Post on 31-Dec-2016
transcript
CHANGING MINDSETS,DEEPENING RELATIONSHIPS
The Report of the Remaking Singapore Committee
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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.”
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.
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
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”.
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
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
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.
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
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.”
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,
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.
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.
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
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.
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.
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
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
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
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.
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.
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.
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
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.
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
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.
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
• 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
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
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
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
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
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.
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
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.
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.
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.
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.
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
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
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
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.
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
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
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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
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.
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.
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
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
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.
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.
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
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.
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.
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
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,
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.
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.
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
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.
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.
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.
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.
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
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
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:
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
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
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
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
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,
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
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
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.
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.
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
© 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
CHANGING MINDSETS,DEEPENING RELATIONSHIPS
The Report of the Remaking Singapore Committee