Tag: meritocracy

  • Forcing Racial Rotation For Presidency Is Racist And Anti-Meritocracy

    Forcing Racial Rotation For Presidency Is Racist And Anti-Meritocracy

    I welcome the proposal by Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong to tighten the criteria for the Elected Presidency (“Key changes to refresh political system”; Jan 28).

    But I believe it is superfluous to force a rotation among the races for the Elected Presidency. Such a policy also assumes inherent racism, as it presupposes that the Chinese majority in Singapore would not elect a minority candidate to the Elected Presidency even if he or she were the best candidate in an election. It assumes that minorities in Singapore are so incapable that they require such affirmative action in order to be elected. It is saddening that after more than 50 years of nation-building, such attitudes could persist in our society.

    Such a system will also shut out highly qualified persons simply because they are of the wrong race. Enforcing minority representation for the Elected Presidency flies in the face of Singapore’s policy of meritocracy, as it will no longer be about choosing from among the best and most qualified candidates because of the rigidity of such a system.

    Moreover, the pool of qualified persons from minority races is naturally smaller, due to their smaller numbers. This may increase the likelihood of walkovers and reduce the strength of the Elected President’s mandate, in an era when Singaporeans are used to exercising their right to vote in elections. The competitiveness of the election is reduced.

    On Thursday, Member of Parliament Rahayu Mahzam, who is Malay, said in Parliament that “we would like to see representation from our community, but we want Malays to be chosen because he or she is the best, and not because of his or her race”. As we move beyond our first five decades of nation-building, we should refrain from enacting policies based on the crutch mentality that minorities will always need a helping hand because of their race.

     

    This view by Dennis Chai Hoi Yim, was published in Voices, Today, on 30 Jan 2015.

    Source: www.todayonline.com

  • Why Should Singapore’s Prime Minister Be Chinese?

    Why Should Singapore’s Prime Minister Be Chinese?

    Talk of the “rising star” of Deputy Prime Minister Tharman Shanmugaratnam has raised the old question of whether Singapore is ready for a non-Chinese Prime Minister. But why shouldn’t Singapore be ready?

    If Chee Soon Juan of the Singapore Democratic Party captured people’s attention during the general election period, Finance Minister and Deputy Prime Minister Tharman Shanmugaratnam has undoubtedly emerged as the darling of the post-GE period.

    There’s already a Tharman for PM Facebook page with, at the time of writing, over 760 likes. Reuters did aprofile on him as a “rising star”. As anchor minister of the Jurong Group Representation Constituency (GRC), his People’s Action Party (PAP) team coasted to victory with almost 80 per cent of the vote, an even better performance than the team in Ang Mo Kio GRC led by Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong.

    If Singapore had a more competitive democratic system, Tharman could probably mount a leadership challenge within the party and win power. Yet the matter of Tharman’s suitability for leadership consistently runs into another question (apart from his own apparent unwillingness): is Singapore ready for a non-Chinese prime minister?

    The question was first brought up in the 1980s, when Singapore’s first prime minister Lee Kuan Yew revealed that he had considered then Minister for National Development, S Dhanabalan, to be a worthy successor, only to decide that the country was not ready for an Indian prime minister. This message was endorsed by Dhanabalan himself in 2007, when he said that he was “not saying it’s not possible [to have a non-Chinese prime minister], but I think it will take some time.”

    Current prime minster Lee Hsien Loong reiterated this in 2008 shortly after Barack Obama was voted in as the first black president of the United States of America:

    Will it happen soon? I don’t think so, because you have to win votes. And these sentiments – who votes for whom, and what makes him identify with that person – these are sentiments which will not disappear completely for a long time, even if people do not talk about it, even if people wish they did not feel it.

    Lee now believes there’s more of a chance for a non-Chinese prime minister as Singapore’s younger generations grow more accepting and are more ready to connect across racial lines, although he still notes the need to communicate with voters in Mandarin.

    The question is thus an old one. But it’s high time it got turned on its head: why shouldn’t Singapore be ready for a non-Chinese prime minister? Why shouldn’t we be able to have a non-Chinese prime minister right now (or whenever Lee Hsien Loong steps down)?

    The question about winning votes shouldn’t actually be an issue, seeing that Singaporeans don’t get to vote for the leader of the PAP, and therefore the Prime Minister, anyway. (In fact, most PAP members don’t get to vote for the leader of the PAP either; only cadre members – who are selected by the Central Executive Committee of the party – get to vote on the leadership in the Central Executive Committee.) Singaporeans only get to have a say over whether that candidate gets elected as an MP; once that’s done the leadership of the party is out of our hands.

