Don’t Rely on Us (You Just Need to Remember Everything Needs to Go Through Us)

 

Mr. Ravi Menon, the Managing Director of the Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS) just concluded a four-part lecture series that was organized by the Institute of Public Studies (IPS). This four-part lecture series proved to be quite radical in as much as Mr. Menon touched on hot button issues like a minimum wage (he argued Singapore should have one – which goes against the grain of traditional Singapore government DNA) and he went as far as to suggests that a “wealth tax” might be helpful (venom to the minds of Singapore’s powers that be). Most interestingly, Mr. Menon concluded his series by suggesting that Singaporeans needed to rely less on the government and more on themselves. The full report of Mr. Menon’s lectures can be found at:

https://www.todayonline.com/singapore/society-mature-singaporeans-shouldnt-rely-too-much-government-solve-problems-mas-chief

 

If you read Mr. Menon on the surface of the words, there’s very little to disagree with. Singapore’s government has by any account made itself omnipotent, omniscient and omnipresent in Singapore. I think of the “fail-proof” strategy that a former business partner used to propose for any Public Relations (PR) issue that all our clients had – get a government minister to grace the event and positive press coverage is assured.

If one looks carefully at things, this strategy that was applied to my early PR campaigns didn’t just apply to PR – it’s the basic problem-solving strategy to any given issue in Singapore. Solving problems in Singapore isn’t so much about solving problems but getting the government to realise that your problem could be its problem. It’s part of our national DNA, regardless of what the government or people tell you. The people expect the government to solve their issues and the government expects to be the exclusive solution to all issues.

I think of the time my favourite young politician (we’re talking about a die-hard devotee of the ruling party) tried to tell me that Gilbert Goh, one of our better-known social activists, was a trouble maker. His explanation was simple – “He goes round helping homeless people – this is causing trouble because there’s no need to do that because there is the government to take care of that.”

The second instance that comes to mind was from a time when I was trying to squeeze freelance work from the labour movement. I thought my story of surviving long term unemployment would be a good selling point as to why they should work with me. It wasn’t. They were utterly flabbergasted that in a decade of not having a full-time job, it never occurred to me to approach government to solve what I saw as a personal problem.

However, as Mr. Menon has argued in his lectures, this happy situation cannot go on. This is no longer the 1960s when it was just a problem of giving rice to a group of hungry people. Our problems are more complex and let’s face it, the government’s ability to solve “ALL ISSUES,” in a decisive manner isn’t what it was back then. One only needs to look at the number of lock downs and opening ups that we’ve been through in the last six months to understand how our government, which acts like it competes with God for the usual “omnis,” is simply unable to solve modern day problems in a decisive manner.

Mr. Menon rightfully pointed out that you need competing sources of ideas. In any other place, you get the rise of foundations, think-tanks, NGOs, religious organisations and so on, that will come up with a multitude of solutions to existing issues and all these solutions will be put into practice together. Government behaves more like a referee in a game rather than the only player in the game. You could say that it is at this point where a wise government should look to build a “strong society,” rather than a “strong government.”

Whilst Mr. Menon is right in what he says, there’s one slight snag. Our current system isn’t designed to allow anyone to solve any issues beyond their tying their shoe laces. In a funny way, the Singapore government of the current era is more tolerant of expression than its predecessors. I am definitely not alone is grousing about this and that on the net. I am merely different in as much as I do so under my actual name.

However, it’s a different story doing anything more than being a keyboard warrior. Let’s go back to the young politician’s comments about Gilbert Goh. As far as the government is concerned, Mr. Goh and his transitioning.org team are a group of trouble makers, whom they tolerate because crushing him would be bad PR. In any other society, Mr. Goh would be a candidate for sainthood.

Then, there’s Mr. Jolovan Wham, who has been in and out of the court system for the past decade. If you judged by the number of times Mr. Wham was on the wrong side of the legal system, you’d come to the conclusion that he was either trying out for “ISIS Idol,” or had a severe case of “kleptomania.”

This is not the case; Mr. Wham simply has the “unfortunate” habit of speaking out about the less than satisfactory living conditions of the likes of itinerant workers and his protest methods are as socially damaging as holding up smiley faces in public places. Even when Mr. Wham was proved right about the conditions in the worker’s dormitories after the massive break of Covid-19 cases, the authorities still continued treating him like the cause of Covid.

I don’t disagree with Mr. Menon’s point about Singaporeans needing to be less dependent on government. However, this is never going to change as long as government remains unable or unwilling to view self-reliant problem solvers like Mr. Goh and Mr. Wham as anything other than criminals. A contradictory message is being sent out here. Mr. Menon says we should be less dependent on government. However, when we try to do anything without government approval, we end up coming under fire for criminal activities like trying to help the helpless. Does anyone with half a brain cell expect change unless the powers that be allow it?

There is No Fancy Way of Saying. “I Have Sinned.” – Bill Clinton, Former President of the USA

 Singapore has returned to what is politically known as “phase 2” alerts, thanks to an outbreak of cases of Covid-19 in Karaoke joints and the fishery ports. I’ve effectively lost my restaurant side gigs, which had given me much needed pocket money to supplement my weekly income from corporate insolvency and it looks like things will be quiet for a while. A best friend’s mother and brother are down with the virus and life looks a little less promising than it did a few weeks ago.

In many ways, the return to these measures is a sign that our government, which the world perceives as being a model of super competence, is a little less than what its public image suggests. The government in particular has been facing plenty of brick bats thanks to the out break in karaoke lounges, which all of us have known were a polite euphemism for whore-joints.

I’ve argued on many occasions that Singapore has what one would call an enlightened approach to the vice-trade. Lee Kuan Yew famously stated in his book that a total ban on the trade would only force it underground, so it was better to keep in out in the open. Our red-light districts aren’t as famous as Thailand’s more obvious flesh markets but they’re not the crime infested dens that you see on Western dramas. The police do make their presence felt once in a while. It’s enough of a presence for the pimps and prostitutes to understand that they need to stay on the right side of law enforcement but not so much that business is actually affected.

