Connect with us

Commentaries

3D Printing in Singapore: The Need for a Public Policy Framework

Published

on

By Yap Shiwen

3D printing

3D Printing or 3DP, an additive manufacturing technology that translates digital designs into physical objects, has emerged as the latest technology trend in the news, given its status as a disruptive innovation. As a technology, it has the potential to disrupt established supply chains, logistics, the manufacturing industry and intellectual property rights.

One of the technology startups centred in Singapore, Pirate 3DP, aims to develop itself as both a producer of 3D printers and a distributor of digital designs. It has been active in marketing itself across different media platforms and has articulated a long-term goal of facilitating a post-scarcity economy, via the creation of a low-cost 3D printer.

3DP technology holding great promise, with applications ranging from tissue engineering and organ production to its established use in rapid prototyping and design, and even the production of household goods such as furniture. Professions ranging from designers, both artistic and industrial, to engineers, software programmers, 3D artists and technicians are affected by this technology.

But what is its relevance to Singapore? Simply put, it is a technology with a global impact but with particular relevance to Asia, due to the presence of significant global economies present in Asia – the most crucial being China.

The rise of China resulted in a shift of both financial capital, jobs and industrial infrastructure to China beginning in the 1980’s, due to the lower labour costs and greater scalability China offered, as well as the size of its domestic market.

However, with the current state of the world economy, as well as the advances in robotics, computing and 3D printing, Singapore needs to look at ways in which the technology can be harnessed and capitalised, as doing so soon would grant a significant first mover and early adopter advantage to the country and develop its status as a niche for 3d printing technologies.

More significantly, 3D printing disrupts supply chains by potentially allowing for local customised production of parts through on-demand production, more efficient material usage with less wastage and diseconomies of scale, compared to traditional mass production methods. It also allows for greater compactness of infrastructure and equipment, granting space savings compared to traditional manufacturing equipment which is often of greater bulk. Finally, it allows for designs in the form of digital information to be transmitted around the world.

This necessitates the requirement for a policy framework to address the multiple challenges it poses to Singapore, in both a local and global context. The challenges it poses can be categorised into the following:

  • Intellectual property

  • Legal Responsibility

  • Standards

  • Infrastructure

  • Security

Intellectual Property (IP)

The basis of most 3DP lies in the software, the use of the STL (Standard Tesselation Language) format. This enables people to download designs of the Internet and translate these designs into physical objects. This is much like Napster, which enabled the digital distribution and reproduction of music through the use of the MP3 file format.

This challenges not only the established business models of mass production manufacturing, but creates an issue with regards to the potential losses faced by designers, engineers and other IP holders. Much like Napster, the manufacturing industry will have to respond to this issue sooner rather than later. 3DP technologies are not presently developed enough to pose a challenge to traditional manufacturing businesses.

At this current time, the business model centred around 3DP is still evolving, with a combination of proprietary and open-source designs available through community portals such as Thingiverse, owned by Makerbot Industries. Another digital marketplace with the same concept but with a more commercially-oriented direction is Shapeways.

Given the rapid pace of development, measures need to be put in place to respond to these coming challenges. IP issues and patent conflicts could inhibit development of the industry and technology, as well as compromise consumer and investor confidence in the industry.

Any location possessing an IP policy that vigorously protects the IP of designers would be able to maintain a strong advantage, in attracting building investor and designer confidence, as well as incentivising designers and their affiliates to base themselves in there.

Legal Responsibility

There is currently no legal framework or arbitration process that has evolved to deal with the legal challenges pose by 3DP technologies. Given the ability to easily and rapidly create, copy and produce certain designs or products, this then results in the issue of legal liability. Who is ultimately liable for any damage or injury incurred by way of the 3DP process and its resulting products? The designer? The webhost? The machine producer? The consumer?

