The four pillars of Singapore’s sustainable development success

By Teo Chee Hean

Wednesday 7 June 2017

http://www.eco-business.com/opinion/the-four-pillars-of-singapores-sustainable-development-success/

At this week’s Ecosperity 2017 conference, Singapore’s Deputy Prime Minister and Coordinating Minister for National Security Mr Teo Chee Hean shared how Singapore has balanced economic, social, and environmental priorities to achieve sustainable development. Below is an excerpt of his speech.

Since the 1970s, economic development has helped to lift billions of people out of poverty. Social indices of human development such as healthcare and education have improved significantly.

But this progress is not even, and important challenges remain. Social inequality, education and work opportunities for women, and youth unemployment are still areas of concern for many countries.

Rising populism and protectionism in several advanced economies, technological disruptions, and new transnational security and pandemic threats add more complexity and uncertainty to health, safety, and development.

Our environment is also under stress. Since 1972, the world population has grown from 3.8 billion to 7.3 billion in 2015, and is expected to grow to 9.7 billion by 2050. More than 54 per cent of the global population already lives in urban areas.

Access to clean air, clean water, power, and sanitation are challenges in many countries. Low-lying coastal communities such as Singapore are also more vulnerable to rising sea levels due to climate change.

Individuals, companies, countries, and the global community will need to work together to develop solutions for sustainable development.

As a small, densely populated island nation with no natural resources, Singapore’s own sustainable development experience has focused on four key areas: Building a sustainable economy; creating a sustainable living environment; ensuring sustainable development for our people; and contributing to international collaboration.

Sustainable economy

Economic growth generates the resources to invest in education, research and development, security, infrastructure, and public services.

With no natural resources, Singapore has had to be resourceful to make a living for ourselves. This has entailed finding ways to create and add value, producing goods and services that are in demand by others, and making careful use of resources.

This has required integrated and long-term planning to optimise resources such as budget, land, manpower, energy, and more recently, carbon emissions, to ensure sustainable growth.

We made early choices to turn away very pollutive industries and took early action to switch to natural gas, the cleanest form of fossil fuel, for power generation. Today, we are among the 20 most carbon efficient countries in the world.

We will intensify our efforts as we work towards achieving our commitment under the Paris Agreement. We will reduce emissions intensity by 36 per cent from 2005 levels by 2030, and stabilise emissions with the aim of peaking by then.

We plan to introduce a carbon tax from 2019 so that those who emit the most carbon emissions will bear the cost to our environment and be encouraged to reduce their emissions. There is also much potential for our industries to save costs as we raise energy efficiency.

The carbon tax will also help align the costs and benefits of reducing emissions. We are also scaling up deployment for solar, aggregating demand across our agencies and testing floating solar photovoltaics on our reservoirs.

These plans can help us to move towards a low-carbon society, and also be a Living Laboratory for businesses, agencies, and research institutes to develop new products and services for the global economy.

According to the recently launched ‘Better Business, Better World” Asia report, opportunities in sustainability could contribute US$12 trillion to global GDP and create 380 million new jobs by 2030. I encourage our businesses to seize these opportunities.

Sustainable living environment

Our pioneer generation had a vision for a clean, green and sustainable Singapore for all Singaporeans. They instilled in all of us the consciousness that this little island is all that we have, and we have to look after it well.

Over the past 50 years, we have seen vast improvements in our housing, water, public health, and sanitation. Today, we are a City in a Garden with about 47 per cent green cover in Singapore. More than 80 per cent of households are within a 10-minute walk from a park.

We have 72 hectares of rooftop gardens and green walls today, and aim to triple this by 2030. These plans are outlined in our Sustainable Singapore Blueprint.

I have also just launched the Public Sector Sustainability Plan, which will catalyse sustainable practices, generate demand for green products and services, and encourage our public officers to think green. These initiatives will achieve a green and sustainable living environment for all Singaporeans.

With no natural resources, Singapore has had to be resourceful to make a living for ourselves. This has entailed finding ways to create and add value, producing goods and services that are in demand by others, and making careful use of resources.

Sustainable development for our people

Our people are our precious and only resource, and investing in them is of utmost importance.

