prejudices faced

by the disabled is not through affirmative actionlaws. Such laws on minority opportunities have

been known to discourage employers fromemploying minorities, while giving minorities a false

sense of protection that leads to complacency andpoor work attitudes. We prefer a system where the

minority (i.e. the disabled in this case) are expectedto give of their best and employers are encouraged

to give the disabled person an opportunity todemonstrate their worth.

To encourage employers to employ disabledworkers, opportunities for employers to explore

what it means to recruit, retain, and advanceemployees with disabilities need to be fostered.

Such opportunities can take the form ofsymposiums, work attachment and internship and

‘adopt-an-association’ arrangements. Possibleschemes for the disabled could be modelled along

the lines of the “People-for-Jobs Traineeship”scheme administered by MOM. Under this scheme,

50% of a new hire’s salary is subsidised by thegovernment for six months. This is estimated to cost

about S$600 per month per placement candidate(i.e. 50% of the average salary of S$1,200 per month

for people with disabilities). To place 3006

candidates a year would amount to a funding

requirement of S$1.08 million per annum.It is proposed that S$1 million be set as an annual

cap for the scheme.

Eligibility for such assistance would be based ondisabilities as defined by MCDS guidelines. As a

safeguard, the participation of each person withdisability will need to be tracked and employers

cannot continue to be granted subsidies if theymerely replace one disabled person with another

every six months.

Introduce service learning in education. To maintainour social cohesion, those who are more successful

must be willing to help those who are lesssuccessful. Volunteerism needs to be made

relevant to the lifestyles and expectationsof Singaporeans.

Service learning is community participation

designed to achieve substantive curricularobjectives relevant to the individual student. It

differs from the Community Involvement

To encourageemployers to employdisabled workers,opportunities foremployers to explorewhat it means torecruit, retain, andadvance employeeswith disabilities needto be fostered.

6 Currently, BizLink Centre provides placement services for 200 disabledpersons a year. It is estimated that there are another 100 candidates whoundergo job placements outside BizLink Centre’s services.

Page 63: Remaking Singapore (2003)

61A H O M E F O R A L L S E A S O N SC h a n g i n g M i n d s e t s , D e e p e n i n g R e l a t i o n s h i p s

Programme as currently implemented in schools

in two aspects. First, under service learning,service is integrated into the academic or doctrinal

curriculum. Second, students receive academiccredit for participation. It provides an avenue

for students to use their skills and knowledgein real-life situations and to serve real

community needs.

Implementing service learning as a core pedagogyin our education system is one way of bringing

volunteerism home to our young. Studies on theeffects of service learning (as implemented in

American colleges) have shown that it has positiveeffects on the sense of responsibility, on citizenship

skills and commitment to service. By integratingservice within learning, students develop a habit

of helping and serving which if well nurtured wouldcarry through beyond their life after graduation.

Many North American colleges and graduateschools have thus incorporated service

learning into their curriculum.

We therefore propose incorporating servicelearning into our mainstream educational curricula:

• Service Learning Centres already exist in

several organisations; more such Centres canbe established in other organisations to serve

as repositories of service learning expertiseand centres of logistical support;

• Tertiary institutions should build up their

service learning capacity and pilot servicelearning courses in year 2003-04; by 2006-07,

tertiary institutions should incorporateservice learning into at least 10% of their

curriculum; and

Corporations play animportant role infostering communitysupport and the socialcompact. Beyondproviding fundingor donations,corporations should beencouraged to activelypursue particular causesor develop certainservice areas.

• Junior colleges, primary and secondaryschools should be encouraged to incorporate

service learning into their curriculum.

Philanthropy Awards. Corporations play animportant role in fostering community support and

the social compact. Beyond providing funding ordonations, corporations should be encouraged to

actively pursue particular causes or develop certainservice areas. The Committee felt that more could

be done to promote corporate philanthropy.

There are currently several high-level awards torecognise corporate volunteerism and donations.

We recommend streamlining these philanthropyawards, according them the same status as other

national awards, and enhancing their visibility. Wealso recommend introducing an award to recognise

the innovation or pioneering spirit of corporationsthat pursue or support new areas of social services.

Page 64: Remaking Singapore (2003)

62 A H O M E T O C H E R I S H C h a n g i n g M i n d s e t s , D e e p e n i n g R e l a t i o n s h i p s

Page 65: Remaking Singapore (2003)

63A H O M E T O C H E R I S HC h a n g i n g M i n d s e t s , D e e p e n i n g R e l a t i o n s h i p s

A HOME TOCHERISH

C H A P T E R 5C h a n g i n g M i n d s e t s , D e e p e n i n g R e l a t i o n s h i p s

Page 66: Remaking Singapore (2003)

64 A H O M E T O C H E R I S H C h a n g i n g M i n d s e t s , D e e p e n i n g R e l a t i o n s h i p s

Remove female quota for medical faculty in NUS.Since 1979, the government has imposed a one-

third quota on women attending the NUS medical

course. The rationale was that a higher proportion

of female doctors worked part-time or not at all, so

a higher proportion of male medical students would

ensure that there were more full-time doctors to

meet the projected demand for medical services.

From 1992 to 2001, the percentage of female

doctors not working or working part-time ranged

from 16% to 19%. The comparative figure for male

doctors was 6% to 8%.1 These figures, however, did

not distinguish between doctors who were not

working and part-time doctors. On the other hand,

a nation-wide survey conducted between March

and July 2000 by the Association of Women Doctors

Singapore on 998 male and female doctors found

that, excluding retirees, about 1% of men and 2%

of women stopped practising that year. These rates

are not statistically significant.

The medical manpower needs in Singapore are also

rising. Life sciences, biomedicine and community

healthcare are growing areas that attract both

women and men. As Singapore establishes itself

A PROMOTING EQUALOPPORTUNITIES

The role of women has evolved significantly over

the years, with many more now playing important

roles in the workforce and the community.

Singapore has a good record in recognising the

dual roles that women play and supporting

shared responsibilities between husband and

wife in their family roles. However, a number of

instances of gender inequality remain. These

should be eliminated.

as a biomedical hub, it will require more

trained doctors to meet the needs of the

life sciences, biomedical and community

healthcare sectors.

The Remaking Singapore Committee has conveyed

these points to the government, and the

government has responded in Dec 2002 by

removing the quota on female students for the

medical faculty in NUS.

Harmonise the medical benefits of female and malecivil servants. Under the Medisave-cum-Subsidised

Outpatient (MSO) Scheme introduced in January

1994, a male civil servant is entitled to a subsidy of

60% for his wife and children for outpatient

treatment, up to a cap of $350. This applies to all

items of medical expenses which are subsidised,

i.e. consultation, investigations, treatment and

drugs including prescribed non-standard drugs

supplied by a government or restructured hospital

pharmacy. A female civil servant is not accorded

these outpatient benefits unless she is divorced/

widowed /legally separated and is the sole

supporter of her family.

The government’s stand for the current policy is

based on the belief that in an Asian society, the

husband is the “head of household” and is primarily

responsible for taking care of the family. Hence,

medical benefits schemes should reflect this belief

and not undermine the rationale for holding the

husband responsible.

The treatment towards male and female should be

harmonised, i.e. female civil servants should be

entitled to a 60% subsidy for outpatient treatment

for their spouse and children as well . This

is consistent with the principle of shared 1 Data from Singapore Medical Council.

Page 67: Remaking Singapore (2003)

65A H O M E T O C H E R I S HC h a n g i n g M i n d s e t s , D e e p e n i n g R e l a t i o n s h i p s

responsibility for the family, and will send a strong

signal of government’s support for the family.

Harmonise citizenship privileges. Any child born

overseas to a Singaporean parent has to apply for

Singapore citizenship. Article 122(1) of our

Constitution accords Singapore citizenship by

descent to a child born overseas if his/her father is

a Singaporean by birth or registration. This is

provided the child’s birth is registered within one

year (or later with the consent of government). In

addition, if the child’s father is a Singapore citizen

by registration, the child should not acquire

the citizenship of that county in which he/she was

born, by reason of his/her birth in that country.

However, if the child is born to a Singaporean

mother and non-citizen father or to a Singaporean

father who is a citizen by descent, the child’s

application will be for citizenship by registration.

Although such applications are rarely rejected,2 the

perception is that a child born to a Singaporean

mother does not enjoy the same privilege as a childborn to a Singaporean father.

The proportion of marriages between a Singapore

citizen and a non-resident from among the total

number of marriages has increased from 15% in

1990 to 21% in 2002.3 The proportion of foreigners

in our population has been rising. Coupled with the

rising trend of Singaporeans working overseas,

more female citizens, especially the better-

educated, are expected to marry foreigners.

Our current citizenship policy does not encourage

the rooting of the Singaporean man/woman, his/

her foreign spouse and their children to Singapore.

With increased globalisation and our relatively open

policy towards foreign talent, there is a danger that

we could lose a significant number of our better-

educated daughters, and their offspring, through

Singaporean-foreigner marriages if they perceive

that we do not value them and their offspring

as much as we value our male citizens and their

offspring. Singaporean women are no less attached

to the nation than their male counterparts. There is

thus no reason to believe that a child of a

Singaporean woman would be less attached

and rooted to the country than a child of a

Singaporean man.