Given the ability to rapidly disseminate designs worldwide, combined with the many different 3DP platforms and methods, which use different machines and processes to produce the same end-product, who is ultimately responsible in the event of accident or misadventure? It could be a component design at fault or a manufacturing defect

Without a clear legal framework, consumers, designers and producers are not protected and have no legal framework within which to operate, resulting in reduced consumer confidence. This is also related to the issue of IP protection, as without legal protection and copyright claim, commercial designers would then have no incentive to develop their designs if they are unable to profit from them.

Standards

Effective industry standards determine such things as designs, parts, processes, safety and materials, and the manner in which they are dealt with across different platforms and systems need to be developed. Effective standards underly efficient and effective collaborations between companies, as well as contribute to consumer and investor confidence.

Developing standards involves codifying and propagating aspects of the manufacture and use of technology, as well as business practices. This leads to significant economic benefits, as a common set of industry standards reduces business costs and capital expenditure by businesses, in terms of accessing information for the development of core technologies and services. It also serves to increase consumer confidence in the products from that marketplace. A lack of industry standards is economically inefficient, with competing standards resulting in incompatibilities between platforms that should otherwise be complementary. Standards support innovation, reduce inefficiencies in the marketplace, regulate markets and build investor confidence.

WIth the growth of a global marketplace corresponding to the growth of 3DP technology, a customer will eventually be able to choose from a spectrum of digital designs. Production processes and materials need to be standardised, in order for consumers to have confidence in the products they acquire. The casual consumer needs to have confidence that 3D printed products are of a sufficiently high standard, in terms of material quality and printing service. Business owners and investors need to have confidence that 3D printed products can compete in the marketplace against traditionally manufactured products.

Currently, an example of a common standard of the 3D printing industry is the STL format, native to stereolithography CAD (Computer-Aided Design) software and used in rapid prototyping and computer-aided manufacturing.

Infrastructure

There needs to be alterations to the infrastructure, digital and physical, in order to manage the impact of 3D printing. Emerging technologies and new markets rely upon supporting infrastructure to prosper and sustain themselves.

Just as the motor vehicle industry only took off with the creation of road networks and the growth of the petrol station, so too does the 3D printing require an infrastructure to develop into maturity.

Singapore has much of the infrastructure required for the 3D printing industry to function, in terms of having the digital communications network and high-quality digital infrastructure needed for its functioning. However, it also needs sufficient capital investment and an appropriate regulatory regime in order to grow.

The status of Singapore as a logistics hub will be impacted by the capabilities of 3D printing. It could be either negative or positive, given that 3D printing enables a shift from mass production to localised, on-demand manufacturing, lessening the requirement of moving bulk quantities of materials. This could lead to a disruption of Singapores logistics infrastructure, of the network of business and transport links that enables the movement of goods through Singapore. However given the material requirements, it will not be a complete disruption but rather an alteration in the business models of logistics firms rather than a disruption of the sector.

Still, this disruptive effect on logistics, in terms of the supply chain disruption that comes from localised manufacturing capability, needs to be accounted for down the line. Singapores relatively central location and strong logistics network could serve to make us a primary production and distribution centre, and potentially design, which is where the value of 3D printing truly lies.

Security

The Liberator is a 3D-printed handgun, designed and made available by Defense Distributed, an open source organisation that referred to it as as a “wiki weapon”. Other products associated with Defense Deistributed and made using 3D printers were a receiver for an AR-15 and a magazine for the AK-47. This is a weapon design, in STL format, currently available for download on The Pirate Bay.

A test conducted by an Israeli Channel 10 team illustrated the threat it posed, when the gun was smuggled into the Israeli House of Parliament, without the barrel or ammunition. This ability to penetrate the physical security of a vital government facility illustrates the sort of security threat that 3D printing can bring about, given its ability to bypass metal detectors.

In practical terms the threat from the Liberator is overrated, given the unreliability of the weapon and the need to gain access to an actual bullet, a task associated with a modest level of difficulty in Singapore. In other countries it may pose more of a security risk.