Since the 1960s, we have worked to achieve mass education at the primary, secondary, and tertiary levels. Our next frontier is mass continuing education to prepare for the future of work. Rapid technological advances will change the nature of work and the skills required.

The knowledge and skills we acquire through conventional pre-employment education during the first 20 years of our lives will need to be refreshed to last a working life of over forty years.

Our workers must be prepared to constantly upskill and reskill, and move into new jobs and industries several times in their working lives. SkillsFuture Singapore will work closely with our associations, unions, and companies to support our workers to deepen and refresh their skills at key points in their careers.

International collaboration

Nations also need to work together to address global challenges. Issues such as transboundary air pollution or pandemics require a regional response, while others such as climate change require the contribution of all countries.

Singapore remains committed to the Paris Agreement and supports the United Nations 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, which provides a framework to guide national efforts in achieving the 17 Sustainable Development Goals.

In support of this agenda, we have trained more than 112,000 officials from over 170 developing countries in key areas such as sustainable urban, water, and human resource management, health, and education.

We will continue to share our sustainable development policies and expertise through leadership seminars in policymaking, workshops on urban governance in cities, and water and sanitation projects.

In the course of our development journey, Singapore has benefited from the experience of many countries as we developed, and we continue to do so. We hope that our collaborations in sustainable development can, in a similar way, make a small contribution to the development paths and journeys of other countries.

Through international partnerships, we can collectively find more efficient, more comprehensive, and more sustainable solutions to address global challenges.

The four aspects of sustainable development that I have highlighted work in combination with one another. Strong partnership between the public, private, and people sectors will be required to shape a sustainable future for all of us.

Eco-Business is a content partner for Temasek’s Ecosperity sustainable development event, which was held on Monday 5 June in Singapore. 

Why Is Singapore the Happiest Country in Asia?

Claudia Pearson Updated: 14 February 2018

https://theculturetrip.com/asia/singapore/articles/why-is-singapore-the-happiest-country-in-asia/

Singapore has consistently ranked as the happiest country in Asia according to the annual World Happiness Report commissioned by the United Nations, which also named Singapore the 26th happiest country in the world. We’ve got the scoop on what it is about Singaporean life that makes the nation more joyful than its neighbouring Asian countries.

The World Happiness Report determines its rankings by using life evaluation questions. The 6 key determinants used are GDP, healthy life expectancy, freedom, generosity, social support and absence of corruption in both business and government. As a country that’s infamous for its extremely expensive cost of living, Singapore’s happiness is perhaps more closely tied to cultural factors rather than its citizens’ lifestyles.

A distinctive element of Singaporean society is that it is very diverse, especially considering the size of the city-state. Singaporean society is largely made up of ethnic Chinese, Malays, and Indians. Singapore also attracts huge numbers of expats, with studies showing that approximately 40% of the total population are foreigners. This mix has resulted in a strong sense of multiculturalism within Singaporean society. One study conducted in 2016 showed that Singaporeans are focused on living by multicultural ideals and supporting multiracial values.

Of course, cultural diversity does not automatically lead to happiness; today’s world has no shortage of examples of when diversity has caused significant tensions and unrest. However, in Singapore, this diversity is what the city-state was founded on and ultimately seems to serve the country very well.

Another element of Singaporean society that analysts have often suggested brings happiness is Singapore’s emphasis on the importance of the family. Singapore’s founder and Prime Minister for 31 years, Lee Kuan Yew, wrote in his book From Third World to First that “Singapore depends on the strength and influence of the family to keep society orderly and maintain a culture of thrift, hard work, filial piety, and respect for elders and for scholarship and for learning”. Although these values were determined decades ago, Lee Kuan Yew’s lasting legacy means that many Singaporeans continue to hold these values as guiding principles.

Analysts have also tried to gage the secret to Singapore’s happiness by comparing common factors among some of the other high-ranking countries in the world. Following the publication of the 2017 World Happiness Report, National Geographic reporter Dan Buettner focused on what three of the happiest countries from different regions in the world had in common. What he found was that the people of Costa Rica, Denmark and Singapore all share a common feeling of security and sense of purpose, and that they do their best to avoid stress and increase enjoyment.

Of course Singapore, like every other country in the world, is not perfect. It does, however, uphold qualities that make it distinct and from which societies across the globe could learn something.