Singaporean women have progressed in terms of

education and earning power. Over the past decade,

more women have entered the university and

participation in the labour force increased from 40%

in 1991 to 53% in 2002. As their capabilities and

status grow, it is reasonable to assume that women

will have a greater say in decision-making within

the family, including where to live.

We propose that citizenship be granted to overseas-

born babies of Singaporean women marrying

foreigners, and of overseas-stationed Singaporeanfathers who are citizens by descent. This move to

bring about parity in citizenship policy will assure

them that their children have an inalienable right

to Singapore citizenship, encouraging them to

make Singapore their home.4

The move will also change public perception that

the country does not value all children alike. This is

particularly key in today’s times and in line with the

government’s commitment to developing a sense

of belonging and rootedness to the country. It is also

in line with the government’s policy of augmenting

the number of births and talent pool for Singapore.

The proposed change would require the Constitution

to be amended.

Singaporean womenare no less attached tothe nation than theirmale counterparts.There is thus no reasonto believe that a childof a Singaporeanwoman would be lessattached and rooted tothe country than a childof a Singaporean man.

2 Applications are rarely rejected if the applications meet the sameconditions (e.g. not acquiring citizenship of another country) which arealso applied to citizenship by descent.

3 Figures exclude marriages previously solemnized outside Singapore orunder religious and customary rites.

4 Administratively, an increasing number of citizenship applicationsare already being approved for foreign-born children and foreignerspouses. In 2000, 2,476 (92%) out of 2,700 citizenship applicationswere approved for foreign-born children. Hence, any move to accordequality in treatment to overseas-born descendants of citizens wouldbe consistent with existing practice.

Page 68: Remaking Singapore (2003)

66 A H O M E T O C H E R I S H C h a n g i n g M i n d s e t s , D e e p e n i n g R e l a t i o n s h i p s

B STRENGTHENING FAMILIESAS THE FIRST LINE OFSUPPORT

The family remains the cornerstone of our society,

and we need to reinforce this primary social

institution. However, the promotion of family values

needs to take current reality into account. Gender

equality in the workplace must be matched

by shared responsibilities in the home and family.

Formation of a National Family Council. At present,

there are several agencies involved in family life

promotion and related activities. These include the

Ministry of Community Development and Sports

(MCDS), the National Council of Social Service

(NCSS) and the Family Resource and Training Centre

(FRTC). Many VWOs, in particular Family Service

Centres, also provide welfare and counselling

services. In addition, committees have been formed

to engage the community in realising the vision

of strong and stable families, such as the Public

Education Committee on Family (subsequently

renamed Family Matters! Singapore), and the

Committee on the Family.

Ground feedback suggests that such efforts, while

important and useful, lack sufficient visibility and

impact. There is no single visible driving force to

champion the family movement. Moreover, while

research on family issues is being undertaken

by various bodies, there is currently also no

overarching body with the ambit and the resources

to carry out comprehensive research on the

Singaporean family and the impact of various

government policies on it.

MCDS firmly agrees with the need for a coordinated

and integrated approach on family issues. Indeed,

its Family Development Division was set up to

ensure that family issues were tackled holistically.

However, MCDS has a deliberate strategy to let the

people and private sectors lead and front family-

related initiatives and messages where appropriate.This approach comes from the observation that

Singaporeans, especially the younger ones, believe

government should intrude less in the private and

personal spheres.

While the Committee agrees with MCDS’ partnership

strategy, it is equally important for the government

to send a strong signal to Singaporeans that family

matters. It is therefore proposed that a central agency

be set up to act as the champion for families in

Singapore, and to advocate pro-family policies. To

be called the National Family Council (NFC), this

agency should have strong backing and funding from

the government. It should be positioned like the

National Youth Council, under MCDS, and with a

Page 69: Remaking Singapore (2003)

67A H O M E T O C H E R I S HC h a n g i n g M i n d s e t s , D e e p e n i n g R e l a t i o n s h i p s

Minister as the Chairman. Existing committees

and bodies can be subsumed under its ambit.

One of the first tasks of the NFC could be to develop

a Family Charter to articulate the important role the

family plays in Singapore’s development, and to

provide general guidelines for the private, public

and people sectors to follow to help

support and strengthen families. The NFC

could also use the Family Charter as the basis to

champion new policy initiatives and ideas.

The NFC would also drive and conduct research

and training, and benchmark itself internationally

in these areas. It would also steer public

education efforts.

Incorporating family life education into the formalschool curriculum. Family life education (FLE)

“provides skills and knowledge to enrich individual

and family life. It includes knowledge about how

families work; the interrelationship of families

and society; human growth and developmentthroughout the life span; the physiological

and psychological aspects of human sexuality;

the impact of money and time management

on daily family life; the importance and value

of parent education.”5

While FLE efforts have been stepped up

in Singapore, there are drawbacks to the

current programmes:

The family remains thecornerstone of oursociety, and we need toreinforce this primarysocial institution.

• FLE for working adults - Though there are

many good FLE programmes, they are not

well attended and are less successful in

reaching out to males/fathers.

Hence, we recommend that FLE has a structured

curriculum and begin when our children are still

in secondary school. Specific recommendations

are as follows:

• Review the CME curriculum to incorporate

hands-on aspects (e.g. family budgeting), sex

education and parent education or

experiential learning (e.g. father and child

bonding exercises).

• Provide sufficient training to enable teachers

to conduct effective FLE classes.

• Engage external Family Life educators to co-

teach with the CME teachers in the area of FLE.

• Set up a family life centre in each school cluster,

as a resource centre for parents and students.

• FLE classes/workshops can be arranged for

young people at the tertiary level and at the

major transition periods of their lives, e.g., at

the start of secondary school, when entering 5 Taken from the National Council on Family Relations, USA

• FLE for the younger generation - While FLE is

incorporated into the Civics & Moral Education

(CME) syllabus in primary and secondary

schools, it forms only a small component and

is not given sufficient emphasis.

The desired end-state is for Singaporeans, living in

an increasingly stressful and fast-paced environment,

to still be able to continue to value, develop and

maintain strong family relations. Singaporeans should

be taught from young the value and benefits of

family life and be made aware of the roles and

responsibilities involved in family life.

Page 70: Remaking Singapore (2003)

68 A H O M E T O C H E R I S H C h a n g i n g M i n d s e t s , D e e p e n i n g R e l a t i o n s h i p s

pre-university or the polytechnics, before

National Service ends, and before graduation

from university.

The lead agency for these recommendations

should be MCDS.

C PRESERVING MEMORIES,BUILDING SHARED HISTORY

Increase public involvement in heritage matters.Current policies and efforts related to heritage

matters in Singapore are largely managed by the

government through agencies such as the National

Heritage Board (NHB), the Preservation of

Monuments Board and the Urban Redevelopment

Authority. Despite recent government efforts to

engage and consult the private sector, the people

sector and the public more actively on heritage-

related matters, public perceptions about the

government’s “lip service” to ground opinion on

heritage matters are not uncommon. There are also

some who question the objectivity of government

decisions on heritage matters, particularly when the

case involves balancing the conflicting needs for

development and heritage preservation (the

decision to demolish the National Library is a

case in point).

We would like the public to be more involved in the

identification and preservation of physical and

emotional anchors that would help root them to

Singapore, especially in matters related to

our shared heritage. This is especially necessary

given that memories differ from generation

to generation and even among different segments

of the population within the same generation.

The National Heritage Board and the Preservation

of Monuments Board should involve and

consult the public much more in their work.

Partnerships with the people and private

sectors in activities can foster greater appreciation

of our heritage, generate income and encourage

the development of the local heritage industry.

Preserve memories of Singapore life through aCommunity Museum & Radio and Museum ofEveryday Life. Today, there are three National

Museums in Singapore – the Singapore History

Museum, the Singapore Art Museum and the Asian

Civilisations Museum. There are at least a dozen

others run by private and para-government

agencies such as the Changi Chapel and Museum,

Fort Siloso, and Singapore Discovery Centre. These

aim to cultivate awareness and appreciation

of Singapore’s heritage, culture, and arts. NHB

has also worked with ethnic-based organisations

like the Hindu Endowments Board, MUIS and Majlis

Pusat to put up travelling exhibitions on Deepavali,

Hari Raya Puasa etc.

Apart from these, other efforts to document thesocial history of various communities in Singapore

include the Fuk Tak Chi Museum, which holds about

200 artefacts contributed by former residents of

Chinatown; and Chinese Heritage Centre, a research

and resource centre on overseas Chinese which

aims to advance the knowledge and understanding

of people of Chinese descent around the world.

There are also plans to set up the Malay Heritage

Centre, while NHB intends to encourage the

Indian and Eurasian communities to set up

the Indian and Eurasian Heritage Centres

respectively. In addition, there has been increased

interest among local communities to set up their

own heritage corners or galleries within the

Community Development Councils, community

clubs, schools and even private organisations.

We would like thepublic to be moreinvolved in theidentification andpreservation of physicaland emotional anchorsthat would help rootthem to Singapore,especially in mattersrelated toour shared heritage.This is especiallynecessary given thatmemories differ fromgenerationto generation and evenamong differentsegments of thepopulation within thesame generation.

