Almost five years ago, the government pledged to make more data available to the private sector as a way to turn Singapore into a Smart Nation. But while companies and academics say greater data openness has been beneficial in these past few years, there is still room for more detailed data to be made available such as population distribution and historical data, argue academicians.
In the field of historical research, the lack of access to data is constraining and has led some to steer clear of conducting research on Singapore. That is hugely unfortunate as peering into the past could surely be beneficial to Singaporeans.
Noting that historical records such as internal government communication and memos are difficult to obtain, Associate Professor Chong Ja Ian told TODAY online that he would like to take a look at the state of Singapore-China relations before official diplomatic ties were established in 1990.
The deputy head of the Department of Political Science at the National University of Singapore (NUS) is a researcher of foreign policy. Pointing to, for example, PM Lee Kuan Yew’s first visit to China in 1976 when he met with Mao Zedong and the leader’s success Hua Guofeng, Assoc Prof Chong said he would have liked to explore how that contact first came out. The considerations and limitations of that relationship as well as what may have complicated, informed or limited efforts of co-operation between the two nations after that initial meeting would be enlightening. But alas, those records are not readily accessible.
“We have no idea. So, in terms of understanding our own country, this becomes a big limitation,” Assoc Prof Chong said.
The associate professor explains that while internal papers like minutes of meetings and internal memos are made available in places like the United States and Taiwan, the National Archives of Singapore (NAS) does not have a publicly available detailed catalogue of such things.
Researchers who want to get their hands on historical documents can approach NAS but their requests are often passed on to the relevant government ministries. Unfortunately, there is no standardisation on how each agency approaches national security of privacy. They may have different approaches, notes the academician.
On top of that, there’s also no systematic mechanism to declassify documents which Assoc Prof Chong adds is a “big deterrent to doing more research on Singapore.”
“I would rather do work that I can get a clearer sense of what I can do, rather than fish around. I don’t have that much time, resources or energy to (do so),” he added.
What this means is that there is less research being done on Singapore’s history which could be informative to people in the present. Assoc Prof Chong asserts that this limitation of studying the country’s past “prevents a better self-understanding of our society.”
On his Facebook page, Assoc Prof Chong shared a list of links to archives of various countries including Singapore, Taiwan, China, the United States, the United Kingdom, Australia and Germany – illustrating just how easy it is to rifle through historical data in the archives of other countries compared to Singapore.

Echoing in agreement is Professor Lim from the University of Michigan who asserted that academics do not study what they can’t get data on. So research in Singapore with ‘missing-data issues’ will naturally lag behind that in other countries. Consequently, the country is not represented in published international research in this particular niche.

The government’s response to lack of access to data

Responding to TODAY on these concerns, the Smart Nation and Digital Government Office insists that the Government shares data with the public including businesses and researchers in order to facilitate research, develop new applications and improve service.
A spokesperson clarified that this sharing of data is done in a ‘safe and secure’ manner with ‘strong safeguards’ in place when sharing highly sensitive individual level data. The spokesperson added that while researchers can continue to request for data via Singapore’s open data portal data.gov.sg, the relevant government agency will review each request on a case-by-case basis.
“When there is strong demand and justification for a data set, the relevant government agency will endeavour to make the data set available on data.gov.sg, which will be updated on a monthly, bimonthly or yearly basis depending on the type of data,” the spokesperson explained.
GovTech (Government Technology Agency of Singapore) added that in 2015 they had refreshed data.gov.sg to “actively provide data visualisations and data-driven blog posts, to make government data relevant and understandable to the public” following criticism that they only published broad and aggregated data.
Even so, government hasn’t directly address the points raised by Assoc Prof Chong about historical data such as internal memos and minutes of meetings being made available for research purposes
When asked about the government striking a balance between sharing information and protecting data security, deputy chairperson of the Government Parliamentary Committee for Communications and Information Ms Tin Pei Ling said that some information is withheld for strategic and security reasons.
The reason requests for data from researchers are handled on a case-by-case basis is because there needs to be “a clear understanding of what value-add will come out of the collaboration”, she added.