Why Singapore Is the World’s Most Successful Society

By Kishore Mahbubani

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/kishore-mahbubani/singapore-world-successful-society_b_7934988.html

SINGAPORE — Singapore turns 50 on Aug. 9, 2015. Is Singapore the most successful society since human history began? Or, to put it differently, did Singapore improve the living standards of its people faster and more comprehensively than any other society?

The only way to answer these questions is with empirical data. The most basic needs of any human being are food, shelter, health, education and employment. Did Singapore improve the delivery of those basic needs faster than any other society?

When Singapore was expelled from Malaysia in 1965 and thrust into an unwanted independence, it was a typical Third World country. Its per capita income of $500 was the same as Ghana’s then. It was not desperately poor, but it had malnutrition. I know this personally as I was put on a special feeding program when I joined school in the first grade, drinking milk from a pail with a ladle shared by other children.

This malnutrition disappeared quickly. Singapore’s per capita income has shot from $500 to $55,000 today, the largest increase any newly independent nation has enjoyed. This spectacular economic success story of Singapore is clearly amazing. Yet, when I was Singapore’s ambassador to the UN in the 1980s, the then head of UNICEF, the American James Grant, used to chide me for speaking about it.

He told me that Singapore’s success in another area was even more spectacular. We had reduced our infant mortality faster than any other society, going down from 35 per 1,000 live births in 1965 to 10.90 in 1985. James Grant was right. Babies are the most vulnerable members of any society. When they live instead of dying, they reflect an improving social ecosystem that keeps them alive.

The babies who lived in Singapore went on to enjoy one of the best education systems in the world. The OECD ranked 15-year-old Singaporean children number one in the world in a recent global ranking of “Universal Basic Skills” in mathematics and science. Singapore students also topped the OECD PISA problem solving test in 2012.

From the Singapore with slums that I grew up in, we now have the highest home ownership of any country in the world, with 90 percent of residents living in homes they own.

There are many other areas where Singapore’s social standards top the charts. From the Singapore with slums that I grew up in, we now have the highest home ownership of any country in the world, with 90 percent of residents living in homes they own. Even amongst households in the lowest 20 percent of incomes, over 80 percent own their own homes. Rapidly rising salaries and strong compulsory saving schemes, through the Central Provident Fund, led to this incredibly high home ownership.

So why did Singapore succeed so comprehensively? The simple answer is exceptional leadership. Many in the world have heard of Mr. Lee Kuan Yew, the founding prime minister who passed away in March this year. Far fewer have heard of Dr. Goh Keng Swee, the architect of Singapore’s economic miracle, and Mr. S. Rajaratnam, Singapore’s philosopher par excellence.

Together, they made a great team.

This exceptional team also implemented three exceptional policies: Meritocracy, Pragmatism and Honesty. Indeed, I share this “secret” MPH formula with every foreign student at the Lee Kuan Yew School, and I assure them that if they implement it, their country will succeed as well as Singapore. Meritocracy means a country picks its best citizens, not the relatives of the ruling class, to run a country. Pragmatism means that a country does not try to reinvent the wheel. As Dr. Goh Keng Swee would say to me, “Kishore, no matter what problem Singapore encounters, somebody, somewhere, has solved it. Let us copy the solution and adapt it to Singapore.” Copying best practices is something any country can do. However, implementing “Honesty” is the hardest thing to do. Corruption is the single biggest reason why most Third World countries have failed. The greatest strength of Singapore’s founding fathers was that they were ruthlessly honest. It also helped that they were exceptionally shrewd and cunning.

Singapore’s success is due to MPH: Meritocracy, Pragmatism and Honesty

Still, Singapore has its fair share of detractors. Its political system was widely viewed as being an “enlightened dictatorship,” even though free elections have been held every five years. Its media is widely perceived to be controlled by the government and Singapore is ranked number 153 out of 180 by Reporters Without Borders in 2015 on the Press Freedom Index. Many human rights organizations criticize it. Freedom House ranks Singapore as “partially free.”