Page 71: Remaking Singapore (2003)

69A H O M E T O C H E R I S HC h a n g i n g M i n d s e t s , D e e p e n i n g R e l a t i o n s h i p s

Taken together, all these museums, heritage

centres and mobile displays contribute to

the national effort to strengthen Singaporeans’

sense of identity and belonging to the country.6

There is, however, currently no one-stop museum

in Singapore that is dedicated solely to promoting

Singapore’s social history.7 In particular, the origins

and development of the various communities in

Singapore (including the multi-layered cultural links

of the micro-communities within each of the major

races with the rest of the region) have not been

adequately captured in our social history. With rapid

modernisation and development, memories of

everyday Singapore life through the generations

also risk being forgotten and left untold.

To further enrich Singaporeans’ memories and

awareness of our social transformation, we propose

the establishment of a Community Museum &

Radio and Museum of Everyday Life in Singapore

that will focus primarily on our social history.

These two proposed Museums will be one-stop

centres dedicated to showcasing the memories

of ordinary Singapore life and the heritage of

various ethnic communities in Singapore. They

will complement existing museums in Singapore

in helping to preserve and promote familiar places,

sights and sounds that our people have come to

associate with the country.

Singapore came about through the settlement

of an extremely diverse migrant population with

varied cultures and backgrounds. The communities

that made Singapore their home included

Hainanese, Teochew and Hokkien Chinese;

Achenese, Javanese and Balinese Malays; Tamils,

Malayalees and Punjabi Indians; as well as

Portuguese, French and English Eurasians. Through

6 The role of heritage and history in enhancing Singaporeans’ sense ofbelonging to the country was affirmed by a recent survey commissionedby the National Heritage Board on heritage awareness. For example,about 83% of respondents agreed that a better understanding andappreciation of Singapore’s history and heritage would increase theirown sense of belonging, while about 68% felt that taking part inheritage activities and visiting museums would help them personallydevelop a greater sense of belonging.

7 The exhibits at Singapore History Museum, for example, focus mainly onthe earlier periods of Singapore’s political and economic history, tracing thetrends and developments that have characterised and shaped life inSingapore from the 14th century to our independence in 1965. The focus ofthe other museums are more specialised, touching on topics likeSingapore’s war history (e.g., Changi Chapel and Museum, which highlightsthe courage of World War II prisoners-of-war; and Reflections at BukitChandu, a World War II Interpretative Centre), our defence force (e.g.,Republic of Singapore Air Force Museum and Republic of Singapore NavyMuseum), land planning efforts (URA Gallery) and even sports(Sports Museum).

8 Examples of museums in other countries that celebrate the diversecultures and heritage of their migrant populations are the Migration Museumof South Australia in Adelaide and the Institute of Texan Cultures in SanAntonio, USA. The latter, for example, features exhibits on 26 ethnic andcultural groups that have settled in Texas over the years, including theBelgians, Chinese, Filipinos, Irish, Lebanese, and Polish.

9 The concept for the Community Radio is similar to that for Rediffusion, acommercial audio broadcasting system over cable that airs programmes inthe Chinese dialects e.g., Chinese opera, songs, and stories. According tothe Singapore Broadcasting Authority, Rediffusion is permitted to broadcastin the Chinese dialects as it is not a free-to-air station (i.e., listeners need tosubscribe to the station). The station also limits the number of hours ofprogrammes broadcast in the Chinese dialects. For free-to-air radio stations,Chinese dialect pop songs or excerpts of such songs are currentlyprohibited. In addition, where an interviewee important to a programme canspeak only in dialect, a voice-over in Mandarin has to be used. The onlyfree-to-air radio channel carrying Chinese dialect content at the moment isCapital Radio 95.8FM, where news in various dialects are broadcast twice aday. As such, if the Community Radio were to function as a free-to-airchannel, a review of the current guidelines on broadcasts in dialects orlanguages other than the four official languages might be necessary.

the years, however, distinctions in the origins of

these early migrants have become increasingly

overlooked, with Singaporeans today often

narrowly identified as being of Chinese, Malay,

Indian or “Others” descent.

The Community Museum aims to celebrate the rich

heritage of the diverse communities in Singapore.

The museum will serve as our “family album”,

documenting how each migrant community came

to establish a stake in Singapore and the region.8

Exhibits could showcase the history of each “micro-

community”, their memorabilia and artefacts,

unique cultural beliefs, customs and practices (e.g.

festivals celebrated, ethnic costumes, wedding

rituals), religious practices, folklore, lifestyles, food,

art, music, literature, dance, achievements and

contributions to the community/country.

Through understanding the origins and diversity of,

as well as vital links across, ethnic communities,

new generations of Singaporeans will be able to

better connect with their families, communities,Singapore and the region. At the same time, they

will gain a deeper understanding and appreciation

of the rich cultural heritage of the other

communities in Singapore. Facilitating such

cross-cultural understanding and communication

will also contribute to the development of a

sense of shared destiny, future and nationhood

among Singaporeans over time.

To complement the Community Museum, the

Community Radio could be set up as the voice of

the museum. The Community Radio could celebrate

the cultural diversity in Singapore by carrying

broadcasts in the languages, dialects and even

patois of the various ethnic communities in the

country.9 Such programmes could also be

Page 72: Remaking Singapore (2003)

70 A H O M E T O C H E R I S H C h a n g i n g M i n d s e t s , D e e p e n i n g R e l a t i o n s h i p s

translated into the four official languages to widen

their reach. The memories and experiences of older

Singaporeans could be tapped, allowing them

to relate vivid stories of their own community – their

heritage, customs, heroes, strivings for success

etc. Such content, together with the use of local

dialects, will give the station a distinctively

Singaporean flavour.

The Community Radio, however, might not be

financially sustainable in view of the high costs

involved in running a radio station and the possibly

small audience base, especially with the decreasing

number of Singaporeans who understand

and appreciate dialects. A viable alternative

suggested by NHB is therefore to work with the

Media Development Authority (MDA) to increase

local dialect and heritage programmes among

existing broadcasters. NHB is already working with

MDA on such programmes by providing research

support. An example of a radio programme with a

community focus that has been produced is

“Vanishing Trades”, which featured, among others,a letter-writer, storyteller, Bangsawan performer,

Chinese opera actress, and Tamil street theatre.

Museum of Everyday Life. The Museum of Everyday

Life will feature familiar places, sights and sounds

that Singaporeans have come to associate with

everyday Singapore life over the years, especially

in the post-Independence years.10 In doing so, it

will make a slice of a bygone era accessible to our

people, especially the younger generation.

The museum could even serve as a visual talking

point for parents and teachers to discuss events

of our past with younger Singaporeans.

10 Examples of similar museums in other countries include theReminiscence Centre in Blackheath, South-east London, which features amuseum of everyday life in the first half of the 20th century; the WorkersMuseum in Copenhagen, Denmark, which carries, among other displays, anexhibition on everyday life in the 1950s; and the People’s History Museumin Manchester, England, which focuses on the history of working people inBritain over the last 200 years.

Exhibits could include models of public housing

interiors belonging to the different decades, photo

essays of life from the war years to the present, and

even models or replicas of landmark buildings that

have been demolished in Singapore. Other aspects

of everyday life that could be captured in the

museum are our leisure activities (popular

games, hobbies and past-times), food, fashion

(dressing and hairstyles), language (development

of Singapore’s own brand of English, Singlish),

music, entertainment, work and family life,

living conditions, and how they have evolved and

changed over the decades.

The two proposed museums can leverage on the

pride that the various communities have in their

own heritage by working with cultural and

community groups to develop the exhibits. Beyond

being a mere repository of memorabilia and

information, however, the two museums would

need to be set up and managed by professionals.

Government funds would probably be necessary to

support the initiatives. A more detailed feasibilitystudy will have to be conducted by the NHB

or possibly even the proposed Temasek

Heritage Foundation (see below).

Generations of Singaporeans are expected to be

able to relate to the two museums as they

powerfully capture and present the meaning of

being Singaporean – how the different ethnic

communities arrived in Singapore and built up their

lives here, as well as how Singaporeans through

the years live, work and play. The two museums

would thus facilitate the development of physical

and emotional anchors that would contribute to a

strong sense of familiarity among Singaporeans,

Page 73: Remaking Singapore (2003)

71A H O M E T O C H E R I S HC h a n g i n g M i n d s e t s , D e e p e n i n g R e l a t i o n s h i p s

and in the process, strengthen their attachment and

rootedness to the nation.

Creation of Temasek Heritage Foundation. The

proposed Temasek Heritage Foundation (THF)

in Singapore is modelled in part on the

11 The National Trust in the UK, which aims to preserve places of historicinterest or natural beauty permanently for the nation to enjoy, currentlyprotects more than 200 sites in the country. Provisions have been madeunder the British statutes for land transferred to the National Trust to beprotected by an act of Parliament. Such land cannot be voluntarily sold,mortgaged, or compulsorily purchased against the Trust’s wishes withoutspecial parliamentary procedure. This special power means that protectionby the Trust is forever.

United Kingdom’s National Trust, a registered

charity that is independent of the government11.

The proposed THF would also be an

independent, non-government, registered

charity to complement the work of existing

government heritage-related agencies.

Page 74: Remaking Singapore (2003)

72 A H O M E T O C H E R I S H C h a n g i n g M i n d s e t s , D e e p e n i n g R e l a t i o n s h i p s

At some point, the THF will also need some

special powers to enable it to protect

significant heritage sites from over-zealous

town planners and property developers. One

option might be to confer on the THF similar

powers as the UK Heritage Trust (i.e. for land

to be transferred to the Foundation and

protected by an act of Parliament). However,

in land-scarce Singapore, the desire for

conservation and preservation must be

balanced against the needs of urban

planningand development to sustain the

economic well being of future generations.