This underlies part of the challenge posed by 3D printing. The creation and production of weapons brings about a public security issue. And this is another challenge that will have to be addressed in some manner. It grants to criminal and terrorist elements a tool that is undetectable to metal detectors and bypasses most conventional physical security measures. And it is also a problem that may be outside the context of the security apparatus of Singapore.

With the advancement of 3D printing technologies, this may only get worse, requiring the possible registration of people who buy 3D printers, as well as monitoring of businesses in possession of a 3D printer. However, this is an invasion of privacy and could also serve to stifle the 3D printing business in Singapore, were this to happen.

Future Opportunities

From March 2014, there is a projection of extensive opportunities for growth in the 3D printing sector due to the expiration of key patents, according to Duann Scott of Shapeways. This involves the expiration of the patent on laser sintering, which is currently held by 3D Systems.

Selective laser sintering (SLS) is a 3D printing method using lasers to fuse small particles into a matrix, with a wide choice of material options such as plastics, metals and ceramics, in the form of an unsintered powder.

Compared to the Fused Deposition Modeling (FDM) process utilised in currently available 3d printers used by hobbyists, SLS is more efficient process because a single session can be used to product multiple objects, with no requirement for any support structures. SLS methods grant the advantage of rapid batch production with a wider choice of materials, compared to FDM methods which can only produce one object at a time.

This expiration of patent rights,the associated removal of IP barriers and the higher build quality batch production provided by SLS techniques opens up several new opportunities for growth and investment in 3D printing, in terms of the areas of application, material research and hardware platform manufacture.

IP restrictions create a strong barrier to overcome, in terms of capital investment, IP violation and a lack of innovation, as well as the ability to monopolise a market. Monopolies stifle innovation and are generally counterproductive for the industry and state of technology as a whole. The removal of IP opens the way for smaller firms to develop and explore the market, benefiting consumers and hobbyists, and the entire market as a whole. It will also result in a drop in prices and increased competition on the market, amongst the different manufacturers, retailers and service providers present.

China has responded to 3D printing by investing in several research centres, due to the disruptive effect that such a technology presents to China’s manufacturing industry, which is the basis for its current economic strength. The China 3D Printing Technology Industry Alliance is an alliance between universities and business which is responsible for this initiative.

Ultimately, these future developments present opportunities in the area of patent law & IP protection, arbitration, material sciences research, manufacturing technology development and software development, in order to handle the demand and growth of the 3D printing business and market.

Conclusion

Given this short summary of major issues brought about the 3D printing, and the disruptive impact it has, a forward-thinking public policy framework that can address these matters needs to be undertaken by the relevant agencies, such as the Ministry of Trade & Information and the Ministry of Law.

3D printing is a tremendous game-changer, having the potential to alter the nature of business across a range of industries, manufacturing and logistics more so than others. It also has the potential to result in much harm, socially and economically, if it is mismanaged and unaccounted for.

The United Kingdom government has been encouraged to evolve and create a public policy framework, in order to address some of these issues. While in China, a China 3D Printing Technology Industry Alliance has been formed, with the aim of establishing new industrial standards and a policy framework to address the issues affecting the industry.

Singapore should seek to do the same in response, given the impact and implications of such a technology and its effects on both the public and private domains, and its commercial and industrial impact. There are tremendous growth opportunities that can be capitalised upon, if there is a public policy calibrated to take advantage of and address the challenges posed by 3D printing.

Singapore’s small size in this case presents an advantage. It has the ability to cluster companies, universities, research institutions and researchers from different disciplines together, provide the necessary facilities and infrastructure, as well as direct the capital investments and provide the financial resources needed for these sort of ventures, via schemes such as the Technology Incubation Scheme under the National Research Foundation.