Whilst this approach worked well in normal times, the point remains that these are not normal times. Bars, clubs and other night spots have all been shut down because, well, it’s been proven that the best way to spread this virus is at places where crowds gather. Singapore’s “vice-scene” has been no exception. Geylang, our most prominent spot for the vice trade has been transformed from a bustling spot of activity into a sleepy centre of not very much. Sure, in normal times its fine for the sexually deprived to have a place to relieve themselves but in normal times, you want to limit the places where people are likely to get something nasty.

So, many of us are questioning why the karaoke lounges were allowed to stay open and more importantly how was it such where they were able to do so under a legal loophole where they officially claimed that they would “pivot into food and beverage outlets.” What’s more annoying for the tax payers is the fact that those who claimed they were pivoting, helped themselves to a government grant of some $50,000. The pivot is best explained by the following cartoon in our mainstream news

 

What is perhaps far worse than the actual outbreak itself, has been the explanation provided by the government. Singapore’s most pugnacious fighter for truth and justice, our magically unconflicted writer and enforcer of laws, Mr. K Shanmugam proceeded to deliver the what can only be described as a tax-payer insulting, how dare you expect us to do the job you’re paying us to do speeches in parliament. Mr. Shanmugam’s speech can be found at:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SI7hD7MI-Ic

 

One has to ask if Mr. Shanmugam is determined to provide Singaporeans with another reason not to vote for the ruling party? Why is it such that a ruling party with every advantage determined not to provide the voters with their one simple request – a little bit of humility.

Mr. Shanmugam should perhaps look at what Bill Clinton did after his was acquitted in his 1998 impeachment trial.  Mr. Clinton invited reporters to the rose garden and ensured that he looked suitably contrite for his role in subjecting the nation to an impeachment trial. He told the world, “There is no fancy way of saying, I have sinned.” Like him or loath him, Mr. Clinton’s contrition after that key moment in his presidency, played a role in ensuring that he saw his presidency as one of the most popular presidents around. People overlooked his indiscretions and obvious flaws and focused on his achievements.

This is something our politicians need to learn. The current situation has no precedent.  Nobody can expect perfection. However, what we do expect is greater accountability and while we can expect mistakes and oversight, we do expect leadership to own its mistakes. The dialogue should be, you made a mistake, now tell us what are you going to do about it. It should not be “How are you expect me to do my job.”

Stop Putting Brain in the Drain.

 I remember a local Tamil friend of mine was got a shock when he was asked “Are you from India,” at a corporate function. The man who at the time was head of Southeast Asia for a multinational aerospace company, was taken back because it seemed to imply that the multinational company assumed that if an Indian was qualified enough to hold a high-level job, he had to be from India. It was a bit of a shock to the man’s system to find that his employer seemed to assume that Indians from India were more qualified than the Singaporean ones.

This story is a cruel reflection on the reality of how the “big” companies that count view our much-valued human resources. Singapore tells the world that our economic miracle was due to the fact that we managed to make the maximise our “only” resource, which is the “human” one. Our line to the “foreign investors” as that while our costs are higher than our regional competitors, we offer a better-quality workforce. More importantly, we also make the point that we need the world’s highest paid ministers because we need to prevent the “top talents” from being snapped up by international organisations.

While this sounds good on paper, the reality is a little different. As at the time of writing, Singapore has with the exception of Lee Kuan Yew and perhaps Daren Tang, the head of the World Intellectual Property Office, there doesn’t seem to be a Singaporean who has gained any recognition from running anything beyond Singapore’s shores.

Sure, our international colleagues in the multinationals might say nice things about the good work we do in our domestic market but the reality is that any Singaporean would be lucky if they ever got promoted to a managerial role in the regional office (usually Southeast Asia but on accession Asia-Pacific.)

This is a sad record for a nation that makes such a song and dance about how it has maximized domestic talent. It seems that the only people who “make it” (defined as someone outside of Singapore would notice) are either politicians (Lee Kuan Yew claimed the role of single builder of modern Singapore, which helped in his post prime ministerial career as an international consultant and a writer for Forbes and his predecessors had the good fortune to be born tall so that they remained the only Asian leaders at international summits who didn’t have to look up to their Western counterparts) or civil servants (the type that coordinate international visits for foreign dignitaries)

Why is it such that we only seem to produce “leaders” in politics and how is it such that our “leaders” are never really required to shine on the international stage?

One answer might be the fact that they simply don’t have to. If you look at the scholarship system which has groomed plenty of our senior civil servants and ministers, you’ll note that they are never required to put their brain power to much use. A Ministry of Education Scholar for example will never have to teach in a school full of problematic kids and uncooperative parents. The definition of a “good” Singaporean is one who has the ability to memorise facts and to regurgitate them when required to do so. The best part about this is that they don’t even need to “find” the facts for themselves because there is inevitably an army of serfs to do the work. Scholars will inevitably be paid considerably more.

While I don’t disagree with the idea behind the scholarship system in theory (why shouldn’t smart people run the show), I disagree with the narrow definition of “good” and the way in which our scholars stop facing “challenges” the moment they leave the classroom. Unfortunately, the brain is like other muscles, you have to use it in order for it to develop.

For people outside of Singapore, the common saying is that the real learning is after you leave the classroom. While your actual degree may not be of much interest to anyone else, the skills you acquire (the ability to think) is. It’s a different story for our scholars. A degree becomes an badge of prestige that is supposed to remove the need to actually think at all. Hence while theory behind the system is sound (putting smart people in charge), the actual practice is not (ensuring that smart people don’t do smart things).

Once again, I return to the example of our military, which is a conscript force, which means that the military is effectively a microcosm of everything else. The Singapore Armed Forces (SAF) is inevitably commanded by people with great degrees. Our current chief of defense force, Lieutenant General Melvyn Ong is a good example. He went to Anglo-Chinese School (independent), National Junior College and then it was off to the LSE. His predecessor, Lieutenant Perry Lim went to Cambridge.

While I am not belittling high academic achievement, I don’t believe that academics should be the be all and end all of ones achievements. The problem for our generals is that they lack the most crucial ingredient in judging a solider – combat experience.

In a way, it’s a “happy problem,” in as much as nobody should actually want to go to war and have to deal with the horrors associated with it. However, soldiers, especially those leading troops in a potential life and death situation should probably have more than book knowledge about how to fight a war. Why, for example, would you trust a solider to fight and sacrifice his or her life if all they’ve ever done is to watch Rambo movies on TV if you would not trust a surgeon to operate on you if that surgeon had never operated on anyone else before?