    In any case, Tharman’s ability to win votes has been amply demonstrated in the recent general election, showing that it is not the ethnicity of the candidate, but the respect that he/she can command, that does the trick.

    The issue of being able to communicate in Mandarin might be more of a consideration. Chinese Singaporeans do make up the majority of the local population, and it would of course be important for the prime minister of the country to be able to connect with his citizens.

    Yet being a Chinese majority country has not stopped Singaporeans from electing non-Chinese leaders before. Singaporeans got to vote in their first general election in 1955, following the Rendel Constitution that gave all local citizens the right to elect the majority of seats in the Legislative Assembly. The Labour Front won enough seats to form a minority government. Their leader, and therefore Singapore’s first Chief Minister, was David Marshall, born to a Baghdadi Jewish family.

    Research by historian Dr Thum Ping Tjin based on the Chinese newspapers of the time shows that despite not being Chinese, Marshall was popular among the Chinese in Singapore, as they felt that he stood for labour rights and freedom from colonialism:

    While the Chinese press avoided endorsing any specific politicians, their editorials and readers’ letters show a clear respect for Marshall. They believed that he understood the Chinese, and felt the Labour Front would represent Chinese working class interests better than the businessmen of the [Progressive Party] and [Democratic Party].

    Throughout Singapore’s history there have been non-Chinese politicians who have managed to connect across racial lines and represent the people’s interests:Devan Nair, S Dhanabalan, Othman Wok and Joshua Benjamin Jeyaretnam among them. These men stood as candidates even before GRCs – supposedly introduced to help racial minorities get into Parliament – and have arguably done more to prove themselves and convince voters than any Chinese Singaporean former army officer parachuted into parliament on the coat-tails of an established anchor minister.

    Chinese-ness has for years been positioned as desirable, a criteria for success and power. Lee Kuan Yew has been described as a Chinese supremacist who believed that certain “Chinese” traits were crucial to Singapore’s success. Under the government’s CMIO (Chinese, Malay, Indian and Others) system of classifying everyone into neat racial categories, Singapore is an incredibly race conscious country.

    Yet this might not be giving Singaporeans enough credit. As voters, Singaporeans are more than capable of discerning who is or isn’t able to represent their best interests, regardless of the individual’s race. When push comes to shove, what really matters is the person’s ability to prove that he or she is a worthy representative and leader, and that’s a challenge for Chinese and non-Chinese politicians alike.

    It is therefore strange that comments that Singapore is “not ready” for a non-Chinese prime minister is accepted as a reasonable political statement, and not some sort of ahistorical concern trolling.

    Even if Singaporeans are voting along racial lines or according to racist assumptions, then what is needed is not a ruling out of a non-Chinese leader, but to tackle head-on the skewed value judgements and uneven playing fields faced by different racial groups, and to find the common ground and common concerns that Singaporeans have for their country. A prime minister, after all, represents the entire nation, not just the majority.

    Lee Kuan Yew himself said in 1965 that “[t]his is not a Malay nation, this is not a Chinese nation, this is not an Indian nation.” Singaporeans have been reminded of this often this year, the year of the nation’s Golden Jubilee as well as the year of his death. If this is indeed the vision of Singapore that we want to live up to, then there is no reason to doubt our readiness for a non-Chinese prime minister.

    The above article was first published on byline.com .

    Source: www.theonlinecitizen.com

  • Stark Differences Between Hong Kong’s MTR And Singapore’s MRT

    Stark Differences Between Hong Kong’s MTR And Singapore’s MRT

    Earlier this year, CNN looked at why Hong Kong’s Mass Transit Railway (MTR) is so successful. CNN described MTR as the “most envied metro system” in the world (‘Hong Kong’s MTR: Taking a ride on the world’s most envied metro system‘).

    MTR was established as a public entity in 1973-74 before it was privatized and listed on the Hong Kong stock exchange as MTR Corporation Ltd in 2000. At the time, the Hong Kong government sold its stake in public utilities, with the aim of reducing expenditure and boosting overall efficiency. But the government remained majority shareholder of MTR Corp.

    MTR is both competitive and profitable, and able at the same time to serve the Hong Kong public efficiently.

    99% on-time performance

    “Hong Kong’s MTR is one of the best designed, best operated and most successful metro systems in the world,” said Robert Cervero, professor of city and regional planning at UC Berkeley.