Finally, our status as a major international arbitration centre plays further to our strengths, with a strong legal Infrastructure. The legal system is based on the British Common Law System and is well regarded with a global ranking of 3rd, by the Political and Economic Risk Consultancy in 2012. Singapore is also ranked as having the best framework in Asia for arbitration of commercial disputes by the World Bank in 2010. In 2007, the International Chamber of Commerce-International Court of Arbitration (ICC) ranked Singapore as the top city in Asia for ICC arbitrations and one of the five most popular ICC arbitration venues since 2000, alongside Paris, London, Geneva and Zurich.

Singapore should aim to provide a patent environment where core 3D printing and additive manufacturing technologies such as FDM, SLS and other techniques are available to developers and other interest groups, without the disruption of monopolistic companies or ‘patent trolls’. It offers firms and investors the ability to protect their business interests and promotes innovation, as well as a transparent and neutral legal framework where IP conflicts between parties can be arbitrated.

Playing to these strengths in the legal, scientific and economic spheres, we can capitalise upon them to prosper and survive in an age of increasing competition, as well as develop ourselves as a hub of another sort, in order to survive in an increasingly post-industrial age.

Sources

Report urges UK government to develop 3D printing policy. 3Ders.org. On the Internet at http://www.3ders.org/articles/20121016-report-urges-uk-government-to-develop-3d-printing-policy.html

UK Study on 3D Printing – A Call for an Official Policy Framework. 3D Printing Industry. On the Internet at http://3dprintingindustry.com/2012/11/05/uk-study-on-3d-printing-a-call-for-an-official-policy-framework/

Singh, K. (2013). Changing the World: Pirate 3DP’s vision is to end ‘need’ . Digital News Asia. On the Internet at http://www.digitalnewsasia.com/sizzle-fizzle/changing-the-world-pirate-3dps-vision-is-to-end-need

Sissons, A. & Thompson, S. (2012).Three Dimensional Policy: Why Britain needs a policy framework for 3D printing .Big Innovation Centre.On the Internet at http://biginnovationcentre.com/Assets/Docs/Reports/3D%20printing%20paper_FINAL_15%20Oct.pdf

Kharbanda, A. (2012). Government needs policy plan for imminent 3D printing revolution to avoid missing out on huge growth opportunities. Big Innovation Centre. On the Internet at http://www.biginnovationcentre.com/Media/Press-Releases/221/Government-needs-policy-plan-for-imminent-3D-printing-revolution-to-avoid-missing-out-on-huge-growth-opportunities-and-to-address-dangers

Mims, C.(2013). Additive manufacturing: 3D Printing will explode in 2014, thanks to the expiration of key patents. Quartz. On the Internet at http://qz.com/106483/3d-printing-will-explode-in-2014-thanks-to-the-expiration-of-key-patents/

Lou, A. & Grosvenor, C. (2012).Selective Laser Sintering, Birth of an Industry. University of Texas at Austin Mechanical Engineering Department.On the Internet at http://www.me.utexas.edu/news/2012/0712_sls_history.php#ch4

Singapore Ministry of Law. (2009).Background Brief on International Arbitration in Singapore. Ministry of Law (Singapore) Portal.On the Internet at http://www.mlaw.gov.sg/content/dam/minlaw/corp/assets/documents/linkclickf8e7.pdf

SIAF. (2013).About Singapore. Singapore International Arbitration Forum 2013 Portal.On the Internet at http://www.siaf.sg/registration/about-singapore.html

Cong, M. (2013). Manufacturing group to build 3D printing innovation centres. People’s Daily Online. On the Internet at http://english.peopledaily.com.cn/90778/8242953.html

Masnick, M.(2012).How Patents Have Held Back 3D Printing. Techdirt. On the Internet at http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120130/16535017591/how-patents-have-held-back-3d-printing.shtml

Giseburt, R. (2012).3D Systems Suing Formlabs and Kickstarter for Patent Infringement. Makezine. On the Internet at http://makezine.com/2012/11/21/3d-systems-suing-formlabs-and-kickstarter-for-patent-infringement/

Singapore Ministry of Law (2013). Intellectual Property Policy .Ministry of Law Portal (Singapore).On the Internet at http://www.mlaw.gov.sg/our-work/intellectual-property-policy.html

Continue Reading
Click to comment
Subscribe
Notify of
0 Comments
Newest
Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Commentaries

Lim Tean criticizes Govt’s rejection of basic income report, urges Singaporeans to rethink election choices

Lim Tean, leader of Peoples Voice (PV), criticizes the government’s defensive response to the basic living income report, accusing it of avoiding reality.