• Promote heritage awareness - The THF could

undertake commercial activities, much like the

UK’s National Trust, that promote greater

heritage awareness (thereby complementing

NHB), while generating income that could be

used to fund its operations.

• Development of heritage industry - The THF

could lead in encouraging the development ofthe local heritage industry e.g. by serving as

a one-stop centre providing advice and

resources on heritage issues.

The Foundation could be set up with an initial

grant from the government (similar to MITA’s

establishment of the Singapore International

Foundation in 1991). To ensure the credibility of the

Foundation as an independent body, the THF, just

like the UK’s National Trust, will need to build its

membership base, source for corporate and

individual contributions, undertake fund-raising

efforts as well as develop a business arm to finance

its activities. While the government’s financial

support in the initial years would be crucial as

securing alternative sources of funding could take

The roles of the THF could include the following:

• Independent advocate for heritage issues -

One of the THF’s primary roles would be to act

as an independent and unbiased advocate for

architectural and natural heritage matters. The

Foundation could serve as a platform where

government agencies (e.g. NHB, URA) could

hold pre-policy consultations on major

heritage-related and conservation matters. In

addition, the Foundation could serve as the

de facto umbrella organisation for the non-

government heritage organisations in

Singapore,12 and help to gather views from

these groups13 as well as from the public. As

an independent body, it is also expected that

the public would view the Foundation with

more credibility.

12 There are several non-Government heritage-related bodies in Singaporee.g. the Singapore Heritage Society (which is dedicated to understanding,revitalising and promoting awareness of heritage); and the Nature Society(which is dedicated to the study, conservation and enjoyment of naturalheritage in Singapore, Malaysia and the surrounding areas).

13 The proposed Temasek Heritage Foundation differs from URA’sConservation Advisory Panel (CAP) as the scope of the former is much wider(encompassing all areas of heritage, including natural heritage, not justarchitectural heritage). The Foundation is also envisaged as an organisationwith a full-time core staff that can focus its resources on the protection ofSingapore’s heritage, while CAP is an advisory body made up of memberswho hold other full-time appointments.

Page 75: Remaking Singapore (2003)

73A H O M E T O C H E R I S HC h a n g i n g M i n d s e t s , D e e p e n i n g R e l a t i o n s h i p s

D IMPROVING THEENVIRONMENT FORPARTICIPATION AND FUN

Free up more time for Singaporeans. We have

identified the lack of time as one of the main

obstacles hindering Singaporeans from having fun

and de-stressing. It is simply not possible to trulyrelax, unless one has sufficient time to do so. Simply

increasing the variety and quality of entertainment

and leisure opportunities does not automatically

mean that people will benefit from them. People

still need to have the time to enjoy these activities.

With the improvements in IT, Singaporeans are now

never really disconnected from the office. This adds

to the feelings of stress. It is thus necessary to free

up Singaporeans’ time to “play”. If Singaporeans

can de-stress and have fun in Singapore, this

can help them lead healthier lives as well as

anchor them to Singapore.

Currently, the Civil Service has implemented

alternate Saturdays off as a model for work, with

each officer having to fulfil 42 work-hours a week.

The 42 work-hours were to ensure that Singapore’s

time, the Foundation should be given as much

independence and autonomy as possible, so that

it is not hampered in its role as an independent and

unbiased advocate for architectural and natural

heritage matters. The government could also

extend relevant incentives to corporate and

individual contributors, to make it easier for the

Foundation to attract funding support.

By supporting the creation of the Temasek Heritage

Foundation, the government will give a strong

signal that it is prepared to engage the

public actively through an independent,

non-government organisation.

economy remained competitive, as well as

to provide essential services to the public from

Monday to Saturday.

We propose that a formal five-day workweek be

implemented in the Civil Service.

The Prime Minister’s Office (PMO) has said that

Ministries can adjust the working hours for their

officers within the overall framework of the 42-hour

work week, provided it does not impact on service

levels for the public, or lead to a decrease in

productivity. These two criteria are important for

prudent and efficient management and use of

government resources.

PMO also expressed concern that a five-day workweek

could send an inappropriate signal. The government

was mindful of the impact on the economy if the Civil

Service fully adopted a five-day workweek. Quite apart

from considerations of efficiency and productivity,

doing so would send the signal that, since the

government itself was now working fewer days,

workers throughout the economy should similarly and

automatically shift to a slower pace. This was likely to

cause undue pressure on those private sector

companies which were not ready or equipped to move

to such an arrangement. Employers customised

flexible working arrangements to suit their business

needs, otherwise their businesses were unlikely to

remain viable for long.

We think that there may not be as much pressure on

the private sector to switch to a five-day workweek

as first feared. Many private sector organisations

have already implemented a five-day workweek.

Moreover, changes in Civil Service practices are not

always followed by private firms. In any case, the

private firms can protect themselves by keeping a

51/2 day workweek as a term of the employment

Page 76: Remaking Singapore (2003)

74 A H O M E T O C H E R I S H C h a n g i n g M i n d s e t s , D e e p e n i n g R e l a t i o n s h i p s

Nonetheless, there is a very real need to maintain

essential services from Monday to Saturday. Hence,

we propose that the Civil Service implement a

companion policy allowing civil servants to work five

full working days in a week, but each Ministry be

given the autonomy to designate which of the five

days in the week each employee should work. The

system would be based on 44 working hours per

week. The Civil Service can reserve to itself the

right to recall the employee for the additional half

day where necessary but this should only be

implemented if absolutely necessary.

Sea and water sports in Singapore. Given

Singapore’s position as an island state, there is an

excellent opportunity to expand the sea and water

sports scene here to re-make Singapore into a world

class city to work and play in.

There are several government agencies that can

help Singapore achieve the goal of optimising its

potential as a water/sea sports hub:

• MCDS can be the lead agency tasked with the

promotion of sea sports, as part of its overall

mission of promoting sports. It can draw up a

blueprint for the development of sea sports in

Singapore, and provide grants to help sea

and water sports enthusiasts set up water-

sports businesses.

• MCDS, working together with the National

Parks Board and the URA, can encourage or

incentivise commercial operators to develop

essential infrastructure and facilities, like

access roads, toilets and car parks, in out-of-

the-way areas that have been zoned for sea

or water sports.

contract but implement the 5-day workweek as a

matter of policy. In this way they could reserve the

legal right (as a term of the employment) to recall

the employees to work an additional half day in the

work should the need arise. In short, keep the legal

requirement to work 51/2 days but in practice, work

five days except when it is necessary to recall the

employee for the extra half day.

Moreover, the concerns about a decrease in

productivity may be more imagined than real.

The World Competitiveness Worldbook ranked

Singapore fifth in 2002, down from its previous

position of second. The countries ahead (in order of

first to fourth placing) are US, Finland, Luxembourg

and the Netherlands. All EU countries have legislated

the 5-day workweek, and in the US, most companies

have also adopted the 5-day workweek (subject to

the requirements of the industry and specific union

laws). The concept that longer working hours means

more productivity is no longer valid.

Page 77: Remaking Singapore (2003)

75A H O M E T O C H E R I S HC h a n g i n g M i n d s e t s , D e e p e n i n g R e l a t i o n s h i p s

Singapore possessesmany of the conditionsnecessary to be aregional sea and watersports centre. Butsome changes inregulations and moreinfrastructureinvestment would berequired.

In sum, Singapore possesses many of the

conditions necessary to be a regional sea and water

sports centre. But some changes in regulations and

more infrastructure investment would be required.

We need to further optimise our unused coastal and

sea areas to remake this island into a tropical sea

sports paradise for both Singaporeans and tourists.

Raise profile of Singapore Youth Festival. The

Singapore Youth Festival (SYF) is an event that takes

place every alternate year and showcases the best

of the artistic and musical talent in our schools. The

standard is impressive and includes music, dance,

drama and static art among others. However, the

event is confined largely to the school system, and

although there are several public performances, the

entire event is not well marketed and publicised.

The profile of the SYF should be raised to become

an event at the national level that showcases

talented young Singaporeans, and promotes the

arts. With suitable publicity and positioning, it could

become the youth version of the Singapore ArtsFestival. This would increase opportunities for our

young artists to showcase their talent, and make

the arts more accessible and appealing to all

segments of Singaporeans, possibly with events

in the heartlands.

An Asian Events Hub. Singapore can be an Asian

events hub, playing host to a series of world famous

international events in the same league as the

Grand Prix, UK Glastonbury Festival, the London

Horticultural Show, etc. Such large-scale

international events could attract large local

followings, as well as increase opportunities for

local participation.

• PA’s four Sea Sports Clubs at Changi, East

Coast, Pasir Ris and Kallang are working on

enhancing their usage. These clubs offer

a range of water sports including boardsailing,

kayaking, sailing, dragon boating and power

boating. Some courses, activities and rental

of equipment are open to non-PA members

(both individuals and organisations)

but they pay a higher rate than members,

students and NSmen. PA could further

improve cooperation with other agencies, and

maybe even commercial operators, to optimise

the usage of the four clubs. PA could also offer

instruction in more extreme water sports.

