Singapore scores well in global corruption perception index

last SG · 2006-12-10T08:22:40+00:00

Is the 'OXYGEN' that is essentail for HUMANS to 'LIVE' - any different from one society - or race, or ethnic group - to that from another ? Mushrooms can su...

oxford mushroom SG

The Corruption Perception Index (CPI) is compiled by Transparency International, a global civil society organisation dedicated to the fight against corruption. It is well respected globally and its survey findings are quoted by the BBC (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/3567745.stm) and national governments (http://www.senate.gov.ph/publications/AG%202006-04%20-%20Corruption%20Facts%20and%20Figures.pdf).

The higher the CPI, the lower the experience of corruption among those surveyed. In its latest published figures for 2006 (http://www.transparency.org/news_room/in_focus/cpi_2006/cpi_table), the CPI for Singapore is the fifth globally at 9.4, after Finland and Iceland (tied at first place), New Zealand and Denmark; putting Singapore ahead of Sweden (6th), Australia (9th), UK (11th), Hong Kong (15th), USA (20th), Taiwan (34th) and South Korea (42nd). Singapore has the highest CPI score of all the Asean nations, with the next highest being Malaysia (44th), Thailand (63rd) and Vietnam (111th).

The Philippines, arguably the most democratic of Asean nations has a dismally low score of 2.5 at 121st position.

Corruption exists in every nation but it can be curbed by stringent laws, strong political will by a clean government, upright judiciary and efficient administration. As illustrated by the experience of the Philippines, western democracy does not translate into a clean government. They have had a liberal democracy for years, brought in by the Americans. Yet their graduates have no jobs, their women have to work as your maids, and their nation still remains poor and corrupt-ridden.

Democracy does not produce wealth, good governance does.

SpeedStar SG

There is one question that I really want to ask for a long time. R u from PAP?

4getmenot SG

i wonder how much of the transparency was based on s'pore governance to reflect its cpi index..

If there is no true transparency, how are we to judge and based that it is corruption free?

If democracy does not produce equal opportunity and freedom for the community to produce and achieve wealth, what system does? socialism? communism? millitarism?

How much wealth has good governance produced here.. *cough* with the income group gap growing bigger and bigger? maybe it does produce alot of wealth, but only for a few within the so called elite circle.

BillyBong SG

What purpose does this thread have other than to expose the fact that your main points (in red) slant towards the championing of pseudo-democracy?

It is an affront to all singaporeans when one of their number claim that we are not 'ready' to handle true democracy and need to continue bowing to the 'strict governance' of the ruling party.

Does strict governance = corruption-free and clean governance? Hardly. It simply means the people are cowed through a serious of defamation suits that stifle free speech and will ask less of the 'why' questions, allowing the ruling party to dictate terms with ease. It is easier for men in such positions to abuse their power and influence policy and the constitution, even if it is at the expense of the people.

Conversely, the government need not explain to the people WHY they are implementing this policy. They simply DO IT.

The fact that national referendums in HK could overturn the government's intention to implement sales tax is in direct contrast to our referendum over the Integrated Resorts. It really shows how 'big' the people's teaspoon of salt means to the current administration.

LinYu SG

it legalised?

SnowFlag SG

Singapore scores well in global corruption perception index Smile

Perception is not real Cool

googoomuck SG

Fifth place is not good enough. Singapore must be first, must aim high.
Once the ministers' salaries are cut by half, Singapore can surge ahead of Finland and Iceland, or at least tie with them at first place.

croco2006 SG

cos many cases are not detected….

charlize SG

How can Finland or Iceland be first?

Their ministers are not drawing million dollar salaries. Laughing

ShutterBug SG

Ok, let me ask all of you one big question. I won't and am not implying anything, but just let me ask you:

"WHO, is the biggest and most powerful Mafia in Singapore?"

I won't answer it myself, but let me hear yours...

eyebuzz SG

the answer is simple enough... water always flows from the higher level so we have the likes of offsprings to demand you to get out of their elite faces lor Mr. Green

ps. uncaring

googoomuck SG

That's the point. What I should say is once OUR ministers cut their salaries by half, then we can tie with Finland, Iceland or even surge ahead these countries.