He calls on citizens to assess affordability and choose MPs who can truly enhance their lives in the upcoming election.

Published

on

SINGAPORE: A recently published report, “Minimum Income Standard 2023: Household Budgets in a Time of Rising Costs,” unveils figures detailing the necessary income households require to maintain a basic standard of living, using the Minimum Income Standard (MIS) method.

The newly released study, spearheaded by Dr Ng Kok Hoe of the Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy (LKYSPP) specifically focuses on working-age households in 2021 and presents the latest MIS budgets, adjusted for inflation from 2020 to 2022.

The report detailed that:

  • The “reasonable starting point” for a living wage in Singapore was S$2,906 a month.
  • A single parent with a child aged two to six required S$3,218 per month.
  • Partnered parents with two children, one aged between seven and 12 and the other between 13 and 18, required S$6,426 a month.
  • A single elderly individual required S$1,421 a month.
  • Budgets for both single and partnered parent households averaged around S$1,600 per member. Given recent price inflation, these figures have risen by up to 5% in the current report.

Singapore Govt challenges MIS 2023 report’s representation of basic needs

Regrettably, on Thursday (14 Sept), the Finance Ministry (MOF), Manpower Ministry (MOM), and Ministry of Social and Family Development (MSF) jointly issued a statement dismissing the idea suggested by the report, claiming that minimum household income requirements amid inflation “might not accurately reflect basic needs”.

Instead, they claimed that findings should be seen as “what individuals would like to have.”, and further defended their stances for the Progressive Wage Model (PWM) and other measures to uplift lower-wage workers.

The government argued that “a universal wage floor is not necessarily the best way” to ensure decent wages for lower-wage workers.

The government’s statement also questions the methodology of the Minimum Income Standards (MIS) report, highlighting limitations such as its reliance on respondent profiles and group dynamics.

“The MIS approach used is highly dependent on respondent profiles and on group dynamics. As the focus groups included higher-income participants, the conclusions may not be an accurate reflection of basic needs.”

The joint statement claimed that the MIS approach included discretionary expenditure items such as jewellery, perfumes, and overseas holidays.

Lim Tean slams Government’s response to basic living income report

In response to the government’s defensive reaction to the recent basic living income report, Lim Tean, leader of the alternative party Peoples Voice (PV), strongly criticizes the government’s apparent reluctance to confront reality, stating, “It has its head buried in the sand”.

He strongly questioned the government’s endorsement of the Progressive Wage Model (PWM) as a means to uplift the living standards of the less fortunate in Singapore, describing it as a misguided approach.

In a Facebook video on Friday (15 Sept), Lim Tean highlighted that it has become a global norm, especially in advanced and first-world countries, to establish a minimum wage, commonly referred to as a living wage.

“Everyone is entitled to a living wage, to have a decent life, It is no use boasting that you are one of the richest countries in the world that you have massive reserves, if your citizens cannot have a decent life with a decent living wage.”

Lim Tean cited his colleague, Leong Sze Hian’s calculations, which revealed a staggering 765,800 individuals in Singapore, including Permanent Residents and citizens, may not earn the recommended living wage of $2,906, as advised by the MIS report.

“If you take away the migrant workers or the foreign workers, and take away those who do not work, underage, are children you know are unemployed, and the figure is staggering, isn’t it?”

“You know you are looking at a very substantial percentage of the workforce that do not have sufficient income to meet basic needs, according to this report.”

He reiterated that the opposition parties, including the People’s Voice and the People’s Alliance, have always called for a minimum wage, a living wage which the government refuses to countenance.