To make up for the “lack of combat” experience, we do send troops on overseas international missions (which remains not the same as actual war). However, this clearly something that the system does not value.

Take the example of Mr. Bernard Miranda, who was a navy officer who actually commanded an international task force to conduct anti-piracy operations in the Gulf of Aden. Mr. Miranda was by all accounts pretty good at the job as can be seen in the report below:

https://www.mindef.gov.sg/web/portal/mindef/news-and-events/latest-releases/article-detail/2010/april/2010apr21-news-releases-01319/!ut/p/z1/vVJJUsMwEHwLBx8Vjbc45maWYqmYsASIdaEUe7yALRlbxPB7JgkcqCJQXNBJM-rp6ukWF3zBhZKrqpCm0krWVCdi_BDMjg5PwXMuZv7chuhuPp_6Bxdnt8GY33HBRZtWGU_S0EU_lxkLlp7NvNADNkEMmC3HmcR8CY501uhUmdaUPGkqlWHOUq0MKmNBqRu0QOHQM6kyhivq9hbU0mBvWIc1yh6p4YANFsi2q-ptQVfHZpvBTxQD27VDfv-bfEHPsONEQPNiA5ldeSe2B850Fl_7xBCGkzlcOnASfAB-4EhIQ7BbQ8DvVxUO_FbpriHHb_5o6Cnw842EH7akFJ0uPowLYpamZJXKNV-sreOLjY_bYrePRFA9Pj-LiNJbx_Vq-OIf4qPFilovt_8wUkt3Qht0mGOH3eilo3ZpTNvvW0Q4DMOo0LqocZTqxoLvRkrdk_CvSN42zcR9Y095fOx6Irmc5rHxk2jvHfU_hx8!/dz/d5/L2dBISEvZ0FBIS9nQSEh/?urile=wcm%3Apath%3A%2Fmindef-content%2Fhome%2Fnews-and-events%2Flatest-releases%2F2010%2Fapril%2F2010Apr21-News-Releases-01319

You would have imagined that success on an international level would have made Mr. Miranda a hero. Unfortunately, Mr. Miranda was the wrong colour (out of Singapore, the armed forces champion themselves as places where ethnic minorities can succeed) and more importantly not one of the chosen few.

His reward for a job well done was to be demoted (from one star admiral to colonel) and he was quickly retired. To be fair, he was given lucrative postings and will probably be remembered as a senior civil servant who got caught drunk driving.

 

The other example of wasted experiences is that of Tan Huck Gim, who commanded a task force in what was then called East Timor from 2002 to 2003. If there was an example of a Singapore General who did a job for Singapore, it was General Tan’s command in Timor Leste. His experiences have been turned into a case study on how little Singapore can use its troops to do something useful in the wider region:

https://www.mindef.gov.sg/oms/content/dam/imindef_media_library/graphics/pointer/PDF/2012/Vol.38%20No.3/5)%20V38N3_A%20UMISET%20Case%20Study.compressed.pdf

How did we reward General Tan for doing a good job? We demoted him, took away the extra star because the only two-star general allowed to exist in Singapore was the Chief of Army, which at that time was Major-General Ng Yat Chung, who would distinguish himself by becoming a Chief of Defense Force (CDF) that was mysteriously absent from all the events you’d expect the CDF to be at and then he would become a businessman who would run down not just one but two public listed companies.

I remember talking to someone in the Ministry of Defense about this. It didn’t make sense that an army that had never seen an unfriendly situation in its entire history was demoting a leader who had actually dealt with unfriendly situations. The reply was “But he’s OLD WHAT.”

 

Thank you for being a leader on an international stage – now please give us back the rank you actually earned and p*** off into obscurity

It doesn’t make sense to demote people who have proven themselves to be capable, particularly in a society that claims to worship meritocracy. So, what is he’s old – he’s shown that he’s good?

Yet, while there may be some sense to what I’ve said, it clearly doesn’t apply. It seems that “leadership” is about looking good on paper (right school, graduate from university, preferably from a family with some money, it helps if you’re the right colour, though we may need the odd token and you got to be the right age). Unfortunately, what looks good on paper doesn’t always prove to be so.

The world is going through a rough patch. We need competent leadership and the only way we are ever going to achieve it is by promoting people who have shown themselves competent in the here and now rather than what they did in a sheltered background two decades ago. We need to stop trying to check boxes made up by bureaucrats in a cubicle and judge people by what they do on the ground. Sure, I have nothing against scholars or scholarship. However, we need to challenge our scholars – give them the shitty problems. There’s no point in putting smart people in charge of things that don’t need to be solved. Getting scholars to avoid challenges is an act of putting brain in a drain.  

A General can make Beautiful Plans – But without Guys Like Us To Execute, Nothing happens – Retired Warrant Office Yeo Lay King

 

I have to confess that I had high hopes during national service. I had a strange fantasy of being an officer and then, somehow proving myself in a combat situation and climbing the ranks. I guess part of it was from growing up in the UK, where it was expected of any young man with A-levels entering as an officer if he chose the armed forces. Another part of it was from watching movies, where officers seemed to get a better life than the average grunt.

So, when I got to admit that I was a little disappointed that I didn’t make it to OCS and going to what was then called “School of Infantry Specialist” (SISPEC) felt like second best. However, as I was going through specialist training, I received an invaluable piece of advice from the then Weapon Wing second in command (2ic) in the School of Artillery. The then 1^st Warrant Officer, Yeo Lay King, told us, “Gentlemen, always remember, the generals on top can draw up the most beautiful plans – but without us to execute, nothing is going to happen.”

 

These Guys Are Brilliant at Drawing Things Up On Paper

 

But we need this guy to ensure their brilliant plans are more than just sheets of paper

I didn’t know it then, but he was giving us a pearl of wisdom, which I would soon realise, nobody followed much to the detriment of the rest of society. The Singapore Armed Forces (SAF), which as a citizen army, is a microcosm for the rest of society is a perfect example. In the word of my Uncle Andy, who was an officer in the SAF – “You know the army is going downhill when the officers get everything and the NCO’s, who are the backbone of the army, get nothing”

Back in my day (early nineties), the government spent a sinful amount to create the Singapore Armed Forces Training Institute – Military Institute or SAFTI MI. The idea was simple (and often repeated across the board) – it was to make Singapore the regional centre for training military officers. The facilities at SAFTI-MI are supposed to be based on West Point in the USA or Sandhurst in Britain. Officer Cadets lived like university students – two to a bunk. Food at SAFTI-MI was inevitably better than it was anywhere else in the military eco-system (there’s a direct correlation between the quality of food served in a camp and the number of colonels and above and SAFTI-MI had a hold of the number of colonels walking around).

