Hard Choices: Challenging the Singapore Consensus

15 Liberal Ideas in the New Normal

15 15 LIBERAL IDEAS LIBERAL IDEAS IN THE NEW IN THE NEW NORMAL NORMAL Donald Low Right after the 2011 General Election (GE 2011), it was probably fair to say most liberals and progressives in Singapore believed that the policy and institutional changes that they wished to see would be best advanced by the incumbent PAP government. Most, I think, subscribed to the view that it was preferable for these changes to be driven from within, rather than forced on the government from without. Substantive reforms in a liberal direction, initiated and driven by a secure, confident and still dominant PAP government were (in the minds of liberals and progressives at least) more desirable than politically calculated half measures pursued by a weakened, demoralised regime seeking short-term political advantage. Almost three years after GE 2011, there are indeed quite a few signs that the government is moving in the right direction. It has made concerted efforts to address the various grievances that had led to the results of GE 2011 and to the other political setbacks that the PAP has suffered since. These include measures to moderate the price of new HDB flats, increase capacity and government subsidies in public healthcare, expand the public transport network to ease overcrowding , and reform the education system to ensure fair opportunities for those with lesser means. Even on foreign worker and immigration policy, still a source of great public unhappiness as the reactions to the Population White Paper attest, an objective assessor would conclude that the government has moved to reduce the country’s intake of low-skilled foreign labour—even if it has not moved as quickly or as far as some would like to see. These reforms should be commended. They are important for restoring public trust in a government that has, in recent years, appeared quite fallible and even incompetent at times. Deputy Prime Minister Tharman Shanmugaratnam’s comment in an interview with Straits Times in April 2013 that the centre of gravity in the PAP government has shifted to the “left-of-centre” is also noteworthy in this context.1 It was the first time a senior PAP minister has explicitly signalled a desire by the government to turn left. It also marks an implicit acknowledgement that the growth-promoting policies of the PAP government of the last decade may have come at the expense of social equity and citizen well-being, exposed citizens to risks that should have been socialised, and resulted in outcomes that were less than fair. Such acknowledgement is welcome as any substantive reform programme must first begin with an acknowledgement of the government’s recent failings. Falling Short Yet despite the wide range of policy changes that have been undertaken in the last two years, there remains a palpable sense among many Singaporeans of a liberal bent that the pace and scope of reform that the PAP government is willing to pursue falls well short of their expectations. This perception stems partly from the fact that in a number of areas, the results of policy change will take at least a few years to bear fruit. This is especially so with respect to infrastructure investments with a long gestation period. The perception is also partly 210 LIBERAL IDEAS IN THE NEW NORMAL the result of the PAP’s own conservative rhetoric and its constant reminders that Singapore must avoid drastic or destabilising change. In the 2012 PAP conference for instance, Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong reminded Singaporeans “that we have to be very careful not to go overboard as we recalibrate left a bit, right a bit, don’t flip-flop, flip-flop, and turn upside down.”2 This “under-selling” of the government ’s reforms—already seen by many as modest and limited to begin with—reinforces the impression that this government has not been sufficiently bold or reformist in the last three years. But more important than the widely held perception that the PAP does not favour radical change is the fact that, compared with how quickly and profoundly Singapore’s context is changing, the PAP’s appetite for change—in terms of reforming Singapore’s growth model, overhauling its population policies, expanding social protection, and liberalising the political system—is considerably smaller than what many deem necessary. This is especially so with respect to two key areas. The first area is that of inequality. While the government acknowledges...