Undoubtedly, some of these criticisms have some validity. Yet, the Singapore population is one of the best educated populations and, hence, globally mobile. They could vote with their feet if Singapore were a stifling “un-free” society. Most choose to stay. Equally importantly, some of the most talented people in the world, including Americans and Europeans, are giving up their citizenship to become Singapore citizens. Maybe they have noticed something that the Western media has not noticed: Singapore is one of the best places to be born in and to live in. Quite amazingly, a society destined to fail in 1965 has become one of the world’s greatest success stories.

How S'pore has grown - from a policy perspective

Essays by economists show how policies have worked (or not) in the last 50 years as Singapore - and the world outside - changed.

TUE, MAR 08, 2016  LINDA YC LIM

LAST year, 17 economists, mostly Singaporean academics, got together to prepare 13 papers for an SG50 Special Issue of the Singapore Economic Review, that I guest edited. This has since been republished as a book, Singapore's Economic Development: Retrospection and Reflections.

We look at Singapore's economic development of the past 50 years from different policy perspectives: governance, lessons for other developing countries, role of the state, monetary policy, public financial management, labour and productivity, trade and foreign direct investment, demographics and population, housing, the Central Provident Fund (CPF), poverty and social welfare and energy and the environment. And we reflect on what lies ahead for the economy.

There are several common themes among our papers. The dominant theme is the primacy of economic growth in driving social as well as economic policies. This was maintained throughout our 50-year history, even after per capita gross domestic product (GDP) had risen well beyond the level at which growth tends to slow down in developed countries.

Examples of social policy being harnessed for economic growth include: ensuring affordable housing to keep factory wages low during the years of labour-intensive manufacturing; reducing employers' CPF contributions and government industrial estate rentals to lower business costs during growth slowdowns; the liberal foreign worker and talent policy underlying the extensive growth model based on factor accumulation; public finances oriented toward providing incentives and subsidies for investors; social welfare policies focused on human capital development; and energy and environmental policies focused on developing the oil and gas sector and lowering costs through energy efficiency.

A second theme is the interconnection between different policy arenas, which increased the effectiveness of individual policies. The best known of these is the mobilisation of individuals' CPF savings to finance their publicly-constructed housing, thus avoiding budget deficits, creating a home-ownership society and motivating national service. Racial quotas in public housing estates helped to foster national unity and prevent the formation of ethnic ghettoes and voting blocs. Housing Development Board (HDB), CPF and labour policy also served industrial policy conducted by the Economic Development Board (EDB). Housing, education and health policy were used to lower birth rates during the 1960s and 1970s, while budget measures such as tax relief and child payments were later employed to encourage births.

Third, there were sharp changes in policy direction, but within the same development model and institutional infrastructure. The HDB's goals moved from dealing with a chronic housing shortage and providing affordable basic housing in the 1960s through the 1980s, to upgrading, market deregulation and asset enhancement after 1990, with some return to a focus on affordability very recently. CPF moved quickly from retirement savings to mortgage financing, later adding non-housing investments, healthcare and education financing to its allowable expenditures.

Investment incentives and industrial policy moved up the technological ladder from labour- to capital- and skill-intensive, while foreign labour policy swung back and forth between heavy dependence and tightening. Population policy, which was emphatically anti-natalist in the 1960s and 1970s, was reversed in the 1980s to encourage higher fertility. There was a switch from public provision to partial privatisation of public and social services, reflecting an ideological shift from state to individual responsibility for social welfare, which has recently begun to shift back.

Fourth, the dominant role of the state in the economy was maintained, and even expanded. Rather than retreating with the development of markets and institutions, state and state-linked entities have reached into ever more areas of public and private life and the provision of commercial goods and services which in other developed-market economies would be undertaken by private enterprise.

Strong central executive control, an undivided legislature and what Associate Professor Tilak Abeysinghe of the National University of Singapore (NUS) calls "politicians with high opportunity cost", facilitated swift decision-making and policy implementation by the civil service, statutory boards, the government-linked companies (GLCs), NTUC and other state-linked units and their private-sector subcontractors. This pervasive state apparatus enabled the rapid mass mobilisation of resources for economic growth during different developmental phases.