FreeToFly SG

Hi,

The index is based on perception. And it is relative. Being the top place does'nt mean that Finland and Iceland are corruption free countries.

Coming back to look at Singapore, this topic is about corruption subject alone. Personally, I think it is a blessing to be very sure that, Singapore is so much better as compared to our neighbouring country where bribery runs at street level - if you are stopped by a police for speeding (whether you did or not), you can easily get out of it, by giving you know what. And that is a bad thing. That actually means that corruption runs top-down where the wealth of the nation goes mostly into the pocket of the corrupt few, and every citizen bloody knows that, but can do nothing about. So you corrupt, he corrupts, the whole nation is corrupting.

nismoS132 SG

Ranked 12th in Bribe Payers Index

However, in another ranking conducted by Transparency International, Singapore did not fare that well.

Here's the review:

"In Asia, strong domestic anti-corruption measures at home are not consistently translating into responsible business practices abroad, especially for Singapore, Hong Kong and Taiwan. They are assessed significantly worse by respondents from non-OECD countries the same divide is evident for the United Arab Emirates indicating a sharp double standard in business practices. "

http://www.transparency.org/news_room/in_focus/2006/bpi_2006

both articles go hand in hand. why report only half the story?

LazerLordz SG

So Transparency International's reports are trustworthy but Reporters Sans Frontieres and Amnesty International's reports are not?

Seems like a case of selective reporting, after all, all three NGOs are well-respected worldwide.

Choosing one element and discounting others, is nothing more than hypocrisy.

Lefleche SG

or perhaps...the big cases of corruption/nepotism had been legalised.

4getmenot SG

Originally posted by nismoS132:
[b]Ranked 12th in Bribe Payers Index

However, in another ranking conducted by Transparency International, Singapore did not fare that well.

Here's the review:

"In Asia, strong domestic anti-corruption measures at home are not consistently translating into responsible business practices abroad, especially for Singapore, Hong Kong and Taiwan. They are assessed significantly worse by respondents from non-OECD countries the same divide is evident for the United Arab Emirates indicating a sharp double standard in business practices. "

http://www.transparency.org/news_room/in_focus/2006/bpi_2006

both articles go hand in hand. why report only half the story?[/b]

its called selective posting Mr. Green

oxford mushroom SG

Stringent domestic policies to curb corruption makes Singapore attractive to foreign investors. If local businesses gives out 'discounts' in return for business opportunities (which would constitute corruption at home), the damage, if any, is not done to Singapore but the foreign nation.

It's not our job to make sure other governments are clean. If they cannot control their officials from accepting bribes from Singaporean businesses, that's their problem.

As long as it benefits us more, that's fine with me. Anyway, Singapore's ranking in the BPI is still respectable.

oxford mushroom SG

TI's reports matter to foreign investors. The other two are more concerned with human rights issues.

A question for you: does China's human rights record prevent any foreign companies from investing in it? Case closed.

LazerLordz SG

Human rights are one component of the international political economy that does matter in the long run. Look at the mess stirred up by Cisco Systems in their supply of backend hardware to the Chinese authorities that have Congress planning to introduce a Bill that aims to move FDI away from unfettered economic focus towards a more social and ethical model.

Unfortunately, I believe that Singapore cannot survive as a nation based on mere focus on FDIs and positioning herself as a hybridised maquiladora. Call it whatever, but our imbalanced focus on corporate rights as opposed to citizen empowerment will only mean further alienation and a short-term fix to a long term issue of identity, memory and where the average Singaporean fits into this national discourse.

Let's not miss the forest for the trees. All things are linked in one way or the other.

The TI index is based on perception, and perception is one element that has been tweaked to the advantage of certain groups, not to mention a reaction and not a resistance to policies that are meant to formulate this antithesis of in situ transparency, which may be anachronistic because of the unique situation Singapore is in. Our degree of transparency, and the access to it, is targeted carefully for a specific audience.

Try pushing for real across-the-board transparency acts like FoIA legislation, and the reaction you will get in the streets, as well as from academics, is that transparency is not for everyone. This is unfortunately, another child of perception.