Scepticism about the government’s ability to control rising costs

In a time of persistently high inflation, Lim Tean expressed skepticism about the government’s ability to control rising costs.

He cautioned against believing in predictions of imminent inflation reduction and lower interest rates below 2%, labeling them as unrealistic.

Lim Tean urged Singaporeans to assess their own affordability in these challenging times, especially with the impending GST increase.

He warned that a 1% rise in GST could lead to substantial hikes in everyday expenses, particularly food prices.

Lim Tean expressed concern that the PAP had become detached from the financial struggles of everyday Singaporeans, citing their high salaries and perceived insensitivity to the common citizen’s plight.

Lim Tean urges Singaporeans to rethink election choices

Highlighting the importance of the upcoming election, Lim Tean recommended that citizens seriously evaluate the affordability of their lives.

“If you ask yourself about affordability, you will realise that you have no choice, In the coming election, but to vote in a massive number of opposition Members of Parliament, So that they can make a difference.”

Lim Tean emphasized the need to move beyond the traditional notion of providing checks and balances and encouraged voters to consider who could genuinely improve their lives.

“To me, the choice is very simple. It is whether you decide to continue with a life, that is going to become more and more expensive: More expensive housing, higher cost of living, jobs not secure because of the massive influx of foreign workers,” he declared.

“Or you choose members of Parliament who have your interests at heart and who want to make your lives better.”

Continue Reading

Commentaries

Political observers call for review of Singapore’s criteria of Presidential candidates and propose 5 year waiting period for political leaders

Singaporean political observers express concern over the significantly higher eligibility criteria for private-sector presidential candidates compared to public-sector candidates, calling for adjustments.

Some also suggest a five year waiting period for aspiring political leaders after leaving their party before allowed to partake in the presidential election.

Notably, The Workers’ Party has earlier reiterated its position that the current qualification criteria favor PAP candidates and has called for a return to a ceremonial presidency instead of an elected one.

Published

on

While the 2023 Presidential Election in Singapore concluded on Friday (1 September), discussions concerning the fairness and equity of the electoral system persist.

Several political observers contend that the eligibility criteria for private-sector individuals running for president are disproportionately high compared to those from the public sector, and they propose that adjustments be made.

They also recommend a five-year waiting period for aspiring political leaders after leaving their party before being allowed to participate in the presidential election.

Aspiring entrepreneur George Goh Ching Wah, announced his intention to in PE 2023 in June. However, His application as a candidate was unsuccessful, he failed to receive the Certificate of Eligibility (COE) on 18 August.

Mr Goh had expressed his disappointment in a statement after the ELD’s announcement, he said, the Presidential Elections Committee (PEC) took a very narrow interpretation of the requirements without explaining the rationale behind its decision.

As per Singapore’s Constitution, individuals running for the presidency from the private sector must have a minimum of three years’ experience as a CEO in a company.

This company should have consistently maintained an average shareholders’ equity of at least S$500 million and sustained profitability.

Mr Goh had pursued eligibility through the private sector’s “deliberative track,” specifically referring to section 19(4)(b)(2) of the Singapore Constitution.

He pointed out five companies he had led for over three years, collectively claiming a shareholders’ equity of S$1.521 billion.

Notably, prior to the 2016 revisions, the PEC might have had the authority to assess Mr Goh’s application similarly to how it did for Mr Tan Jee Say in the 2011 Presidential Election.

Yet, in its current formulation, the PEC is bound by the definitions laid out in the constitution.

Calls for equitable standards across public and private sectors

According to Singapore’s Chinese media outlet, Shin Min Daily News, Dr Felix Tan Thiam Kim, a political analyst at Nanyang Technological University (NTU) Singapore, noted that in 2016, the eligibility criteria for private sector candidates were raised from requiring them to be executives of companies with a minimum capital of S$100 million to CEOs of companies with at least S$500 million in shareholder equity.