These policies were very successful in achieving both the primary goal of rapid GDP growth (with low unemployment and inflation), and each policy's multifaceted social and economic goals. They were greatly enabled and enhanced by a favourable world market environment, which also benefited other Asian newly-industrialising economies. But focusing on maximising growth through factor accumulation proved to be unsustainable. The depression of both capital and labour costs preserved international competitiveness and attractiveness to foreign investors. But there were diminishing returns, especially given the extreme scarcity of land and the early appearance and continuation of low, and even negative, productivity growth.

Both public and private housing prices rose due to heightened scarcity values intensified by foreign demand (the result of open capital and labour markets). In response, Singaporeans saved more of their income to spend on housing, with a corresponding fall in the share of income spent on consumption of other goods and services to a very low level (40 per cent of GDP) by local historical and comparative international standards.

Becoming "asset-rich and cash-poor" in a rapidly-ageing society, where most retirement savings lodged at the CPF have been devoted to housing, poses serious problems for retirement-income adequacy. The integration of CPF savings with HDB housing policy, so perfect for a much younger, lower-income, higher-fertility society in a much lower-cost, faster-growth era, now presents difficult policy challenges in a much older, higher-income, lower-fertility society in a much higher-cost, lower-growth era. Higher land and property costs have also directly and indirectly reduced international competitiveness and hence, the capacity for growth through foreign investment.

While individual policies interacted to enhance their collective effectiveness, successful policy in one domain also had negative impacts on other policy domains. For example, during the labour-intensive era of development, low-skilled manufacturing jobs were plentiful for lowly-educated residents. Their employment and wages rose rapidly, reducing poverty and inequality and increasing their ability to pay for affordable public housing out of CPF.

But as Singapore's comparative advantage shifted, returns to internationally mobile capital and skills increased, while those to low-skilled domestic labour decreased, as in other developed countries also subject to intensified global competition and skill-biased technological change. This resulted in increased income inequality, intensified in Singapore by the massive import of low-skilled labour which depressed wages at the lower end of the scale, and reduced productivity growth by removing the incentive for firms to automate and innovate.

At the same time, the policy to attract global talent, especially into financial services, pushed salaries up dramatically at the high end of the labour force. Not surprisingly, earned-income inequality in Singapore is now greater than in most other developed countries, and overall inequality is even greater if wealth inequality is also taken into account. Combined with the rising cost of living, this has introduced challenges of poverty and retirement adequacy for significant proportions of the population.

Industrial upgrading through statist policies has also increased economic volatility, given concentration in a few volatile and capital-intensive industries. Volatility not only reduces growth and productivity, it also makes macroeconomic stabilisation more challenging, reducing the degrees of freedom which monetary and fiscal policy previously had to pursue other goals. Increased volatility has also arguably reduced welfare for workers by forcing them to shoulder higher risks, in the absence of an effective social safety net.

Industrial upgrading also increased the skill-wage premium, worsening income inequality, while prioritising heavily capital-intensive industries such as petroleum refining and chemicals also conflicts with environmental goals of reducing energy use and pollution. Growth based on large imports of foreign labour and talent has resulted in increased physical congestion, and increased risk of social divisions between indigenous citizens and the "new residents".

We collectively conclude that economic policy was both innovative and effective in the first two to three decades of independence, particularly in simultaneously delivering on both rapid economic growth and improved social welfare. In more recent decades, economic growth and social welfare for a significant minority of Singaporeans have begun to diverge. At the same time, external demand and domestic supply-side constraints have sharply lowered growth potential, even as the income, housing and healthcare needs of the ageing population rise.

Furthermore, prolonged dependence on foreign enterprises has left the economy lacking what economists Tan Kim Song and Manu Bhaskaran call the "inherent production capacity" and "core of strong vibrant local enterprise" - necessary to propel development into the future. "An investment approach - putting bets on many new industries with the expectation that some would pay off handsomely even if others fail - limited the likelihood of developing sufficient depth and globally competitive scale in any of these industries, since all would be competing for already extremely scarce resources."

Looking ahead, there is consensus that slower GDP growth, higher productivity, a more vibrant and innovative local private entrepreneurial class, and a relative shift from manufacturing to services, and from a global to a regional market orientation, are necessary for continued economic development. The big question here is whether and what the government can and should do in this transformation away from the development model it created.