While young officers were resting two to a bunk in SAFTI-MI, we at the other “commander school,” were living many, many people to a bunk. Although, we were treated relatively well (trainees get to take on various commander roles under supervision), it was quite clear that those of us in the old Pasir Labar camp were living off the scraps of the more glorious at SAFTI-MI next door.

The comparison between the officer and NCO (or specialist as we were rebranded in Singapore) continued throughout the rest of our national services careers. I do acknowledge the differences between the Officer and NCO class and I do believe that good officers are as important to the system as good NCOs. However, while the importance of the role of the NCO as much talked about, the reality was quite different. The best example comes from the fact that a third sergeant, which is an operational rank that comes with command responsibilities, pays a grand total of $900 a month. By comparison, an officer cadet, which is to all intents and purposes, a trainee with no actual responsibilities, is paid $40 a month less (at one stage officer cadets were paid more).  

If you want to put this into the commercial context, it means that a senior technician, in charge of actually fixing things, is paid only marginally higher than a student in engineering school.

Interestingly enough, the disparity between the officer class and NCO and enlisted men would also continue into later life. Singapore has the world’s highest paid ministers. Our Prime Minister, who runs a country that is barely a suburb of New York or LA, makes at least four times more than the US president. We’re constantly told that we need to “attract talent,” because Singapore’s success in just about everything comes from letting world class people run the show and you need to pay for talent.

It’s nice idea. However, does it actually work. Well, Singapore is well run on the surface, so much so that the people who don’t have to live through the system are inevitably the ones praising it. Dig a little deeper and the story is rather different.

Let’s look at the opposite end of the scale where the guys who ensure that our world class cleanliness is actually that, are paid wages that are just ahead of slave wages. The standard reply to any suggestion that people the lower end of the scale should earn a few cents extra was inevitably “Would you be willing to pay more for your ……” (which inevitably happened anyway, because the other main costs for business, which is controlled by the people in power – i.e. rent inevitably shot up, even in a recession.)

 

Singapore CEOs are good at drawing up plans

It took the Covid-19 pandemic for us to realise that we actually needed people to do things. Someone had to clear the trash. Someone had to get our food ready for us? How have we shown the people that make our life livable our appreciation? Well, there’s now some talk about how we’re going to have a “Progressive Wage model,” which will help the guys who actually do things to double their low salaries in five years. In the meantime, rents for businesses, especially the home-grown ones, have gone up in an instant.

A year after Covid, you have the usual bureaucrats trying to get people back to the office. The answer is simple, these are the clowns trying to help ensure the landlords have a large say in things. You have people insisting that their professional service providers up the bill by two thirds but at the same time insist that they are being screwed when logistics movers send the bill and insist on being paid up front.

Unfortunately, Covid has shown us that what we considered “normal,” was not actually normal. Nobody is saying that the people who do should be given as much as the people who talk on an overnight basis. However, it is clear that the people who do things have to be respected and valued. Talking, contrary to what most bureaucrats assume, is actually the easy part. Picking up a paper and walking to the end of the room on the other hand requires energy. If we are to progress as a nation, we need to rediscover the respect and value of the people who actually do things rather than to lavish it all on the people who talk about doing things.

 

Without these guys, our homes don’t get built, we’ll travel on potholed roads etc

 

Better Kneel in the Stadium than Riot in the Streets

 Call it indoctrination if you like but I was brought up to stand at attention whenever the national anthem was played. School children in Singapore start their day with a flag raising ceremony, which involves singing the national anthem and saying the national pledge. This was, for the better part of my early life, normal.

While Singapore remains the only country, I’ve lived in where the national anthem and the flag is a big part of your daily life (rituals like saying a national pledge or singing a national anthem were part of my school life in Spain, Germany or the UK), It was drilled into my head that the right reaction to the playing of any national anthem is to stand in attention.

So, I grew up in a system where the national anthem was something sacred. Reacting a certain way to the national anthem is something that is simply understood. Whenever you hear the national anthem in a public event, you simply cease everything and stand at attention.

So, how does someone who has been conditioned to act in a certain way towards a national anthem react when you read about the news of athletes who “take a knee” out of political protest. This was something that was first made famous by the former San Francisco 49ers Quarterback, Colin Kaepernick, who wanted to protest racism and police brutality. Mr. Kaepernick found his protest gaining a lot of publicity thanks to the former President, Donald Trump, who demanded that all any football player taking a knee be fired. As with anything involving Mr. Trump, the debate grew passionate.

What started in America has since moved to the “Old World,” where we had players from the England Squad taking a knee during the playing of “God Save the Queen.” Ironically, the British showed that anything American politicians could do, the British ones could do with a bit more panache. Instead of having a fat old white man make threats against a group of young and fit black men, we had Priti Patel, the home secretary and daughter of migrants dismiss another group of native-born black men as being “gesture politics.” More of taking a knee can be found at:

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/world/taking-knee-history-black-lives-matter-a4458816.html

While I’ve not been to the US or the UK for nearly two decades, I often wonder what would happen if something similar were to happen in Singapore. How would I, as a national service completed, Singaporean Chinese man feel if I saw our national soccer team, which made up mainly of Malay and Tamils “take a knee” upon the playing of “Majullah Singapura” to protest the treatment of ethnic minorities.

I am aware that based on the way things are at the moment, this is an implausible scenario. While we do have “racist vibes” in Singapore as does any other country, our race relations are pretty good and the government has conditioned us to automatically see any form of protest as something that will disrupt our cherished social order. In Singapore, we’ll grouse online but nobody will think of going onto the streets or doing anything that might embarrass the powers that be on the international stage. Most of us do not wish to end up paying fines or going to jail.