• The Singapore Sports Council can organise

regional competitions on sea/beach sports.

• The PUB can review the use of water

catchment areas for water sports, such as

canoeing, paddleboats, rowing or even

dragon boats.

• The Maritime and Port Authority of Singapore

(MPA) has stated that it is not against the

expansion of sea sports and is willing to

designate sea space along the coastal areas in

the North (Sungei Buloh/Kranji) for such

activities, including para-sailing. It has started

to mediate with other agencies on how

to increase water sports accessibility and

venues, e.g. placing buoys and opening up new

areas for boating. MPA should also consider

creating different classes of license for

motorised water craft, according to size and not

have just one class for all. This will enable

Singaporeans to rent and use smaller craft,

such as jet-skis.

Page 78: Remaking Singapore (2003)

76 A H O M E T O C H E R I S H C h a n g i n g M i n d s e t s , D e e p e n i n g R e l a t i o n s h i p s

Audience Development Fund. With the Esplanade

in place, it is timely to focus on audience

development, and educating Singaporeans about

enjoying and appreciating various art forms. We

propose that an Audience Development Fund be set

up to seed the development of an arts-going

culture. The objectives of the fund would be to

collaborate with major arts groups to hold arts

performances to attract specific audience groups,

to develop public arts appreciation programmes,

and to assist major arts groups to set up Arts

Education units to promote the appreciation of

various art forms.

Streamlining the process of bringing in events. To

address the concern that there is too much red tape

involved in bringing events into Singapore, we

recommend that a one-stop agency be set up for

arts and entertainment groups to contact when

organising events. This agency, which could be part

of MITA or NAC, would cut red tape for local and

foreign groups by serving as a one-stop service and

information centre.

Make more facilities available for community andrecreational use. In addition to public parks, more

common and easily accessible open spaces can be

made available for recreation and community

activities. There is a general perception that many

parcels of land have been left vacant as their

development has not yet come about. Some plots

have been lying vacant for years. Feedback from

grassroots organisations indicates that a Temporary

Occupational License Fee, often costly, is payable

to the Singapore Land Authority before the land can

be used. The vacant land is hence inaccessible to

the general community.

Many school fields also lie idle after official school

hours. Residents in nearby estates who need

recreational space for sporting or community

activities could put these fields to good use. Many

of our waterbodies (e.g reservoirs) also have strict

regulations on the types of activities that can be

carried out in and on them.

To maximise use of state land and to better meet

demand for such facilities, we propose making

vacant state land, school fields and waterbodies

more accessible to members of the public for

community and recreation use.

Relaxation of rules in use of HDB void decks. Void

decks are ideal common spaces for community

activities that encourage residents to get out of their

homes to interact with their neighbours. HDB could

consider relaxing its rules on the kinds of activities

that can take place in the void decks.

Enable richness of life at the ‘street level’.Singapore has made a very good attempt at

recreating street life, for instance at Boat Quay and

Clarke Quay. However, success may unwittinglybe limited by the contrived environment and

regulated, organised setting. We should allow

people to hawk their wares creatively, either with

or without a small licence fee on a vacant piece of

land. We can encourage flea and antique markets,

or entrepreneurship through ‘car boot sales’ on

empty JTC or state land.

Accelerating the development of our rail network.Singapore’s present rail network has not reached

the desired level of comprehensiveness, coverage

or convenience. Unlike cities such as London or

Tokyo, where commuters are able to travel between

most points on rail alone, most commuters in

Singapore still rely on bus transfers to get them to

their final destinations. We should accelerate the

construction of our rail network with a view

In addition to publicparks, more commonand easily accessibleopen spaces can bemade available forrecreation andcommunity activities.

Page 79: Remaking Singapore (2003)

77A H O M E T O C H E R I S HC h a n g i n g M i n d s e t s , D e e p e n i n g R e l a t i o n s h i p s

to achieving a similar level of coverage

and connectivity as these cities. To ensure

comprehensiveness, we could consider setting a

target such that there should be a Rapid Transit

System (RTS) station within a certain distance of

a pre-specified number of households. The

authorities should also consider building lines

ahead of demand, where these would help to

accelerate the development of new towns and

stimulate business activities. The standards for

determining the distance between stations should

also be shortened to allow more entry and exit

points into the network. These steps will not only

make public transportation more attractive, but

would also ultimately reduce the use of private

transportation, and the need for more roads. The

quality of life in Singapore would thus be enhanced.

Page 80: Remaking Singapore (2003)

78 T H E W A Y F O R W A R D C h a n g i n g M i n d s e t s , D e e p e n i n g R e l a t i o n s h i p s

Page 81: Remaking Singapore (2003)

79T H E W A Y F O R W A R DC h a n g i n g M i n d s e t s , D e e p e n i n g R e l a t i o n s h i p s

THE WAYFORWARD

C H A P T E R 6C h a n g i n g M i n d s e t s , D e e p e n i n g R e l a t i o n s h i p s

Page 82: Remaking Singapore (2003)

80 T H E W A Y F O R W A R D C h a n g i n g M i n d s e t s , D e e p e n i n g R e l a t i o n s h i p s

• The economy at a turning point. A remade

Singapore will be a vibrant, open society that

will release the creative potential of

Singaporeans, and attract discerning talent to

live and work here. This will in turn speed

up Singapore’s economic restructuring, and

help Singapore remain relevant as an

economic centre and a global city of choice.

• Fallout from restructuring. A remade

Singapore has fine-tuned social safety nets,

and a compassionate society of Singaporeanswho actively assist one another; these will help

to bridge the income divide.

• Accentuated tribal fault lines. Singaporeans

in a remade Singapore are committed to

building common spaces and working

together to achieve our shared future. This

commitment will strengthen our society and

prevent external forces from prying apart our

social and communal fault lines.

• Complex loyalties and identities. A remade

Singapore will offer many avenues and

opportunities for Singaporeans to contribute,

and thus enlarge their stake in, their

community and country. Even if these

Singaporeans live abroad, their emotional ties

to Singapore will still remain strong.

The recommendations in the preceding chapters

reflect the collective thinking of many people, and

hours of vigorous debate. They represent the

general consensus of the Committee on what

will help us address the challenges and achieve

our vision. However, several proposals did not

achieve overall support. Where that has been the

case, the arguments for and against them have

been included in the Annex, in the spirit of open

and honest reporting. These proposals may not

soon gain sufficient acceptance to be adopted,

but we hope that by including them in this

report, we acknowledge the diversities within

our own process.

A Network of “CommunityChampions”

Notwithstanding the recommendations put

forward, it would be presumptuous for anyCommittee to propose a blueprint for a statically

remade Singapore. This is particularly true in a

context of relentless change. “Remaking” is a verb

in motion, an ongoing work. The diversity of

thought within our Committee also demonstrates

the value of, and necessity for, continuing

engagement on difficult issues.

While the report itself signals the conclusion of the

RSC process, we advocate that a mechanism be put

in place to ensure that this process of engagement

continues, so that together, we regularly check our

bearings and review our destination. In the spirit

of a remade Singapore, the Committee encourages

“community champions” to step forward to adopt

selected recommendations, and to work with the

The recommendations in this report are not merely

short-term tactics aimed at Singapore’s immediate

survival. Taken collectively, these recommendations

attempt to address comprehensively the long-term

challenges confronting Singapore, by focusing on

transforming the mindsets and relationships of

our citizens. This will result in corresponding

downstream changes in the social, cultural, political

and economic operating environment. Collectively,

the recommendations address the following:

Page 83: Remaking Singapore (2003)

81T H E W A Y F O R W A R DC h a n g i n g M i n d s e t s , D e e p e n i n g R e l a t i o n s h i p s

evolve. The government will come to play a less

direct role in determining the well-being of

Singaporeans. Instead, it might move towards

creating opportunities and facilitating the efforts

of aspiration-driven Singaporeans to achieve

success themselves. Still, some fundamentals of

the relationship will remain: decisive government

action, close people-government cooperation,

trust, and open communication channels.

Remaking Singapore must be an ongoing process.

It is a process that calls for commitment and

an unquenchable desire to want Singapore to

succeed. And it will involve everyone who

calls Singapore “home”.

government to move the recommendations

forward. These “community champions” can form

a network to keep track of the progress and

implementation of the recommendations. This

network can also serve as a platform for the

exchange of information, ideas, requests and even

complaints with each other and with government.

This is one way to ensure that the engagement

that underlies the RSC process continues. On its

part, the Committee is confident that the

government will reciprocate and will remain

engaged in remaking Singapore.

A Closing Word: Of MindsetChanges, Good Governance andStout Hearts

The Committee’s focus has been on actionable

recommendations along our four themes. But the

basic underlying challenge is a long-term one: to

remake Singaporean mindsets from one of

expectation to one of aspiration. Singaporeans with

an “expectation” mindset are passive; they depend

on the system to deliver their success, and they

measure their progress by the yardsticks offered

by that system. Singaporeans with an “aspiration”

mindset drive themselves to achieve success, and

are prepared to go beyond the comfort zone offered

by a familiar system; they will benchmark

themselves against external yardsticks, or against

measures of their own devising.

Aspiration-driven Singaporeans will increase the

dynamism of Singapore society. On the other hand,

these same Singaporeans are also less likely to

look to the government to improve their well-being.