    The system is world class in terms of finance, operation service and transit-property integration, says Jin Murakami, an associate professor at City University of Hong Kong.

    Hong Kong’s MTR carries more passengers (more than 5 million) than London’s subway and almost the same number as New York’s. This is despite Hong Kong having less track than London and New York.

    Figures show that MTR runs about 20 hours and 8,000 train trips per day, and it boasts a staggering 99.9% punctuality rate.

    In the first half of last year, MTR ran for 120 consecutive days without a single delay over 8 minutes, establishing a record for the company, if not the world.

    In contrast, there have been 60 over breakdowns and delays over the past 2 years for Singapore’s MRT, since LG (NS) Desmond Kuek took over SMRT Corp from his predecessor, Saw Phaik Hwa:

    The latest Singapore train service disruptions on Tuesday (7 Jul) affected 250,000 commuters at all 54 MRT stations on both the North-South Line and East-West Line, with many commuters taking their frustrations online, scolding SMRT – which runs both lines – and Desmond Kuek its CEO.

    MTR helps London Overground enhance its punctuality

    MTR’s reputation as one of the world’s top metros has attracted many international clients seeking its expertise.

    MTR now operates the London Overground, 2 lines of the Beijing Metro, as well as parts of the Shenzhen and Hangzhou Metro systems in China, the Melbourne Metro in Australia and the Stockholm Metro in Sweden.

    In 2014, it won a contract for a new rail project in Sydney. As part of the US$6.5-billion deal, MTR will deliver and operate the Australian city’s North West Rail Link, the largest public transport project in the country and its first fully automated rapid transit network.

    MTR also provides consultation services to railway networks around the world. According to a 2013 Wall Street Journal report, these overseas operations have improved both the network’s punctuality at home, as well as its profitability. London Overground enhanced its punctuality from 88.4% in 2007 to 96.7% in 2013 after MTR took over its operations for a year.

    Will the PAP government consider engaging MTR to help LG (NS) Kuek and his cohort of SAF officers? Or perhaps PAP thinks that SAF scholars and soldiers are better?

    Continual investment in maintenance, upgrades and renewals to train system needed

    Another key to MTR’s success in keeping Hong Kong’s subway in tip-top conditions is its willingness to continuously reinvest profits back into its MTR system.

    “A railway requires ongoing investment and a lot of resources in order to keep it in tip-top form,” said Jacob Kam, the operations director of MTR. “Even for a system considered state of the art, in 10 years time, everything – signaling systems, urban railways – will have changed.”

    Each year, US$645 million is invested in maintenance, upgrades and renewals to the MTR system. It’s a significant amount compared with many other cities and systems, said Prof Cervero.

    In contrast, during the public inquiry in May 2012 into the major train breakdowns occurred in Dec 2011, previous CEO Saw Phaik Hwa became defensive when the COI questioned her about SMRT maintenance budgets.

    AGC presented data showing SMRT did not raise its maintenance budgets in nearly 10 years since 2002, despite rising ridership, more frequent train runs and ageing assets. Ms Saw then stoutly defended the SMRT’s maintenance regime. She said SMRT had not only met, but exceeded, maintenance standards set out by rail manufacturers and the LTA. She claimed that money spent on mid-life upgrades for the trains had actually helped in saving maintenance cost.

    When it was pointed out to her that the upgrades were mainly for the train cabins and air-conditioning units, Saw then said parts such as wheels and propulsion systems are “upgraded continuously” and are “changed on a regular basis.”

    “If there is any need to upgrade, anything in the system, it would have been,” she added. Saw also blamed the new trains for the spike in train faults. The new trains were a source of bugs, she said. One of the COI panelists, Prof Lim of NTU, cited an SMRT internal report showing a 20% drop in maintenance cost per kilometer operated. Saw replied “that could be wrong numbers” or “errors in the parameters”.

    She said the events that triggered the train breakdowns on Dec 15 and 17, 2011 were unprecedented. The trains stopped because a section of the electrical ‘third rail’ had dropped off after several support claws were dislodged. No power was being supplied to the trains. She said that nothing like that had happened before. Prof Lim then pointed out that the ‘third rail’ did sag in 2010 and before 2006. Saw said management was not aware of the seriousness of the events because the dropped claws were reinstated. To that, Prof Lim retorted, “You knew the risks, and you didn’t do enough. You implemented cable ties.”

    High-tech tools to aid operations

    MTR also invests and employs a range of high-tech tools to aid operations.