As this scenario is implausible, its worth imagining and using it to question ourselves. The sad is truth is that while I may not like Donald Trump or Boris Johnson’ s positions on this, my initial reactions to seeing a group of Singaporean soccer players take a knee during the national anthem is likely to be the same. From where I stand, racism in Singapore, between native born Singaporeans is limited to crude to jibes. Sure, our soccer players don’t make the millions that the athletes in the West make, but they’re not doing badly. Let’s also not forget that most people in Singapore have a roof over their head and no matter how small, there is some form of social assistance, which is something that cannot be said for many parts of the region.

So, yes, I can understand taking to cyberspace to vent. I’d find it hard to take that step to not do the “normal” thing on the international stage. “Disrespecting” the national anthem is not just an embarrassment to the government – it’s an embarrassment to me as an individual Singaporean.

Yet, feeling that way should that implausible scenario take place, is actually wrong. While I do have my grouses about life in Singapore, life is not bad and it could always be worse. Sure, I may not have built much of a “corporate career” but I will never be unable to make a living in my own country as long as I stay relatively healthy. I belong to the majority and nobody is going to question me too hard on certain things. If I enjoy a windfall and upgrade my government subsidized home, nobody is going question my right to be there. The assumption is I must have worked hard because I’m a Chinese Western Educated graduate working in a profession – I must be OK.

What applies to me, may not necessarily apply to my friends from ethnic minorities. What may seem OK for me, may not be for them. Sure, racial relations in Singapore are, as things stand, pretty good but we do need to keeping testing if our experiences are necessarily shared. When we see people protest, we can’t dismiss them as people who don’t know how good they have it.

Take Colin Kaepernick’s case as an example. Sure, Mr. Kaepernick is not living the life that his “Black Brother’s” live in Harlem. However, what he’s protesting against predated him. Let’s remember when a black man was beaten by the cops and sued, an all-white jury acquitted the cops despite seeing the obvious evidence of their guilt. Mr. Kaepernick took many years to protest the way black people are treated by the powers that be many years after the Rodney King riots. He was dismissed as an unpatriotic, ungrateful brat who didn’t know what was good for him. Several months later, the entire country erupted in the “Black Lives Matter” protest.

 

Copyright – Getty Images – He took a knee

 

Copyright – South China Morning Post – Perhaps they may not have had to take to the streets if he was listened to.

In England, we had black players taking a knee. They were booed by the fans and the home secretary and Prime Minister defended the guys booing them. If you believe the Prime Minister and Home Secretary, Black British people shouldn’t complain and racism doesn’t exist.  Well, despite helping the English squad to one their most successful outings in 50 years, the black guys ended up being the targets of racist abuse. The Financial Times (hardly a left leaning, do-gooder paper) reports that contrary to what Mr. Johnson and Ms. Patel would think, racial inequality in England has worsened. The report can be read at:

https://www.ft.com/stream/bd89df59-1c96-4bb4-856c-823bd4dcb4b1

Ms. Patel is now scrambling after being proven so dreadfully wrong. She says that racist abuse is wrong and the players are rightfully giving her the proverbial middle finger as can be seen from the following report:

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2021/7/13/englands-mings-slams-uks-home-secretary-over-racism-remarks

Thankfully leadership in the UK is not limited to Downing Street. Mr. Southgate has shown himself to be a leader and taken responsibility for failures on the pitch and defended his players as can be seen from the following vide:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5OOo6soHW9w

 

Is he a future Prime Minister? It may not be a bad idea?

Life as it seems can be comfortable. However, what we experience may not be so for other people. When they protest, we have to find out if there’s something that’s driving them to do things so publicly. Dealing with an issue when its just athletes taking a knee during the national anthem on national TV is a lot easier than dealing with masses on the streets and ugly behavior being made globally famous.  

God Save the Queen ……..From Her Subjects

If there is a certainty that ranks along side with death and taxes, it is the certainty that the average England Football Fan will screw up England’s image at the very moment when global cameras are focused on England.

The recently concluded European Cup should have been a very proud moment for England. The English national team did exceptionally well, only losing in the final on a penalty shoot out and defeating strong teams like old rival, Germany on the way to the final. English soccer has never looked better. The much hyped “English Premier League,” (EPL) was looking like it was actually producing players that could go toe-to-toe with the best in the world.

It wasn’t always that way. When I was growing up in England back in the 1990s, English football was overhyped. Everyone bragged about the EPL and highly talented players like Paul Gascoine (Gazza), David Beckham and Wayne Rooney and yet the performance of the national team was barely worth mentioning. England once reached the semis in the 1990 World Cup but that was pretty much it.

This time, things seemed different. The English National Team reached the semi-finals in the 2018 World Cup in Russia and their run in the European Championship suggests that this was no fluke. England was showing the world that it had a national squad worth talking about. Like the World Cup winning French teams of 1998 and 2018, the current English squad is racially diverse and its recent successes should have been a showcase of a multiracial England showing its strength to the world.

Unfortunately, the fans had other ideas and the behavior of the fans is such that whatever the national squad does on the pitch is irrelevant. One of the most prominent moments was fans without tickets gate crashing Wembley Stadium (all of them not wearing mask – welcome super covid spreader) and then attacking Italian Fans after losing the final. The “black” players on the English squad have been racially abused and just to show off English hospitality at its best, there was “booing” of the national anthems of the other countries in the tournament. As for the “sportsmanship” that the British are so famous for, there was the incident of shinning a laser pointer into the eyes of the Danish goalkeeper on route to the final.

The “Good” manners of the England’s Football Fans can be seen at:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CxNUepxhY5I

 

England Football Fans behaving like Sewer Rats is nothing new. I’m old enough to remember watching people get crushed to death on TV during Hillsborough and the collapse of the Heysel Stadium is also within my living memory. It goes without saying that whenever England or English clubs went abroad to play, everyone else thought – “Good God – not them again, let’s make sure they f** off back to where they came from.” The only difference with the recent incidents is that it comes at a time when the England football squad is actually giving English fans every reason to be happy. You’d imagine that fans would be encouraging the team to go onto something better after a good showing.

