By Yahoo!
Singapore | SingaporeScene – 1 hour 24 minutes ago
The PAP has presented a White Paper that looks too perfect to be
true, said Nicole Seah. (AFP file photo)
BY NICOLE SEAH
COMMENT
Along with many other Singaporeans, I oppose the White Paper.
I oppose the White
Paper as a young Singaporean, who has no intention of
giving up my citizenship or moving on to greener pastures because I
want to stay and fix what is wrong with our country, so that we can
be proud to pass on a better, more sustainable Singapore to future
generations.
A Singapore that people can feel secure enough to call home, and
feel confident to raise their children in.
Where the past, present and future can complement each other,
rather than being a burden to economic progress.
A society that lives in harmony, rather than tense and overcrowded
conditions.
Not the Singapore Inc. that has been aggressively forced down our
throats the past few years – a Singapore which is in danger of
becoming a transient state where people from all over, come, make
their fortunes, and leave. A Singapore that has become a playground
for the rich and the people who can afford it. A Singapore where
the middle class is increasingly drowned out because they do not
have the social clout or sufficient representatives in parliament
to voice their concerns.
The paragraph above espouses rhetoric, a word that has become a
filthy taboo that PAP MPs are attacking the opposition MPs for.
Well, unless you’re talking about one of their own citing personal
anecdotes like rich foreigners buying three properties, or trees
that cannot grow properly if they are constantly uprooted. It’s
okay when a PAP MP spouts rhetoric. It is ill-prepared of an
opposition MP to do so. It is fluffy of them to do so.
This mudslinging in parliament, primarily over how
the Worker’s
Party has failed to provide a strong alternative, and the
inherent smugness of the PAP is worrying.
Uneven playing field
Of course, it is easy for the PAP to slam the opposition on the
quality of proposals that have been presented, whether these
opposition parties have a presence in parliament or not. Apart from
the length of time that the PAP has had in developing this paper,
they also have an entire machinery of civil servants at their
disposal churning out data which, apart from the topline
information available on Singstats, is not available to the
public.
With a Freedom of Information Act that is sorely lacking in this
country, and with this comparative advantage that only elected
officials in white have more access to such information than any
other party, it is natural that they should have more facts at
their fingertips to debunk any alternative proposal that the
opposition puts up.
Is this fair?
No. It puts any opposition party elected into parliament in a tough
spot. It’s akin to allowing competitors in only if they have a
significant handicap. This attitude is selfish and
counter-productive for policymaking in Singapore because it does
not allow alternative proposals to be developed to the best of
their ability, and for diverse proposals to flourish, which could
help raise points or insights that may not have been earlier
considered.
The question here is: Have sufficient diverse viewpoints been
considered in the making of this White Paper? There may have been
several focus groups conducted locally in constituencies, but is
this sample size already skewed as their feedback may be more
aligned with the ruling party? Have the views of the 39.9% who
voted for the opposition in the last General Elections been
considered too?
Overconfidence in predicting future
The PAP has presented a White Paper that looks too perfect to be
true. It’s comprehensive, with clear graphs and data to show
exactly what the consequences will be if we do not adhere to their
policy recommendations, and a nicely predicted, positive outcome if
the White Paper were to be implemented in full.
This over-confidence and certainty in prescribing future outcomes
should not be comforting to people. Responsible leaders need to
acknowledge that the world that we live in is a tumultuous one, and
past data or historical events are not indicative of future
trends.
For years the PAP has been telling us to do X, and it will result
in Y. It all sounds very simple and linear, but we now know that
they have been less than perfect in predicting outcomes. It’s
nobody’s fault – after all, the world is changing at a speed that
is impossible for us to predict trends as clearly as before. So,
there is no need to act like we have all the answers. Even the PAP
does not have all the answers, and they should not pretend to do
so. Money can buy data, but it cannot predict the future.
What policymakers and leaders do need to establish, however, are
the values by which they govern this country. The values we use to
lead this country will cascade down into the mindsets of
policymakers, and it will influence the way that they make
decisions.
Just to be clear – Heart, Home, and Hope are not values. They
should be the desired outcome of values.
The values of the White Paper currently appear to be – Money. GDP
Growth. Corporations. Even the carrots dangled in front of us to
start families are all centred around money and tangible
rewards.
But is this the kind of Singapore we want? Have we really looked
hard enough at cultivating an optimal balance between heartware and
hardware? Or are we still fixated on an economic model that allows
the rich to get richer while the poor get poorer?
Instead of continuing to paint a false picture of a comfort zone
that we can take refuge in with the implementation of this White
Paper, perhaps it is time for the state to stop mollycoddling its
voters with the false promise of successful policies that can only
happen with minimal confrontation of differences in ideas and
opinions, because it allows the government to move ahead and make
decisions that are right for its people.
The absence of soft culture
Singapore now needs time to grow into its own. Early on in the days
of independence we’ve been whisked out of birthing pains out of
necessity and quickly built into a first world nation in a short
span of time. We are thankful to the old guard of the PAP for
setting up this stage for us to flourish.
However, we will never truly mature as a society and as a country
if we are not allowed the breathing space to grow. To grow our
culture, to grow the things that matter, rather than to be caught
up in a race of GDP growth numbers. The policies over the past
decades have created an erosion of our social roots, widespread
resentment, and a loss of who we are as Singaporeans. We have been
taught to prioritise money-making practicality over what it means
to have a solid culture. That is why we will find it difficult to
have truly flourishing soft culture unless we can look beyond
quantifying every scheme into a commercially viable one.
Soft culture sounds like a lofty proposition, but the truth is that
developed economies around the world now are now being judged on
their soft power influences and how they export their culture to
the rest of the world. Soft culture also plays a part in
determining how attractive a country is to the rest of the world.
This is one area that we need to start focusing on in order to
build a sustainable economy that goes beyond pure numbers and
low-wage foreign labour.
Reality check: What if a prescriptive government is actually more
detrimental than beneficial for its people? So apart from
constantly doling out more monetary rewards and physical incentives
to encourage a growth in TFR and sustain the population, perhaps it
is also time for the government to take a step back and allow
Singaporeans to find themselves and grow into their own. We need
the space to organically build ourselves a strong Singaporean core
before we should even talk about bringing more people in without
diluting our identity and sense of belonging.
Speak up and be heard
The White Paper was developed with well-meaning intentions, but
with deep-seated assumptions and a lack of openness to alternative
ideas, it is difficult for many Singaporeans to endorse this White
Paper as a reflection of the future that they want to see for this
country. For many, the prospect of building a country primarily to
serve economic needs and turn into a transient place for other
seeking to use Singapore as a stepping stone is indeed a bitter
pill to swallow.
To be clear, we are not by nature fear mongers, or doomsayers. We
are all concerned because we’ve seen the destructive effects of
similar policies over the past years, and with more of the same,
the country is headed in a direction that understandably makes many
of us uncomfortable, not just for ourselves, but for our children
and the generations ahead of us.
The motion for the White Paper has already been passed in
parliament, but I hope that we will not stop here and accept this
silently. This is an opportune time to make our voices heard, and
we can do so either by pushing for a National Referendum to
demonstrate a representative view of what Singaporeans want for our
future. We can and should also continue writing our thoughts on
social platforms to make our opinions and ideals heard by as many
of us as possible.
This is the time for us to stand up and make a difference for the
beliefs that we hold dear to us. I hope we will not stand by the
sidelines any longer.
I vote Nice, Sweet and Pretty.