In such a situation, the relationship between

government and people will necessarily have to

Page 84: Remaking Singapore (2003)

82 T H E W A Y F O R W A R D C h a n g i n g M i n d s e t s , D e e p e n i n g R e l a t i o n s h i p s

Page 85: Remaking Singapore (2003)

83T H E W A Y F O R W A R DC h a n g i n g M i n d s e t s , D e e p e n i n g R e l a t i o n s h i p s

Page 86: Remaking Singapore (2003)

84 A N N E X C h a n g i n g M i n d s e t s , D e e p e n i n g R e l a t i o n s h i p s

Annex:PROPOSALSWITHOUT CONSENSUS

Changes to Defamation Law

The existence and content of defamation

laws can have an impact on the freeness

of public debate on matters of public

importance. A balance needs to be struck

between the value of free speech and the

right of individuals to the protection of their

reputation, and this balance would depend

on the values and culture of each society.

One view was that compared to other

countries such as the USA, India, Australia/

New Zealand, Canada and Hong Kong/

England, Singapore’s laws tend towards the

protection of reputation rather than of free

speech. Shifting the balance towards the

latter would be consistent with, and would

support, the other recommendations in this

report that advocate enlarging the space for

public discourse.

There were three suggestions. First, during

election campaigning, a candidate should

be protected from being liable for

defamation even if he made a statement

which turned out to be inaccurate or untrue.

This “qualified privilege” would apply as

long as (i) the statement was relevant to a

question being debated in the election, (ii)

the speaker had reasonable grounds for

believing that what he said was true or

justifiable, and (iii) the speaker had taken

steps to verify the accuracy of his

information. This change could be achieved

by deleting Section 14 of the Defamation Act.

(which says that “qualified privilege” is not

available to election candidates). Deleting

Section 14 would not mean that election

candidates can lie freely; it would simply

mean that if an election candidate is sued

in the future, the judge deciding his case can

consider whether or not his actions meet the

conditions for protection.

The second suggestion related to the defence

of “fair comment”. This defence arises when

a person has made a remark which damages

the reputation of another, but which the

speaker can show is a comment or opinion

on a matter of public interest, and that the

opinion is based on facts and could

reasonably be drawn from such facts. The

suggestion was that the speaker should be

protected by this defence of “fair comment”

so long as he believed in the truth of his

opinion, regardless of the motive for making

the statement. This defence would thus

prevail even if he had the “ulterior motive” of

seeking a political advantage when

expressing his opinion. This was needed to

counter a Singapore case which previously

held that such a motive (of gaining political

advantage) could amount to “malice” and so

defeat the defence of “fair comment”.

The third suggestion was that there should

be a cap on the amount of damages that can

be awarded for defamation. In some cases,

damages had ranged in the millions of

dollars. This is even more than what courts

usually award for the loss of life and limb. It

Page 87: Remaking Singapore (2003)

85A N N E XC h a n g i n g M i n d s e t s , D e e p e n i n g R e l a t i o n s h i p s

was felt that the potential for such huge

damages could curb free expression.

These suggestions were contested on

several grounds. First, free speech has never

been an unfettered right in Singapore,

and the current balance struck by our

defamation laws do accurately reflect the

optimal balance between free speech, and

the interests of the individual and the larger

community. Allowing the victim to vindicate

his reputation and, in the case of political

leaders, expecting that they should do so,

provides a strong platform for maintaining

the people’s trust in political leaders.

There is also insufficient evidence that our

libel laws inhibit legitimate expression.

Any “chilling effect” of defamation laws, if it

exists, is desirable in the sense that it

discourages speakers from falsely defaming

others. There was therefore no need to

change Section 14 of the Defamation Act.

Second, the relevance of examples from

other countries is moot. In fact, these

countries have themselves developed

different approaches, reflecting each

society’s unique political and social

conditions. Also, many of these examples

concerned the right of media to publish

certain statements. In those countries, the

role of media as a “fourth estate”, with the

right and duty to engage in politics, is

accepted by citizens and courts alike. It was

argued that the Singapore’s media does not,

and should not, play the same role.

On the question of “fair comment”, the

opposing view was that the mere desire to

gain political advantage should not prevent

a speaker from raising the defence of “fair

comment”. Our judges would, even without

Parliament enacting any explicit law to that

effect, allow the defence of “fair comment”

in the appropriate case, even if the speaker

had a political motive in making the

comments. In fact, the Singapore court had

done so in one case.

Finally, on the question of a cap for

damages, it was argued that the amount of

money to be awarded should be left for the

courts to decide on a case-by-case basis.

That way, the courts could take into account

the severity of the specific statements made,

the position of the person defamed and

other relevant facts.

Further Liberalisation of theMass Media

One view put forward was that the

mass media in Singapore should be

further liberalised. This would increase

Singaporeans’ global awareness, boost

the quality and credibility of the local media,

and generate economic spin-offs through

a more vibrant mass media sector. The

proposals fell into three areas:

• Review the laws and regulations

surrounding the mass media. This

includes allowing the market to decide

the number of mass media players,

Page 88: Remaking Singapore (2003)

86 A N N E X C h a n g i n g M i n d s e t s , D e e p e n i n g R e l a t i o n s h i p s

and allowing Singaporeans to own

shares in mass media companies

without restrictions.

• Enact a Freedom of Information Act

to enable journalists to request and

receive information from ministries and

government agencies.

• Giving foreign correspondents more

leeway to comment on local issues

and politics to provide alternative

perspectives to Singaporeans.

However, it was also argued that while

the media plays a role in informing

and educating Singaporeans, it should

not compromise the nation’s overriding

need for political stability. The media

should be free but responsible.

In that vein, it was noted that our media

laws were continuously being reviewed

and updated. Most recently in 2001,

the Newspaper and Printing Presses Act

and the Broadcasting Act were amended to

align the shareholding ownership

provisions of newspapers and broadcasting

companies with those in the Banking Act,

in tandem with today’s investment and

corporate environment.

Currently our laws do not cap the number

of mass media players in Singapore.

Nonetheless, it was in our national interest

to ensure that the number of media players

was sustainable in a small market, so

that competition would not end up

compromising credibility and content

standards of the local media industry.

While Singaporeans can own shares in mass

media companies, it was felt that ownership

levels needed to be capped to ensure that

control of these companies do not end up

being concentrated in the hands of a few.

This is necessary to prevent a situation in

the past where local newspapers were

owned by rich families or groups of

private individuals and were manipulated

to advance their own objectives, often

against national interest.

It was also noted that government

information is available through a variety of

channels, such as government websites,

publications, and the National Archives.

Parliament records are also a significant

source of information. The concern was that

legislating information access would shift

public resources to addressing individual

demands rather than for collective benefit.

It might also impose rigidities on the way

information must be kept and managed in

order to be made available for public

scrutiny. It was thought that there might

be more practical value to taking a

needs-based approach, and cultivating

greater civic awareness and involvement

around specific issues.

As for foreign news correspondents, they are

free to report on Singapore, and there are

almost 70 foreign news organisations, and

Page 89: Remaking Singapore (2003)

87A N N E XC h a n g i n g M i n d s e t s , D e e p e n i n g R e l a t i o n s h i p s

150 journalists and cameramen covering

Singapore and the region. Singapore has

sufficient diversity in terms of media

content and Singaporeans do not lack

exposure to global perspectives. The view

was put forward that foreign correspondents

covering Singapore have to report

accurately and not engage in domestic

politics, as the politics of Singapore are for

Singaporeans. A foreign newspaper with a

large circulation in Singapore becomes a

player in the local media industry and must

conform to our rules and standards. If there

are inaccurate reports about Singapore, it

would only be fair to have the right of reply

to set the record straight.

Changing the PoliticalPlaying Field

The Committee believes it is important to

deepen Singaporeans’ engagement in the

local political process, hence the measures

put forth in this report to expand the space

for association and expression. It was felt

that over time, the continued evolution of

our political culture would then lead to

changes in the level of political engagement.

Nonetheless, one view advanced was that

the more radical changes were needed to

facilitate political contests.

First, it was proposed that the

Parliamentary Elections Act (PEA) be

amended to require that changes to

electoral boundaries be announced some

time in advance of elections. At present, the

PEA does not specify a date by which the

electoral boundaries have to be declared.

This may contribute to the perception

that the electoral process was designed

to favour the incumbent party. Advance

announcements of boundaries would

make it easier for prospective candidates to

“work the ground”.

Second, the work of the Electoral Boundaries

Review Committee (EBRC) should be

conducted with greater transparency.

Specifically it was suggested that:

• Repor ts on population shifts be

released every two years, so that the

public would have an idea of the likely

changes to the electoral boundaries.

• T h e E B R C c o u l d p u b l i s h t h o s e

boundaries under review, or that havebeen redrawn, and seek the public’s

opinion of the proposed changes.

However, it was argued that the focus on

electoral boundaries was misplaced.

Electoral boundaries are not the key aspect

of the election process – if a party loses the

confidence of the Singaporean electorate,

it is likely to lose across the board,

regardless of constituency boundaries. The

more fundamental issue is whether the

elections are honestly and fairly conducted,

and whether the outcome is a stable political

system which promotes development and

progress. Our election process could always

be designed and changed in accordance

Page 90: Remaking Singapore (2003)

88 A N N E X C h a n g i n g M i n d s e t s , D e e p e n i n g R e l a t i o n s h i p s

with “best practices” from around the world,

but this would not guarantee a happy

outcome for the country.

