Former Chief Economist at GIC and former adjunct professor at the Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy, Yeoh Lam Keong has criticised Trade and Industry Minister Chan Chun Sing’s statement regarding collective responsibility in easing the effects of social mobility and globalisation.

Mr Yeoh, in his Facebook post on Friday (30 Nov), raised the question as to why the government, which he dubbed as “the most powerful agent” for “collective responsibility”, appears in Mr Chan’s statement to be “seemingly exempt from redoubling its current insufficient efforts to increase social mobility by helping the less privileged”.

He further questioned as to why the onus of alleviating socioeconomic inequality is instead placed on “individuals and groups”, who do not have the power to put in place social and economic policies the way the government does.

Mr Yeoh argued that “raising the payouts of the WIS [Workfare Income Supplement] and SSS [Silver Support Scheme] by $600 would effectively provide the working and elderly poor a living income that would not only seriously reduce absolute poverty markedly, but also provide a platform for children from these families to improve their difficult lot”.

“The fiscal cost is less than 0.8% of GDP and eminently affordable, yet the government has somehow avoided doing this for a over a decade,” he added.

Mr Yeoh also said that he found it “bizarre” that “a top minister who has helmed both MSF and NTUC seems somehow oblivious to the fact that only [the] government has the financial and organizational resources to systematically do the heavy lifting in the fight against poverty and inequality, and that it is government that needs to lead any serious systemic change in our social compact.”

“Do we take the maximum that we think we are entitled to have, or do we leave something more for those who need it more?”: Chan

Previously at The Straits Times’ annual Global Outlook Forum on Wednesday (28 Nov), Mr Chan had called upon more privileged Singaporeans to step up their efforts in assisting their underprivileged counterparts in the face of social mobility and globalisation, both of which are rife with constant challenges.

He said that those who are able to catch up with the tide of such changes should take it upon themselves to help the ones who struggle in order “for us to progress as a society together”.

Mr Chan added that while government policy and intervention do play a significant role in uplifting the livelihoods of underprivileged classes in Singapore, citizens who are able to reap great benefits from such material progress should also develop conscientiousness and collective responsibility towards making the country a habitable place for all.

In a dialogue session after delivering his speech, he said: “Do we take the maximum that we think we are entitled to have, or do we leave something more for those who need it more?”

“If we have that kind of collective responsibility to one another, the kind of societal values that say it is a privilege to take care of others… and it’s not just about us taking all that we can – then, I think, we will have the new social compact,” he emphasised.

“Never-ending task” to find the right people to take up the task of governing Singapore; no “magic formula”: Chan

Touching on leadership, particularly in light of the political transition currently taking place amongst the upper echelons of Singapore’s governance, Mr Chan said: “There’s no magic formula to this.”

“How do we hardcode this into our DNA? It’s a constant process; it’s a never-ending task to find people with the correct value system.”

He emphasised that the individuals who decide to take up leadership posts should have “sense of a higher purpose that they are here because the country is more important than their individual considerations”.

Despite measures such as unilateralism, protectionism and trade frictions that are being adopted by an increasing number of nations throughout the world currently, Mr Chan said that a closed-door policy “has never been and can never be an option” for Singapore.

“For a small city-state to survive and thrive, the world must be our hinterland from Day One,” he stressed.

Subscribe
Notify of
0 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
You May Also Like