What is interesting about England’s horrible football fans is that England is also the country that produced the ideal of what a man should be – well mannered, sporting and concerned about the welfare of others. The concept of the “English Gentleman,” has become the ideal of what high society in every part of the world should look like. If you look at “independence” leaders in the post-colonial world, many were produced by the system that produced English Gentlemen. Pakistan’s founder, Mohammad Jinnah, who famously said that he would rather be ruled by an Indian Terrorist than an English Gentleman, was also famous for ensuring that all his suites were made in Saville Row. Even when we in the colonies were trying to get rid of the English, we still looked up to the English as an ideal.

 

So, how is it such that the nation that produced the ideal of what a man should be, can also be the nation that produces the most horrible specimens of humanity at every football game?

As a matter of full and frank disclosure, I went to a public school (defined as the public that can pay). Churcher’s is a small school of no great significance. However, it’s still part of the “Public School” system in the United Kingdom, which plays a role in shaping many of the people who make the UK tick.

While I am a beneficiary of Public-School education, there is an intrinsic problem with its very existence. In the British context, the guys who go to public schools are usually from families that can afford to pay hefty school fees along with the taxes that are partially used to fund the school system provided by the state.

The guys I grew up with, were from what you’d call decent enough families. Sure, I didn’t grow up alongside the super elite who populated the more illustrious public schools. However, my friends were from pretty decent families. I grew up alongside the children of ICI executives and officers in the armed forces. The education was not just academic but social and learning good graces was part and parcel of growing up (as mentioned in previous postings, I actually encountered very few incidents of racism – helped that I was willing to do my part on the rugby pitch).

The state system in the UK functions rather differently. The kids who end up in the system are less well off and often have less resources at their disposal. Teachers struggle alongside unruly kids and less cooperative parents. While there have been success stories from the state system, the problem in the UK remains that as a rule of thumb, the better academic results, which translates into better university placements and therefore better jobs still come from the public school system.

Hence, the system that produces the English Gentleman coexists alongside a neglected system that produces the friendly people at football games. The guys who come from the system that produces the English Gentlemen know exactly how to manipulate the guys from the system that produces football fans. Both Boris Johnson (Old Etonian) and Nigel Farage (Dulwich College) are from the system that produces “Gentlemen.” Their manipulation of statistics on how EU money could be spent on the NHS is manifested by the racial abuse hurled at England’s black players.

Unfortunately, the only solution proposed comes from leftist politicians who will make a few public pronouncements about the public school system. Such pronouncements make good headlines but don’t solve the real issue, which is to raise the standard of the schools in the state system so that they can compete with those in the public-school sector (which was happening in Petersfield when I was leaving – the local comprehensive got themselves a dynamic headmistress who rebranded it the Petersfield School and gave Chucher’s a good run for its money). Very little of that actually happens and until the schools in the state sector are boosted, English Gentlemen will be produced alongside England’s well behaved football fans.

We in the colonies are also destined to follow the example of the mother land in keeping the majority less educated than they should be. In India, you have elite colleges like the Indian Institutes of Technology and Management, producing world class corporate leaders working alongside the colleges that are effectively printing qualifications. Here in Singapore, we have elite colleges like Raffles, Anglo-Chinese, Hwa Chong and Victoria running the entire system and the neighbourhood schools which can barely raise enough to buy an eraser and produce the academic results that somehow get forgotten about whenever the government wants to show the world how “educated” we are.

Whilst it is important to train up the elite, its not sustainable if the elite only comes from one group. If you want a nation to grow you need to improve basic education for the masses. You cannot have one system that produces the ideal of manhood and another that produces sewer rats.    

I Don’t Expect You to Help – Just Don’t F** It Up for Me.

 

Last week I ended up having a bit of cash than I expected to have and so, I decided to indulge in a quick bite at KFC. Although I don’t patronize fast food joints much these days, I’ve always had a soft spot for the food at KFC. There’s always been something special about the way they’ve turned the chicken skin into something quite delicious. My single “Zinger” cost me a grand total of seven dollars plus.

 

A Tasty Piece of Chicken for Seven over Bucks

That was, as they say a great indulgence because I had a bit extra in my pocket. After that, I’ve been going back to my neighbourhood economic rice stall. My last meal there cost me a grand total of three dollars and ninety cents. I managed to get my fill of carbohydrates, vegetables and meat as well as a drink.

 

A full meal and drink for less than four bucks

This experience was a reminder of a point that I was trying to make in my blog posting “Small is Smashing,” which was published on 6 June 2021. The point is this simple, the local coffee shop economic rice uncle had managed to feed us something healthier, tastier and dare I say healthier for less than the international fast-food joints. I’ve argued that this fact isn’t limited to the food industry. I’ve argued that Singapore is filled with businesses that do offer their customers better value for money than their larger international counterparts.

Whilst giant multinationals grab headlines for their large investments, the real strength of any economy is based on the quality of its Small and Medium Enterprises (SME). Singapore is no exception. According to UOB, the SME Sector employs some 65 percent of our workforce and contributes about 48 percent of our GDP.

https://www.uobgroup.com/assets/pdfs/research/SME_1q17.pdf

Yet, despite the significance of the SME sector to our economy, words like “entrepreneur” or “small business” have barely touched the lips of government officials.

The difference in the attention provided to multinationals and the SME sector can be seen in the government departments in charge of those sectors. The Economic Development Board (EDB) works like a dream. All you have to do is to ask and they’ll provide it for you. Enterprise Singapore (IE Singapore) on the other hand has problems getting the microphone to work in its seminars aimed at getting SMEs to expand outside of Singapore.

Lee Kuan Yew himself, had something of a disdain for small time businesses. I remember watching him on a YouTube talking about how Singapore like other small nations didn’t have the scale to build anything really viable. I’ve also read his book where he states that our people were “traders” not “entrepreneurs.” While the English Educated Mr. Lee did get many things right, he had that most damaging of Confucian prejudices – namely the bureaucrat’s disdain for traders.

In fairness to Mr. Lee and the system he created, it was a good thing to get multinationals to come into invest. They brought the skills and capital that we needed. Singaporeans who have worked in multinationals have learnt “world-class” standards rather than locally made ones.

However, while multinational investment is important in growing an economy, one cannot develop a sustainable economy based purely on investment from elsewhere. You actually need a “Singapore core” of businesses. As one Indian born data analytics entrepreneur, who is starting his second business in Singapore says, “You would get more value spending the money on attracting multinationals on developing your SME sector.”