On the subject of transparency

Assistant professor in the department of Asian and policy studies at the Education University of Hong Kong Dr Kris Hartley was quoted by TODAY as saying that the balance of access to data and security “must be mediated through the political process, and thus, differs across political systems”.
In most Western liberal democracies, access to data is largely regarded as an entitlement because of freedom-of-information policies, explained Dr Hartley. The same does not hold true for Singapore which doesn’t have its own iteration of the United States’ Freedom of Information Act.
“While Singapore makes some data openly available, it seems uninterested in embracing a wholesale approach to data sharing, particularly on issues related to elections, fiscal spending and other politically sensitive issues that arguably have little to do with national security — outside military budgets,” he said to TODAY.

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

Funeral parlour cremated wrong body, license being suspended

The license of a funeral parlour has been suspended and will be…

Create “Economic Recovery” jobs

Singapore should aim to curb unemployment with the Jobs Credit Scheme. Tan Kin Lian.

1982年就已征外劳税 要减少对低技术外劳依赖

新加坡国立大学建筑系客座教授郑庆顺,分享一则1982年的剪报。剪报说明打从38年前,为了打造清一色新加坡人的劳动力,当时政府向雇主征收外劳税。 当时的报导这么写道:“对于每名薪资最低1150元的员工,雇主将被征收30巴仙的外劳税”。而该税赋的目的,正是避免雇佣低技术外籍劳工。报导也提到当时政府有意在10年时间减少对外籍劳工的依赖,放眼1992年劳动力清一色都是新加坡人。 对此,工人党前非选区议员余振忠感叹,我们究竟走偏了多远,今日我国与澳洲、新西兰、日本、香港和欧洲国家已渐行渐远,这些国家建筑领域主要仍依赖本地人。 相对而言,我国的生产力已落后,需要很多年、行业进行结构性转变,才能取得重大改进。 外籍劳动力142万人 根据人力部的统计,截至2019年12月,我国的外籍劳动力(包括外籍女佣和建筑工友等),高达142万人口。 人力部长杨莉明在今年五月初的国会也证实,其中本地43个大型客工宿舍,共容纳20万客工;9万5000名客工住在1200座工厂改造宿舍、2万客工住在建筑工地临时住处。 回顾1982年的新年献词,已故建国总理李光耀提到,须在1991年达到劳动力完全由新加坡人组成。当时他认为,依靠大量移工在社会、政治和经济层面都不可取。他以法国、英国和当时的西德为例,大量移工劳动力也延伸很大的社会问题。 黄循财:“减少建筑客工不实际” 然而,近期国家发展部长黄循财则指出,目前有32万名客工在建筑业工作,不过要找到愿意在建筑工地从事苦力活的国人并非易事,因此我国仍需依赖这些客工。

人民行动党议员迪舒沙 针对杜佛树林议题提呈休会动议

有民众呼吁应保留杜佛树林(Dover),避免被拿来发展项目,对此荷兰-武吉知马集选区迪舒沙议员,也向国会提呈有关保护杜佛树林的议案。 迪舒沙在周一(18日)脸书上表示,目前就保护杜佛树林议题,向国会提呈修会动议。如若没有其他议员争取休会动议,也将会由他开启该课题的讨论。 迪舒沙也强调,自己虽然支持房屋发展和重建,但他也非常珍惜绿色地带,因此他称会借此提出其他空间的调配,尽可能保留乌鲁班丹目前的绿色园地。 此外,他也会提出可用于顶替杜佛树林的备用场地,以及讨论有关推广乌鲁班丹和绿色保护的相关话题。 目前乌鲁班丹属于荷兰-武吉知马,即迪舒沙所服务的选区。 本社发现,迪舒沙并未提及有关一直闹得沸沸扬扬的金文泰森林的组屋开发。 另一方面,本社也得知,在早些时候有关杜佛森林的一篇文章中所报道,六名人民行动党议员也将在2月提出相关动议,加速和深化气候变化的解决方法,并呼吁政府和私营部门,以及公众透过可持续性方针减缓和适应气候变化。