It was therefore suggested that the

recommendations should focus on the

upstream changes to the relationships and

mindsets of Singaporeans. This would

ultimately have the greater impact on

political culture in the long run.

Streaming In Schools

The issue of streaming was debated at

length, centering on three concerns.

First, the more egalitarian view was that

treating students differently on the basis of

ability was elitist. The alternative to

streaming was therefore mixed ability

classes, where teaching would be targetted

at the average. However, this approach has

its problems. In mixed ability classes, the

more academically able may languish as

they lose interest in the curriculum, while

the less academically able students risk

giving up when they cannot keep pace with

the curriculum. In the end, it was conceded

that if we recognise that different students

have different needs, then we should

explicitly provide different streams and

educational opportunities for them.

This would be better than working on

the premise, or hope, that they are all the

same, and then lament later when they do

not make it.

Second, it was proposed that streaming

could take place later, so that late

developers would not be put into a

particular stream prematurely. The counter-

argument to this position was that

streaming was needed precisely to cater to

late developers. Whatever the reason for the

poorer academic performance of late

developers at any point in time, forcing them

to learn at a pace that they cannot or are

not ready to cope with would simply push

them out of the system. Further, even after

students enter a particular stream, there is

a well-structured progression route for them

through to post-secondary education, and

a net of “ladders and bridges” that allows

students to go as far as they can, and even

across streams. Every year, about 1,000

ITE graduates go on to the polytechnics, and

about 1,000 polytechnic graduates go on

to universities.

Third, concerns were raised that streaming

labelled and stigmatised students in slower

academic courses, with detrimental effects

to their self-esteem and future development.

It could be argued that such labelling was

really a social phenomenon, and that the

correct way to address this was to change

societal perceptions that the provision of a

more moderately paced curriculum and a

sound technical education for students was

something undesirable. All the same, it was

agreed that we could lessen the extent of

labelling by celebrating diversity and using

more than one measure of success (i.e.

Page 91: Remaking Singapore (2003)

89A N N E XC h a n g i n g M i n d s e t s , D e e p e n i n g R e l a t i o n s h i p s

academic) in schools. There should be

multiple scales, and a variety of ways to

count oneself successful. This formed the

basis for the Committee’s recommendations

on greater diversity in curriculum and

pathways for progression in schools to cater

to the different strengths of students.

Page 92: Remaking Singapore (2003)

90 A N N E X C h a n g i n g M i n d s e t s , D e e p e n i n g R e l a t i o n s h i p s

Mr Ong Kian MinMP for Tampines GRC

Mr Sin Boon AnnMP for Tampines GRC

Mr Warren FernandezForeign Editor,

The Straits Times

Ms Goh Sin HweeSenior Correspondent,

Lianhe Zaobao

Mr Bambang SugengChief Executive Officer,

Namirah Ventures Pte Ltd

Dr Tan Chong KeeChairman, Board of Directors,

The Necessary Stage

Ms Eleanor WongAssociate Professor,

Faculty of Law, NUS

Credits

Remaking SingaporeMain Committee

Dr Vivian Balakrishnan(Chairman)

Minister of State for National Development

Dr Ng Eng HenActing Minister for Manpower

Mr Cedric FooMinister of State for Defence

Mr Raymond LimMinister of State for Foreign

Affairs & Trade and Industry

Dr Balaji SadasivanMinister of State for Health & Transport

Mr Hawazi DaipiParliamentary Secretary for

Education & Manpower

Mr S IswaranMP for West Coast GRC

Mrs Lim Hwee HuaMP for Marine Parade GRC

Page 93: Remaking Singapore (2003)

91A N N E XC h a n g i n g M i n d s e t s , D e e p e n i n g R e l a t i o n s h i p s

Beyond CondoSub-Committee

Sense of ownership and belonging – As a

nation made up largely of migrant people,

one of our biggest challenges is to instil in

Singaporeans a greater sense of ownership

and belonging to this country. Are our public

housing policies and other forms of wealth

distribution sufficient for Singaporeans to

remain rooted here, even if the economy

fails and the value of their property and

investments plummet? Or will they cash out

their physical assets and start life anew

elsewhere? How can we increase ownership

and belonging over and above material

needs and physical requirements? How do

we create in Singaporeans a sense of

passion for this country, that they would

stick it out here because this is their home?

One avenue is to nurture greater political

and civic participation among Singaporeans,

to enhance their sense of ownership and

responsibility for the nation’s destiny. If so,

what form will this take?

Mr Raymond Lim(Chairman)

Minister of State for Foreign

Affairs & Trade and Industry

Mr Sin Boon Ann(Co-Chair)

MP for Tampines GRC

Ms Indranee RajahMP for Tanjong Pagar GRC

Dr Warren LeeMP for Sembawang GRC

Mdm Halimah Bte YacobMP for Jurong GRC

Ms Rowena BhagchandaniSenior Account Director,

Bates Advertising

Mr Cavinder BullDirector,

Drew & Napier LLC

Mr Walter FernandezNight Editor,

Channel NewsAsia

Mr Warren FernandezForeign Editor,

The Straits Times

Mr Ho Mien, IvanImmediate Past President,

24th Executive Committee,

NUS Students’ Union

Mr Joseph Lee Shin WoeiDirector,

Giskard Pte Ltd

Mr Liang Eng HwaManaging Director,

Treasury & Markets, DBS

Page 94: Remaking Singapore (2003)

92 A N N E X C h a n g i n g M i n d s e t s , D e e p e n i n g R e l a t i o n s h i p s

Beyond Credit CardSub-Committee

Income distribution, safety nets, sports and

arts – We have always thought of success in

monetary terms. But the new economy will

bring about greater inequalities of income

distribution. How will we ensure social

cohesion across different socio-economic

groups with different interests and

priorities? How do we promote greater self-

reliance and competitiveness? Do we need

more, or fewer, safety nets? What other

things should we aspire to have? Should we

promote sports and the arts more

aggressively, and how? What lifestyles do

Singaporeans aspire towards? Censorship

and the provision of greater personal space

and choice will be explored here too.

Dr Ng Eng Hen(Chairman)Acting Minister for Manpower

Mr S Iswaran(Co-Chair)

MP for West Coast GRC

Mr Gan Kim YongMP for Holland-Bukit Panjang GRC

Ms Irene Ng Phek HoongMP for Tampines GRC

Ms Eleanor WongAssociate Professor,

Faculty of Law, NUS

Mr Edwin LyeVice-President,

Singapore Teachers’ Union

Dr Suzaina KadirLecturer,

Political Science Department,

Arts and Social Sciences, NUS

Dr Tan Chi ChiuExecutive Director,

Singapore International Foundation

Dr Tan Chong KeeChairman, Board of Directors,

The Necessary Stage

Mr Patrick TayAssistant Director,

Skills Development Department

NTUC; Secretary, Bedok CCC

Dr Wee Li-AnnCorrespondent,

The Straits Times [until June 2003]

Mr Zainudin AhmadExecutive Director

(Operations and Development),

Perdaus

Page 95: Remaking Singapore (2003)

93A N N E XC h a n g i n g M i n d s e t s , D e e p e n i n g R e l a t i o n s h i p s

Ms Sharminee Naidu RamachandraSocial Worker,

SINDA Family Service Centre

Mr Philip JeyaretnamPartner,

Rodyk & Davidson

Mr Samuel AngLegal Counsel,

Ministry of Defence

Ms Shireen Seow Su LinDirector,

Shaksfin Asia Pte Ltd

Mr Mustaffa bin Abu BakarAdvocate and Solicitor

Ms Joan Huang Shi QiNational sailor, undergraduate

Mr Desmond KohVice President,

Investments,

Salomon Smith Barney

Mr Yue Lip SinPrincipal,

Chung Cheng School (Main)

Mr Raymond MakHead of Dept,

Singapore Sports School

Ms Vernie Alison OliveiroMentor Assistant,

Mentorship Programme,

Eurasian Association

Ms Oniatta bte Mohd EffendiEducator,

Theatre Practitioner

Mr Andrew Mak Yen-ChenAssociate Director,

Venture Law LLC

Ms Linda Lim Bee LangConsultant,

Hill and Knowlton

Mr Ekachai UekrongthamArtistic Director,

Action Theatre

Page 96: Remaking Singapore (2003)

94 A N N E X C h a n g i n g M i n d s e t s , D e e p e n i n g R e l a t i o n s h i p s

Beyond CarsSub-Committee

Balancing the physical development needs of

our island – Cars and roads, heritage and the

environment. These epitomise the sorts of

dilemmas we face in balancing the material

and physical development needs of our small

island-nation. How will we accommodate

economic activities and the transport network,

without compromising on pollution and other

environmental standards, while also

facilitating a sense of belonging in the midst

of racial, religious and income differences?

Should we become a mega-city or a collection

of urban villages? What is the best home? How

should we balance the development needs of

economic survival, with that of recreational

space and heritage preservation? Can we build

a larger global Singapore rooted in the

physically smaller geographical Singapore?