As stated in the UOB report, home grown SME’s employ more than half of us.  In the multinational and government linked corporation space, Singaporeans are facing competition from elsewhere with regards to the “good” jobs. So where can Singaporeans get “good jobs.” Inevitably the answer is from a strong SME sector. Think of Germany as the example. When most people think of Germany, they think of the big car makers like Daimler Benz (Mercedes), Volkswagen and BMW or big pharma companies like Bayer or tech companies like SAP. The truth, Germany does not have as many home-grown multinationals as one might expect of a market of its size. The real strength of Europe’s largest economy lies in its SME sector or the 'Mittelstand,' which comprises of many companies making world class products for niche markets. The one that comes to mind is “Rationale” which makes ovens that every chef that I have worked with drools over.

We need our version of the Mittelstand, especially if we are to create decent enough jobs for our local people. We have the legal infrastructure, the physical infrastructure and to repeat a government mantra, although we have no natural resources, we have highly developed human resources. So, why can’t we strengthen our SME sector?

Well, there is an argument that the government is trying to nurture entrepreneurship and is now more SME/Start-up friendly. There are grants and wonderful mentorship programs for aspiring entrepreneurs. If you want to “make it” in the next big sexy sector, the government will be there.

While all this is very helpful, the record of governments nurturing entrepreneurs is rather bleak for a good reason. In Singapore, being SME/Start-up friendly makes a good headline. However, the government cannot resist minimizing competition for the “big boys”

Let’s go back to the hawker, the most typical example of a home-grown enterprise that keeps families employed and feeds the local community. The government is now making a lot of noise about our “Hawker Heritage” and how we must preserve “hawker culture,” as being an integral part of Singapore’s cultural landscape. There are even courses on “hawker-preneurship.”

However, while all these things are nice, what really discourages people from having a start-up hawker stall is costs – specifically rent. Any bright spark is bound to ask if its worth standing over a hot stove for hours on end when rent alone is going to eat up at least half of the hawker’s costs.

Ironically as a good portion of hawker stalls are on government-controlled land, this is one costs that the government has control over. So, how does the government help. Well, the National Environment Agency (NEA) has proceeded to help hawkers who are struggling from various covid-related limits on their business by jacking up rents by 40 percent. Let’s put this in perspective. If the hawker paid $1,000 a month before, they’ll now pay $1,400 a month. Or to put it into perspective, the chicken rice seller now needs to sell 80 extra plates just to cover the increase in rent (assuming one plate sells for $5).

The government’s defense for this tone-deaf move runs along the lines of we gave hawkers lots of help last year but now we want our money back. To give this a “humorous” touch, the NEA Chairman has decided to star in the following video, which is funny to everyone except the hawkers struggling for business and the customers who will face a price increase.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hv9blaVypwU

 

So, what can the government do? Well, the extra capital and cheap loans are not bad as help goes. Nobody will say no to easier access to capital. Likewise, nobody has ever said networking sessions were a bad thing.

However, what small businesses really want from the government, was best spelled out by an Afghan entrepreneur describing his government. He said, “I don’t expect them to help me – I just don’t want them to f*** it up for me.”

Running a business is tough enough. However, it does not help when the government decides that business is its football. The fellows at the NEA should have understood that when they decided to make life that much harder for the entrepreneurs doing their best to make a living by feeding the rest of us at affordable prices.

     

Glorious A**Holes

 

Given the fact that my main source of income comes from being a business development manager for a liquidations firm, that hopes to get work from the legal fraternity, this posting is probably an act of commercial suicide.

However, the point that needs to be made is an important one and it needs to be made regardless of my narrow commercial interest – the point being the fact that Singapore appears to be run by a group of highly intelligent a**holes who seem to be very good at what they do but not much else. Its quite clear that the term “elite” has been misused in Singapore.

It’s this simple, if you want to be respected for being better than other people, you really need to be better than others. It’s easier said than done because it involves constant work. I think of the elite of the British Army, the Special Air Services (SAS), which works on the principle that they are never fully trained soldiers because they are constantly updating and upgrading themselves to stay ahead of the pack.

One cannot simply be “elite” by calling yourself that and then behaving in a way that is at best on par with the rest of us and worst ……well let’s not go into that.

In all fairness to the system, there’s little to disagree with. We claim to be a meritocracy and success comes from ability rather than birthright, race or religion. You can’t argue against that. We have a “scholarship” system which nurtures bright young things for leadership roles in government and in the private sector. Again, as my European and American friends and family remind me, this is a good thing. You want the place to be run by people with brains.

However, while there’s much to admire in the idea behind the system, the practice has been rather different. Instead of getting new recruits into the elite to challenge themselves, our system protects them. Ministry of Education scholars for example don’t go to schools filled with problem kids. They go to the schools where the kids are so bright, they’ll succeed whatever you do and the parents will ensure that the kid will never have a “lazy” moment. On more worrying concept, we promote our military scholars rapidly and ensure that they are kept as far away from anything resembling a war zone. We had two military men who gained international acclaim for being decent commanders – namely Major-General Tan Huck Gim, who was sent command a UN mission in Timor Leste and Rear Admiral Bernard Miranda who was sent to command anti-piracy forces in the Gulf of Aden. For proving they could to the job, the military promptly demoted them and sent them out to retire so that they would not come close to competing with military men who earned their battle spurs in the airconditioned office.

There is an obsession with the “elite” sharing their brains. Our generals who earned their battle spurs playing computer games against an enemy that will never actually shoot at them are then sent out to cut their entrepreneurial teeth in monopoly businesses designed so that a monkey could print money. The track record has been rather lacking. The big success stories being Desmond Kwek, former Chief of Defense Force and CEO of SMRT who became a hero to the shareholders by selling the company to the shareholders and then there’s General Ng Yat Chung who had to sell a loss making company to someone else to make it profitable and then had to hive off a monopoly media business to non-profit that will be funded by the government.

Apparently, that’s called sharing talent between the public and private sectors and that is somehow beneficial to us as stakeholders in society.

Despite the evidence to the contrary, we are constantly reminded that we need the “elite” to give us the “good” life that we are used to. One of the most amusing ways in which is this is done was though an “international” survey which showed that Singapore topped the list for the “value-add” that the elites provided. The story can be found at:

https://www.todayonline.com/singapore/singapore-tops-global-index-value-elites-add-society-second-straight-year

Now, most of the public ire has been on former civil servants who have been sent to run private sector companies. However, if we look closely, the record of the “elite” who have been in the private sector all their working lives, isn’t much better either.