There is also consensus that public policy must continue to pay greater attention to directly meeting the growing social needs of the population, especially the poor, low-income and elderly. Fortunately, we have the financial and institutional resources to effect the necessary transfers, which will be reduced if we also allow labour and capital markets to function more freely and efficiently.

• The writer is guest editor of "A Fifty-Year Retrospective on the Singapore Economy" published in a special issue of the Singapore Economic Review Vol 60, No 3 (2015), and republished as "Singapore's Economic Development: Retrospection and Reflections" in World Scientific Publishing Co's SG50 Series. She is also professor of strategy at the Ross School of Business, University of Michigan

Singaporean of the Year award for 2017

The recipient of The Straits Times Singaporean of the Year award for 2017 

Fitting tribute for migrant aid group

http://www.straitstimes.com/opinion/fitting-tribute-for-migrant-aid-group

The migrant spirit deserves to be kept in the spotlight because that is what helped to make Singapore what it is. Nurturing that spirit amid everyday hardship is the quiet work of a general practitioner and the healthcare charity that he co-founded. It is thus fitting that The Straits Times Singaporean of the Year award for 2017 has gone to Dr Goh Wei Leong and HealthServe.

The team provides migrant workers with affordable healthcare. This is laudable, as are the contributions of the other finalists not just this year but also since the inaugural award in 2015. This time, there were a film-maker, a conductor, a cartoonist, a para-athlete, an indoor skydiver, a student, a lawyer, a martial arts instructor, and two emergency responders. Each of them exemplifies the pursuit of excellence, an inherent capacity for commitment and an enduring sense of purpose in making Singapore a better place.

All acquitted themselves well but just one had to be picked for the award via a rigorous process. First, the finalists were selected from 60 nominees by a panel of 15 judges who took the results of a public vote into account. They included editors from The Straits Times as well as notable figures from society at large, such as a social entrepreneur and activist, civil servants, bankers, a chef and restaurateur, and a singer-songwriter.

The criteria the nominators and judges kept in mind included the ability to strive against the odds, voluntary aid for the needy which created a significant impact, putting one's life on the line for someone in distress, or innovative ways of doing social good. The challenge is to keep a constant eye out for such qualities so that the unsung work which inspires nominations can, through the award, be an inspiration to all Singaporeans.

What makes Dr Goh's work stand out is the breadth of the selflessness. HealthServe, which runs dental and medical clinics, also offers social assistance, skills training and a food programme. These support structures are a boon to the one million or so low-wage migrant workers from the developing world who make up nearly 30 per cent of the workforce. These migrant workers are instrumental in building, cleaning and greening Singapore, but some of them face problems that require the sustained attention of other Singaporeans. Dr Goh is one of them, and HealthServe is a prominent example of how Singapore can reach out to its migrant workers, assuring them that they are a part of its concerns.

In a metaphorical sense, all the finalists reflect the migrant spirit in venturing out of a comfort zone into an uncertain area for the sake of change. Overcoming their sense of smallness to make a difference in key spheres was the microcosmic challenge that pioneers faced. The finalists show how the spheres can be expanded to encompass ordinary folk and migrant workers too.

Doctor lauded for selfless contributions

A general practitioner and the healthcare charity he co-founded have received The Straits Times Singaporean of the Year award for 2017.

Dr Goh Wei Leong and HealthServe, which provides migrant workers with affordable healthcare, beat nine other finalists for the award yesterday.

HealthServe, founded in 2006 by Dr Goh and businessman Tang Shin Yong, has dental and medical clinics in Geylang, Mandai and Jurong. It also offers social assistance, skills training and a food programme.

President Halimah Yacob presented Dr Goh and HealthServe with a $20,000 cash prize and a trophy at the ceremony at UBS University Asia-Pacific in Kheam Hock Road.

Dr Goh said after receiving the award: "I am thrilled, surprised, really humbled. Getting to know the other finalists personally has been the highlight for us today."

The inaugural award for 2015 went to Good Samaritan Noriza A. Mansor, for helping an elderly Chinese man who had soiled himself in public. The 2016 award was given to Joseph Schooling and his parents Colin and May for their dedication and sacrifice in chasing the dream of an Olympic gold for Singapore.

The finalists, who sat down to a three-course dinner by Chef Alan Wong of Lavish Dine Catering, had the chance to mingle with former winners and nominees of the award.