However, the eligibility criteria for public sector candidates remained unchanged. He suggests that there is room for adjusting the eligibility criteria for public sector candidates.

Associate Professor Bilver Singh, Deputy Head of the Department of Political Science at the National University of Singapore, believes that the constitutional requirements for private-sector individuals interested in running are excessively stringent.

He remarked, “I believe it is necessary to reassess the relevant regulations.”

He points out that the current regulations are more favourable for former public officials seeking office and that the private sector faces notably greater challenges.

“While it may be legally sound, it may not necessarily be equitable,” he added.

Proposed five-year waiting period for political leaders eyeing presidential race

Moreover, despite candidates severing ties with their political parties in pursuit of office, shedding their political affiliations within a short timeframe remains a challenging endeavour.

A notable instance is Mr Tharman Shanmugaratnam, who resigned from the People’s Action Party (PAP) just slightly over a month before announcing his presidential candidacy, sparking considerable debate.

During a live broadcast, his fellow contender, Ng Kok Song, who formerly served as the Chief Investment Officer of GIC, openly questioned Mr Tharman’s rapid transition to a presidential bid shortly after leaving his party and government.

Dr Felix Tan suggests that in the future, political leaders aspiring to run for the presidency should not only resign from their parties but also adhere to a mandatory waiting period of at least five years before entering the race.

Cherian George and Kevin Y.L. Tan: “illogical ” to raise the corporate threshold in 2016

Indeed, the apprehension regarding the stringent eligibility criteria and concerns about fairness in presidential candidacy requirements are not limited to political analysts interviewed by Singapore’s mainstream media.

Prior to PE2023, CCherian George, a Professor of media studies at Hong Kong Baptist University, and Kevin Y.L. Tan, an Adjunct Professor at both the Faculty of Law of the National University of Singapore and the NTU’s S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies (RSIS), brought attention to the challenges posed by the qualification criteria for candidates vying for the Singaporean Presidency.

In their article titled “Why Singapore’s Next Elected President Should be One of its Last,” the scholars discussed the relevance of the current presidential election system in Singapore and floated the idea of returning to an appointed President, emphasizing the symbolic and unifying role of the office.

They highlighted that businessman George Goh appeared to be pursuing the “deliberative track” for qualification, which requires candidates to satisfy the PEC that their experience and abilities are comparable to those of a typical company’s chief executive with shareholder equity of at least S$500 million.

Mr Goh cobbles together a suite of companies under his management to meet the S$500m threshold.

The article also underscored the disparities between the eligibility criteria for candidates from the public and private sectors, serving as proxies for evaluating a candidate’s experience in handling complex financial matters.

“It is hard to see what financial experience the Chairman of the Public Service Commission or for that matter, the Chief Justice has, when compared to a Minister or a corporate chief.”

“The raising of the corporate threshold in 2016 is thus illogical and serves little purpose other than to simply reduce the number of potentially eligible candidates.”

The article also touches upon the issue of candidates’ independence from political parties, particularly the ruling People’s Action Party (PAP).

It mentions that candidates are expected to be non-partisan and independent, and it questions how government-backed candidates can demonstrate their independence given their previous affiliations.

The Workers’ Party advocate for a return to a ceremonial presidency

It comes as no surprise that Singapore’s alternative party, the Workers’ Party, reaffirmed its stance on 30 August, asserting that they believe the existing qualifying criteria for presidential candidates are skewed in favour of those approved by the People’s Action Party (PAP).

They argue that the current format of the elected presidency (EP) undermines the principles of parliamentary democracy.

“It also serves as an unnecessary source of gridlock – one that could potentially cripple a non-PAP government within its first term – and is an alternative power centre that could lead to political impasses.”

Consistently, the Workers’ Party has been vocal about its objection to the elected presidency and has consistently called for its abolition.

Instead, they advocate for a return to a ceremonial presidency, a position they have maintained for over three decades.

Continue Reading

Trending