Dr Balaji Sadasivan(Chairman)

Minister of State for Health & Transport

Mr Ong Kian Min(Co-Chair)

MP for Tampines GRC

Ms Penny LowMP for Pasir Ris-Punggol GRC

Mr Zainudin NordinMP for Bishan-Toa Payoh GRC

Mr Ahsanul KalamService Delivery Manager,Sita Inc. Pte Ltd

Mr Frederick Ho Wee KhoonIndustrial Relations Officer,

NTUC

Mr Ivan LimPresident,

Confederation of ASEAN Journalists and

Chairman, Environmental Forum for

Communicators of Singapore

Mr M RaveendranCivil Servant

Ms Pearl Maria ForssNUS Student,

Arts & Social Sciences

Ms Sithararani DoriasamySenior Correspondent,

Tamil Murasu

Mr Steven Lam Kuet KengChairman,

Compassvale Southgate RC;

Member, Punggol Central CCC

Dr Wong Meng EeResearch Consultant

Mr John TingPresident,

Singapore Institute of Architects

Page 97: Remaking Singapore (2003)

95A N N E XC h a n g i n g M i n d s e t s , D e e p e n i n g R e l a t i o n s h i p s

Ms Judy WeePresident,

Handicaps Welfare Association

Mr Low Teo PingPresident,

Singapore Sailing Federation

Beyond ClubSub-Committee

Ethnic and religious cohesion – How do we

sustain inter-racial and inter- religious

harmony? How do we strengthen community

bonds and narrow ethnic, religious and

social divides? Are we looking for the

exclusiveness of our own clubs where we

associate only with those of the same social

standing, religion or race, or do we want the

inclusiveness of a wider community? How

should we deal with external stresses to our

internal divisions? How do we integrate asSingaporeans while retaining our unique

and traditional ethnic identities? How do we

ensure common rootedness to Singapore?

How do we inculcate a Singapore-first

identity, with race and religion being

secondary attributes?

Dr Vivian Balakrishnan(Chairman)

Minister of State for National Development

Mrs Lim Hwee Hua(Co-Chair)

MP for Marine Parade GRC

Mr Ahmad KhalisMP for Hong Kah GRC

Dr Ong Seh HongMP for Aljunied GRC

Mr Bambang SugengCEO,

Namirah Ventures Pte Ltd

Mr Dennis Lee Poh WahDeputy Executive Director,

Singapore International Foundation

Mr Fazlur Rahman bin KamsaniManager (Portfolio Management),

DTZ Debenham Tie Leung

Mr Jason De HamelFreelance Writer

Mr Joshua SelvakumarDirector, Corporate Affairs,

Antioch Asia Pte Ltd

Mr Koh Chin NguangCDAC Education Committee,

Principal, Ngee Ann Secondary School

Mr Kweh Soon HanKweh Lee & Partners;

Vice President, Buddhist Fellowship

Mr Leonard Yeow Ghim CheePresident & CEO,

Eximius Consulting International Pte Ltd

Page 98: Remaking Singapore (2003)

96 A N N E X C h a n g i n g M i n d s e t s , D e e p e n i n g R e l a t i o n s h i p s

Mr Madan AssomullManaging Partner,

Assomull & Partners

Ms Mazlena Ahmad MazlanDeputy Editor of Detik,

MediaCorp News,

Malay Current Affairs Unit

Mr Mohd Noor A RahmanJournalist,

Berita Harian

Mr Philip Wu Chong GuanDirector,

Product Marketing & Content

Development / iTV, SingTel

Mr Roland Yap Yew ChongAssistant Director,

NTUC International Affairs and Leadership

Development Departments

Ms Sakinah AhmadLawyer,

Hoh & Partners

Mr Sophian Abdul RahmanSenior Officer,

Economic Development Board

Mr Sundaresh MenonPartner,

Rajah & Tann

Mr Viswa SadasivanCEO,

The Right Angle Pte Ltd

Dr Wong Chiang YinChief Operating Officer,

Singapore General Hospital

Ms Wong Yee FongSenior Reporter (Political),

Lianhe Zaobao

Mr Zuraimi JumaatExecutive,

Volunteer Training Development,

Mosque Division, MUIS

Page 99: Remaking Singapore (2003)

97A N N E XC h a n g i n g M i n d s e t s , D e e p e n i n g R e l a t i o n s h i p s

Beyond CareersSub-Committee

New roads to success – We now have an

escalator approach to success. Young

Singaporeans strive to get on the right track

in education, graduate, get on to one of the

established career paths, and expect to be

set for life. What needs to change in order

for us to be a more entrepreneurial society?

How will education, attitudes and values

need to be remade? While the Economic

Review Committee has looked primarily at

economic and financial incentives, this

committee will look at the softer side. How

will we stimulate creativity, greater risk-

taking, higher tolerance of failure, and

provide alternative role models of success?

Mr Cedric Foo(Chairman)

Minister of State for Defence

Mr Hawazi Daipi(Co-Chair)

Parliamentary Secretary for

Education & Manpower

Mr Heng Chee HowMayor,

Central Singapore CDC

Dr Amy KhorMP for Hong Kah GRC

Ms Olivia LumGroup CEO & President,

Hyflux Ltd

Ms Goh Sin HweeSenior Correspondent,

Lianhe Zaobao

Mr Praju Vikas AnekalMolecular Biologist,

National Cancer Centre

Dr Derek GohExec Chairman,

Serial System Ltd

Mr Justin TanGeneral Manager,

Bizlink Centre S’pore Ltd

Mr Raymond HuangFounding Chairman,

Heartware Network

Ms Yap Ching WiVice President,

Singapore Association of

Social Workers

Dr Lim Wee KiakOphthalmologist,

Singapore National Eye Centre

Mr Edwin PangSenior Lecturer,

National Community Leadership Institute

Mr Philip TanFinancial Controller,

PCA Technology Ltd

Mr Sujadi Bin SiswoSenior Producer,

Current Affairs (Malay) MediaCorp

Ms Audrey WongArtistic Co-Director,

The Substation

Page 100: Remaking Singapore (2003)

98 A N N E X C h a n g i n g M i n d s e t s , D e e p e n i n g R e l a t i o n s h i p s

Ms Sulosana KarthigasuMinistry of Information,

Communications & the Arts

Mrs Julia HangMinistry of National Development

Ms Senbagavalli ArumugamMinistry of National Development

Ms Tan Haw JiaMinistry of Community

Development and Sports

Mr Chia Der JiunMonetary Authority of Singapore

[until Jan 2003]

Mr Ong Beng LeeMinistry of National Development

Mr Soo Siew KeongMinistry of Information,

Communications & the Arts

Mr Wee Wern ChauMinistry of Community

Development and Sports

secretariat

Core Secretariat

Mr Eddie TeoPermanent Secretary,

Prime Minister’s Office

Ms Lim Soo HoonPermanent Secretary,

Ministry of Community

Development and Sports

Ms Chan Lai FungMinistry of the Environment

Ms Amy HingMinistry of Community

Development and Sports

Mr Yeong Gah HouMinistry of Home Affairs

Ms Dawn YipPublic Service Division

Ms Jennifer WeeMinistry of Community

Development and Sports

Page 101: Remaking Singapore (2003)

99A N N E XC h a n g i n g M i n d s e t s , D e e p e n i n g R e l a t i o n s h i p s

Beyond Club

Mr Lock Wai HanImmigration & Checkpoints Authority

Dr Lee Tung JeanMinistry of Finance

Beyond Careers

Mr Ho Chee PongMinistry of Information,

Communications & the Arts

Mr Philip OngMinistry of Education

Beyond Condo

Mr Tony SohMinistry of Defence

Mr Gary GohMinistry of Home Affairs

Mr Alex TanMinistry of Defence

Ms Ruth WanMinistry of Defence

Ms Jenny TangMinistry of Defence

Mr Chia Wei KiangMinistry of Home Affairs

Ms Felicia TangMinistry of Defence

Page 102: Remaking Singapore (2003)

100 A N N E X C h a n g i n g M i n d s e t s , D e e p e n i n g R e l a t i o n s h i p s

Beyond Credit Card

Dr Ong Toon HuiMinistry of Community

Development and Sports

Mr Cheang Kok ChungCivil Service College

Mr Poh Yu KhingMinistry of Community

Development and Sports

Ms Siti Mariam SelamatMinistry of Community

Development and Sports

Mr Ng Yao LoongMinistry of Health [until Sep 2002]

Ms Chan Wei LingMinistry of Health [until July 2002]

Beyond Cars

COL Chng Ho KiatSingapore Armed Forces

Mr James WongMinistry of Transport

Mr Tham Kine ThongMinistry of the Environment

Ms Sophianne AraibMinistry of National Development

Mr Chan Boon FuiMinistry of Transport

Mr Ryan YuenMinistry of Transport

Page 103: Remaking Singapore (2003)

© 2003 the Government of Singapore

Published by the Remaking Singapore Committeec/o Ministry of Community Development and Sports

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrievalsystem, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying,recording or otherwise, without the prior permission of the copyright owner.

Printed in Singapore: ISBN 981-04-9306-1

Photographs used courtesy of Ministry of Community Development and Sports,the National Council of Social Service, the Urban Redevelopment Authority,Anglo-Chinese Junior School, National Parks Board and Lancer Design Pte Ltd.

Designed and produced by Lancer IMC (Singapore), an FM company

Page 104: Remaking Singapore (2003)

CHANGING MINDSETS,DEEPENING RELATIONSHIPS

The Report of the Remaking Singapore Committee