AWARD BRINGS THE BEST OUT

They (Dr Goh and his team) have been doing this for a very long time, with all that passion... It is not easy to sustain that kind of contribution.

I must say this is an excellent award because it brings the best out of Singaporeans...

To some extent, they (the finalists) are Singaporeans like you and me, but on another level, you look at them and there is something special about every one of them.

He feels that there is a gap in this service, and Dr Goh steps in to fill the gap. When we talk about compassion and taking care of people, it is wonderful that Dr Goh is thinking of not just Singaporeans, but also our foreign workers who come here to help us build, to help us serve other Singaporeans.

Mr Warren Fernandez, editor-in-chief of Singapore Press Holdings' English/Malay/Tamil Media group and editor of The Straits Times, said in his speech: "By uncovering their stories, and shining a spotlight on their efforts, we at The Straits Times hope to celebrate them, and uphold the values they represent as a reflection of the kind of society we would like to see in Singapore."

He noted that Singapore is a well-known global brand that stands for efficiency and reliability, and is also known for its top-rated airport and seaport. While these remain important, many now want the country to also go beyond these achievements.

"Many Singaporeans today want ours to be a society that is known also for our compassion and care, our creativity and our culture, our courage in the face of adversity, as well as the courage to dare to think and be different," he said.

Mr Fernandez gave a special mention to Australian national Silvia Hajas, who saved three boys from drowning in the sea off East Coast Park last May. "For her instinctive selflessness and courage, all of us know she deserves our respect and gratitude... and we are honoured to have her in Singapore as part of our community," he said.

Mr Edmund Koh, UBS' country head in Singapore and its head of wealth management in Asia-Pacific, lauded the "selfless contributions" of Dr Goh and HealthServe, while adding: "We celebrate all the finalists as they are each deserving in their own way."

He told the finalists: "There were a few tears shed because of (your) achievements, your altruism of doing that, day in, day out, without any recognition or asking for anything. That is the human spirit that is most important."

Singaporean of the Year award for 2017 

It honours citizens who have put the country on the world map, persevered through incredible adversity or made the community a better place through selfless acts.

Now in its third year, the award is organised by The Straits Times and sponsored by UBS Singapore.

In the running for this year's award are 10 finalists from different walks of life.

They are film-maker Kirsten Tan; conductor Wong Kah Chun; cartoonist Sonny Liew; para-athlete Jason Chee; general practitioner Goh Wei Leong and HealthServe, the charity he co-founded; indoor skydiver Kyra Poh; student Muhammad Luqman Abdul Rahman; lawyer Satwant Singh; martial arts instructor Qin Yunquan; and emergency responders Mohamad Fuad Abdul Aziz and Syed Abdillah Alhabshee.

http://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/several-worthy-finalists-and-one-will-be-chosen-singaporean-of-the-year-today

They were picked from 60 nominees after four rounds of selection by a panel of 15 judges.

The judging panel includes editors from The Straits Times, as well as figures such as social entrepreneur and activist Saleemah Ismail, chef and restaurateur Willin Low and singer-songwriter Dick Lee.

While the award recipient takes home the top prize, the other nine will each receive $5,000. The prize money is sponsored by UBS.

Mr Warren Fernandez, editor-in-chief of Singapore Press Holdings' English/Malay/Tamil Media group and editor of The Straits Times, said: "Each of the nominees has an inspiring story. They had either distinguished themselves in their respective fields, or gone out of their way to help others at home and abroad. They show that regardless of your age, gender or social background, you can make a difference.

"Each of them would be a worthy winner. But unfortunately, the judges had to pick just one to be named Singaporean of the Year."

Commentary: Budget 2018, a responsible budget in spending and financing

What one should take away from this Budget is how government spending and financing have been enhanced to give Singapore more fiscal space for future needs, says one observer from Ernst & Young Solutions LLP.

SINGAPORE: Budget 2018 has been described as one that’s multifaceted and lays the foundation for a sustainable future for Singapore.

On deeper reflection, one could describe it as a responsible budget.

It is responsible on two fronts. First, in the area of government spending and second, in the area of financing that spending.

