SG50  celebrations are quickly fading from Singapore's collective memory. The mutual  self-congratulations and laudatory speeches are a thing of the past. Indeed,  the political focus has shifted decisively towards the  future with the official announcement of general elections expected  imminently. 
While  Singapore's 'usual suspects' (e.g. immigration, public transport, cost of  living, etc.) will command most attention during the forthcoming election campaign,  it is Singapore's  welfare over the next 50 years which demand more focus.
Arguably,  the 50 years nation building period since 1965 may prove easier to navigate than  the coming 50 years. Why? Several reasons come to mind.
Lee Kuan Yew (LKY) is  the most obvious answer.  
Singapore  was fortunate to have firm, visionary leadership for several post-independence decades  – a luxury denied most newly decolonized nations. Leadership best symbolized by  LKY, but also includes other cabinet members (e.g. Goh Keng Swee, Rajaretnam  et. al.) influential in their own right in shaping critical national policy frameworks.  
Singapore  circa 1965 was a typical third world city: undeveloped, unclean and riddled  with crime. Arguably, things could not get much worse – only better. Certainly,  development is easier when started from a low base - improvements are more visible  and impactful. 
Singapore  took a free market, export led approach to generating economic growth in an era  when many decolonized countries practiced and preached economic self-reliance. China  was well and truly a People's Republic. Deng Xiao Ping had not yet worked his  magic. India was a socialist country firmly implanted on the Soviet Union's side  during the Cold War. Both China and India were off limits to international  investors. 
For  ASEAN's Asian Tigers it was a sunny period as they received large doses of  direct foreign investment from wealthy industrialized nations. There was far  less competition for the  international investment dollar. Fast forward to 2015 and things are  different. 
Singapore no longer starts  from a low economic base.  
On  the contrary, Singapore is now one of the wealthiest nations in the world. It  is hard, if not impossible, to generate and sustain (say) seven percent annual  GDP growth with GDP per capita at USD 56,000 versus the 1965 per capita income of  USD 516. Put simply, seven percent growth equals an annual increment of USD 36  in 1965 versus a yearly increase in income of almost USD 4,000 today (a monthly  wage increase of approximately SGD 450). 
Suddenly  one pillar of Singapore's  historical social contract looks a bit wobbly?
Like  other Asian Tiger economies, a key factor in Singapore's early economic success  was its low cost structure. Contemporary Singapore is no longer cost  competitive for traditional businesses. Quite the reverse, recent surveys  suggest Singapore  is now a frightfully expensive place for international companies. 
That's  not all. Singapore's economic success brings with it other concerns. 
A wealthy, literate  population has different expectations from the country's political leadership.
Having  achieved success, some Singaporeans believe they are entitled to a 'cradle to  the grave' social welfare structure, often citing various European countries as  appropriate models. The increased demands by citizens coupled with the  power of the social media – think Arab Spring – has on occasion forced  the government's hand towards populist polices. 
Undoubtedly,  Singapore can afford higher social expenditure but if the 'entitlement' trend  continues then Singapore  becomes closer to Europe in other ways too: high taxes, poor delivery of government  services and a rigid labor market. Or Singapore heads towards unsustainable  social expenditure (think Greece)?  
Unfortunately  (or fortunately) ASEAN is not the European Union and no one owes Singapore a  living!
Politically, no single  leader has the gravitas and respect accorded to LKY and his team. 
The  political contract was simpler in 1965: the government improves economic conditions  and the citizenry don't ask too many difficult questions. In contrast, today's  electorate is keen to question the leadership and flex its muscles at the  ballot box. The upshot: despite the ruling People's Action Party's achievements  for Singapore over the last 50 years, the city's long standing rulers cannot  take the popular vote for granted. 
Consequently,  the government cannot enact unpopular policies with the same bluster as before.  A literate, connected and wealthy (entitled?!) electorate  is not as easy to boss around as the less well-off, kampong dwelling  Singaporean of the past.  
History  is for historians and the future is for the next generation (or, PAP, what have  you done for me lately)?!
Despite all the  challenges face in an uncertain world, there are many reasons to argue for  Singapore's continued success in the next 50 years. 
Governmence structures  are solidly in place.  
Public  service and the bureaucracy continue to attract talent due to competitive  compensation structures. In an often unstable region, Singapore's educated and  English speaking society provides a haven of stability which allows the country  to charge a 'Singapore Premium.' 
Currency reserves –  effectively savings squirreled away for a rainy day - are sizeable. 
Between  GIC and Temasek,  Singapore's  two sovereign wealth funds, GIC and Temasek,  contain a massive USD 538 billion in assets. A sum equivalent to approx. USD  161,000 for each of Singapore's 3.4 million citizens! These savings provide a  limited insurance policy for increased social welfare expenditures. 
Singapore's new found  wealth also makes the country ideally placed in a capitalist world. 
The  Republic is a global investor in its own right with large investments,  particularly in developing ASEAN and China. In time these investments will  generate significant positive income for the country.
But  let's forget logic for a moment. After all, human society is a collection of  human emotional endeavours?
Singapore's  future is about survival for its resourceful and creative population. So if  necessity is the mother of invention (or re-invention is this case) then the odds  suggest that this small (non-secular!)  island republic will succeed in for the next fifty years! 
__________________
Imran is a business and management consultant.  Through his work at Deodar  Advisors and the Deodar Diagnostic, Imran improves profits of businesses  operating in Singapore and the region. He can be reached at imran@deodaradvisors.com. 




No comments:
Post a Comment