This was exposed by the collapse of Envy Global Trading, a firm which managed to get members of our elite, specifically from the legal and investment communities to pump money into a firm that was not regulated by regulator to perform nickel trades that never took place. The story can be found at:

https://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/singapore/envy-global-nickel-investment-ng-yu-zhi-fraud-15107800; and

https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/courts-crime/notable-names-among-alleged-victims-in-new-cheating-charges-against

While “cheating” is rightfully illegal and morally wrong, this incident has exposed our elite as being rather drab.

Let’s start with the scam. Like it or not, scams require work. One of the most incredible scams that I know of comes from India. The perpetrator spent years building up a reputation as a creditworthy customer before pulling the plug on the banks. The family ensured that documentation was in place and despite the best efforts of the Indian government to get them extradited from places like Singapore, the UK and UAE, they’ve failed miserably. Much to the frustration of the CBI in India, they’ve not been able to get a “red” notice from Interpol.

Scams like this take planning and patience. The smart ones lay low and don’t get involved in anything flashy. The perpetrators are aware that the authorities will be all over them and so they keep their noses clean. It’s a case of everyone knows but can’t prove it.

If you read the report, it is quite clear that Mr. Ng, who pulled off the scam did it in the most obvious way. He showed people he looked the part of a high roller and offered them wonderful sounding returns. It seems that the greatest claim to Mr. Ng’s brilliance at making money was the ability to afford a very lavish life, including the only Pagani Huayra hypercr in Singapore. More on Mr. Ng’s lifestyle can be found at:

https://www.straitstimes.com/business/companies-markets/multimillion-dollar-car-of-man-linked-to-alleged-1b-fraud-seized

Now, if Mr. Ng’s victims were uneducated and fell for his scam, it would be perfectly understandable. If his victims were educated but didn’t have access to certain things, one might also be able to sympathise, especially if he or she recognised their role in getting scammed.

However, this was clearly not the case. A good portion of his victims are the type of people who have an abundance of experience in investments and have the ability to find out anything with a single phone call.

Take the example of Dr. Finian Tan, Chairman, Founder and Chairman of Vickers Ventures Partners, a firm that specializes in – making investments. As can be seen from Dr. Tan’s profile below, this is a firm that has been around for nearly 20-years. This isn’t a fly by night operation or a one-hit wonder firm. There is a record of consistent performance, which would imply that Dr. Tan has enough resources to know what he’s doing.

However, Dr. Tan was taken in by Mr. Ng, which, given the most basic fact about the way in which Mr. Ng presented himself to investors, lead us to question Dr. Tan’s competence. Despite Dr. Tan’s celebrity like status, the question that many of his investors may well be asking is – would you trust your money to Dr. Tan and if he’s fallen for one shady deal, has he fallen for others? Let’s remember, Dr Tan is not your average Joe trying to invest based on tips found in cyberspace. He’s officially one of Singapore’s leading voices on investment with the resources to ensure he makes the best possible decisions. This isn’t a case of bad luck and the market going against him. This is falling for something based on very little solid evidence.  

https://sg.linkedin.com/in/dr-finian-tan-58188888

 

Would you trust him with your money if he can fall for an obvious scam?

To be fair to Dr. Tan, there is a case of choice. You can choose whether to invest with Dr. Tan. The most worrying is the case of Ms. Pek Siok Lan, General Counsel to Temasek Holdings, a company which has a role in investing public money (money you the tax payer/ CPF contributor have paid).

If you look at Ms. Pek’s profile on the Temasek Holdings, you’ll notice that she’s quite attractive. However, that shouldn’t be the main criteria for the job that she holds. Prior to joining Temasek, Ms. Pek was an in-house lawyer at ST Telemedia, a government linked company with responsibility for legal, regulatory and corporate secretarial affairs.  One of the criteria for doing any form of regulatory and corporate secretarial affairs is “KYC” or “Know Your Customer.”

You would imagine that someone with Ms. Pek’s experience in doing due diligence for a big firm, would have done something when it came to her money. In her position at Temasek, she’s got the ability to pick up the phone to get information at the highest of levels.

Given the role that Temasek plays in safeguarding public money, one has to start asking questions about Ms. Pek. If she can approach using her personal money with a lack of due consideration, who Is to say that she’s approached conducting due diligence with public funds in a similar manner.

https://www.temasek.com.sg/en/who-we-are/our-leadership#management-pek-siok-lan

 

Investing Public Funds Requires Due Diligence – a Pretty Face will not suffice.

Our legal system relies on people like lawyers fighting for laws and doing what’s right. One of the most prominent legal families that makes headlines is the Thio family, which has produced a number of “brilliant” lawyers. Whilst I am openly opposed to their stance on revoking Section 377A (the section that criminalises consensual anal sex between men), I do admit that the Thio family have contributed to the legal fraternity.

However, one member’s investment does raise a question of whether the Thio’s have been book smart rather than actually smart. We have Mr. Thio Shen Yi, managing partner of TSMP Law, Senior Counsel, immediate past president of the law society and Master Bencher of the Middle Temple, an honorary elected position which has been conferred on only six members from Singapore in over seven hundred years of history.

Mr. Thio is without doubt a very clever lawyer. He may probably be one of the best in Singapore. You would expect someone like Mr. Thio to be able to smell a rat. Yet, despite this, Mr. Thio still found a reason to invest with Mr. Ng, despite the obvious give away.

https://www.tsmplaw.com/lawyer/thio-shen-yi-sc/

 

A close relationship with the All Mighty Does Not Constitute Due Diligence.

These are just three of the more prominent names that have been conned by Mr. Ng and one is already obliged to question the basics. Why should we trust Dr. Tan or Ms. Pek to look after our money? Why should we trust Mr. Thio to check on who he represents?

Mr. Ng is a crook and should be punished. However, like former US President Donald Trump, he’s proven to be like chemotherapy. He’s done us a favour by exposing exactly how elite the elite is. It is clear that the class that describes itself as elite needs to be challenged more aggressively so that it can justify its status as elite.