RESPONSIBLE GOVERNMENT SPENDING

The announcement by Finance Minister Heng Swee Keat to moderate the pace of ministries’ budget growth by cutting the growth of their block budget from 0.4 times to 0.3 times of GDP growth sets a clear tone towards prudence.

Yet, this cut is no surprise as it echoes the permanent 2 per cent downward adjustment to the budget caps of all Ministries and Organs of State in Budget 2017.

This approach to tighten the Government’s own purse springs is commendable and timely, done when Singapore is currently in a position of strength, in ending FY2017 with an overall budget surplus of S$9.6 billion.

That said, Mr Heng laid out methodically the areas in which government spending is expected to increase in the years to come. Not surprising, these are healthcare, infrastructure and security.

HIGHER SPENDING TO SUPPORT AN AGEING POPULATION

1 in 4 Singaporeans will be aged 65 and older in 2030, according to the Ministry of Health. This greying population is exacerbated by Singapore’s low fertility rate.

In years to come, ceteris paribus, the burden of financing the increase in the expenditure to support an ageing society will fall on the shoulders of a shrinking workforce, calling to question the sustainability of Singapore’s finances.

With this, if measures are not taken early, our sound fiscal footing fortified through the years may not extend beyond 2020. It is with this foresight that underpins the Government’s call to foster prudent and effective public spending.

Government ministries, like private enterprises, will need to look for more productive and innovative ways to run their agencies.

In the Budget announcement, several collaborations and streamlining of activities within government agencies were introduced.

Examples include the Pioneer Generation Office to be merged with the Agency for Integrated Care, SPRING Singapore coming together with IE Singapore to form Enterprise Singapore, and perhaps more to come.

Against a global landscape of increased connectivity and sector convergence, it is timely that government agencies and ministries too be more streamlined in providing integrated services to residents and companies, while being more cost efficient.

RESPONSIBLE IN FINANCING FUTURE SPENDING

While prudence goes some way to reduce expenditure, as important is raising revenue to make sure that our nation’s coffers remains in a strong position.  

The easiest way for a government to raise finances for its spending is through taxation. In a progressive tax system, it is expected that a greater burden will be placed on those with higher income.

To alleviate the burden of long-term nation building on the current generation of taxpayers, Budget 2018 takes a step in the right direction by financing national infrastructure building like the Integrated Waste Management Facility, the Kuala Lumpur-Singapore High Speed Rail and Changi Airport Terminal 5 through savings and borrowings.

A Rail Infrastructure Fund will be set up to save for large-scale, multiyear rail line projects with top-ups by the Government when Singapore is in a good fiscal position.

A Changi Airport Development Fund for Terminal 5 had been already been set up in 2015.

Statutory boards and government-owned companies that build the infrastructure will explore borrowing, likely much like how private companies fund acquisition and expansion plans.

Returns of investments from such projects may then be distributed to bondholders, corporates and individuals alike.

With this added mode of financing, the Government will have greater fiscal flexibility in funding projects - not only through direct use of external funding for these long-term projects, but also through channeling its existing operating revenues to other areas of expenditure.

More importantly, with this save and borrow approach, there is no need for the Government to dip into our national reserves to fund these major projects, preserving it for future generations.

That said, it is clear that more tax dollars are needed to fund expenditure of a recurrent nature, such as healthcare, security and other social spending.

Such expenditure directly benefits the current generation and as Mr Heng puts it:

The responsible way to pay for them is through taxation so that every generation pays its share.

With this, several tax rate hikes and new taxes have been announced. With immediate effect, the top marginal Buyer’s Stamp Duty rate for residential properties has been increased from 3 per cent to 4 per cent. Tobacco excise duty across all tobacco products have also been raised by 10 per cent.

Budget 2018 has been lauded as a strategic and integrated financial plan to position our island city for the future. And it is indeed so.

At the heart of Budget 2018 is a responsible masterplan that builds on the core values of Singapore: Thrift, prudence and self-reliance, while caring for the young, old and needy and making sure that the future ahead is a sustainable one for generations to come.

Sandie Wun is Partner, Transaction Tax at Ernst & Young Solutions LLP.  

Read more at https://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/singapore/commentary-budget-2018-responsible-spending-financing-prudent-9982470