研究称41巴仙国人对当前生活觉得不快乐 财务困境或是关键因素

追求美好生活本就是人之本能,也是时代趋势使然。那我国人民又是如何定义美好生活?近日安盛保险公司发表首届安盛更美好生活指数的调查,41巴仙的新加坡人,对于目前的生活并不感到快乐,只有五成的人认为他们岁目前生活感到满足。 该指数邀请四代社群,包括Z世代、Y世代、X世代以及婴儿潮世代,共1008名人参与调查,旨在从三层面包括现实感、赋权以及成就感,调查新加坡人民如何定义更好美好生活,其指标包括,生活目标、目的、挣扎、目标的进度以及满足感。 各个世代都均被划分。婴儿潮时代指的是在某一時期及特定地區,出生率大幅度提昇的現象,通常是1946至1964年间出生的人;X世代指1965年至1980年出生的人;Y世代指1980年至1990年代出生的人;Z世代指在1990年代至2000年後出生的人。 据结果显示,新加坡人的更美好生活指数落在50.4分,即指新加坡人离理想生活的目标仍相当遥远。其中有每两位中,就有一位对他们短期或长期目标的进度感到不满意。 在各世代中的人民,以Y世代的分数最高,达54.8分,即指他们最有动力实现理想与目标。 财务困境是关键 既然更美好生活指数如此低分,又是什么原因导致我国人民并不满意目前的生活状态?研究指出,主要关键是财务困境,在四代人接受调查过程中,他们认为财务的多寡成就目标的实现,一切阻碍目标实现的困难都与金钱相关,例如生活成本增加、无法储蓄。 另外,在现实感层面,当被问及是否设立短期目标或长期目标实现人生意义时,近八成的人会设定短期的目标,而对于较为年轻的世代,他们所设定的生活目标大多与金钱有关;然而老年一代则更注重健康生活。 报告也指出,约71巴仙的新加坡人认为他们在设立目标后,清楚知道自己应该怎么做,以完成目标,但只有近六成的人认为他们能够成功达成。对此,许多人认为,阻碍他们完成目标的最主要原因在于生活成本的增长,让他们无法实行储蓄习惯,而阻碍了目标的前进。 最后在成就感方面,新加坡人的得分比起其余两个层面低,得45分,即指新加坡人在生活中处于低成就感,而在四代人中,以婴儿潮世代的人成就最高,约57巴仙,而Z世代的人的成就感最低,其分数落在40巴仙左右。

照常开课引批评 王乙康发长文以三大原因解释

上周,教育部宣布将在今日(23日)照常开课,但随着疫情日益严重,我国新增许多境外移入的确诊病例,让不少家长表示担忧,甚至发出网络请愿书,要求教育部继续延长关闭学校的日期。 此外,教育部长王乙康也透露,有些家长也写信给教育部质询为何要在23日开课。 对此,王乙康也在脸书上发长文解释,开课背后的三大考虑。他表示,如今也有研究证明,武汉冠状病毒(COVID-19)对于年轻人的影响不如成年人,如同水痘对年轻人的影响。 引述国大、世卫组织专家说法 多数年轻患者都是因为家里或学校以外的缘故被感染,他也引述新加坡国立大学医学部主任、世卫组织全球疫情和警报响应网络主席费舍尔(Dale Fisher)的说法,学生如今能够上学可能会更安全,因为他们会与同侪一起相处而不是与到其他社区闲晃,增加感染机率。 其次,延长关闭时间也会打乱许多家庭的日常生活,尤其是前线工作人员,以及无法找到协助或保姆的父母。 “学校采取更多预防措施” 王乙康也向家长保证,学校会采取更多预防措施,保证学生的安全,若出现任何不适症状,如喉咙痛或咳嗽,学生也将立即被送回家进行隔离。 针对3月初到海外旅游的学生或教职人员,也已发出缺席假通知。同时学校也会在学校门口再三确定学生的旅行史。 另一方,课外活动与校外活动也将暂停,学生待在教室内,教室内的桌椅也将分开进行安全隔离,并随时留意他们的卫生。 对于王乙康的解释,许多网民纷纷斥责学业难道比命还重要吗?也有网民认为学校内除了学生,还有其他教职人员,甚至有些学生会搭乘公共交通,所以难以避免,应该先实施停课。…

NEA lifts suspension for Hotpot Culture

The National Environment Agency (NEA) has lifted the suspension for Hotpot Culture Restaurant in…