    After the last trains depart from stations at about 1 a.m., more than 1,000 workers spring into action to maintain the system.

    “Because of the high demand for track space and the small amount of down time, we need to quickly move engineering trains, deliver materials and provide space for people,” said Mr Kam. “We have an A.I. system that helps us optimize the use of space in a limited time.”

    The A.I. program was specially designed and built for the MTR. “We also apply a lot of radio-frequency identification technology that helps monitor the condition of the trains and machinery and gives us an early warning in case of potential problems,” he explained.

    Infrared monitors on tracks are used to detect cracks too small for the human eye to detect.

    “We use man to do what machines can’t do, and machines to create efficiency and accuracy that’s beyond the reach of man,” said Mr Kam, summing up a principle that’s made Hong Kong’s MTR the envy of the world’s mass transit systems.

    In the case of Singapore, it sounds more like a case of “What’s wrong with collecting more money?”

    This is specially so on hearing what was revealed by the COI in 2012 that SMRT did not raise its maintenance budgets in nearly 10 years since 2002, despite rising ridership, more frequent train runs and ageing assets. In fact, COI reports showed that there was a 20% drop in maintenance cost per kilometer operated by SMRT.

    A former SMRT staff even told TRE that many of the experienced engineering staff were “forced to retire” under the pretext of reorganization during Saw Phaik Hwa’s time. Apparently, these experienced engineering staff were deemed too “expensive” and their salaries would eat into SMRT’s profits.

    He said, “I can tell that during Saw’s time many veteran ASP Trains were forced to retire under the pretext of Re-Org. Those officers with decades of rail experience were considered too costly. They hired younger and fresh diploma holders without rail experience but cheaper and with few benefits especially medical and leave benefits.”

    What caused SMRT to degenerate into a “money worshiper” at the expense of public service?

     

    Source: www.tremeritus.com

  • Degree Mills And Fake Qualifications: The Cesspool Of Meritocracy

    Degree Mills And Fake Qualifications: The Cesspool Of Meritocracy

    Here is what an executive of a dodgy institution said as revealed by a 2012 Washington Post news article on Indian higher learning (http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/asia_pacific/indias-university-system-in-deep-crisis/2012/03/20/gIQAzUOgdS_story.html)

    We guarantee 100 percent success. No matter what, we will place a business management degree in your hand from a reputed university that we are affiliated to. You can go abroad, apply for jobs with these degrees. The certificate will not even say the words ‘distance education,’

    It looks like the “abroad” of choice may well be Singapore given the ease with which foreigners get jobs and citizenships with qualifications from degree mills or fake qualifications. And the scale of the problem? Here goes

    • A government commission listed 21 “fake” universities, many no more than a mailing address, a sign over a shop or a hole-in-the-wall office.
    • A technical institutions regulator named 340 private institutions without accreditation from the government
    • Of more than 31,000 higher education institution, only 4,532 universities and colleges had accreditation.
    • One state-run university awarded 2,660 doctor degrees in just 2 years for subjects not taught there.

    That is just India.

    What Meritocracy?

    The government emphasise meritocracy as the cornerstone of its success. Merit must also be paid, as the narrative goes and hence a veritable gravy train for the ministers and the civil service. Never mind the moral hazard of this peculiar line of reasoning but do they merit that gravy train?

    The sordid affair of the IDA need not be repeated here. However can the IDA managers think of nothing but utterly inane reasons for their actions to sop off the public, only to flip-flop later? What about the ICA giving away citizenships without, it appears, minimum due diligence?

    These acts are not of those civil servants elsewhere commonly underpaid but of the best remunerated civil service in the world.  High pay for  merit?

    Excellence, Competence, Reliability

    Another line of reasoning is none of these are due to the agencies but of an imperative to deliver workers indiscriminately to feed the strategy of growing the economy far beyond what can reasonably be expected given constraints of land, population and not least high income.

    However, Singapore’s place in the sun can be attributed to its “brand” of excellence, competence and reliability. It can be argued that meritocracy played a strong role at least when it really meant what it meant, not what it is today. Maintaining the brand require a quality labour force but the indiscriminate employment of foreign workers without proper diligence on skills, qualification and suitability can only adulterate quality and tarnish the brand.

    It will eventually risk the economy for the government is striving for first world status not by the pursuit of the required diligence but by relying much on third world quality of labour and work attitudes. As a retired German engineer, a frequent visitor told the writer as he saw it

    “Ja, what can you expect (regarding train breakdowns)? You have first world infrastructure maintained by so many third world workers.”

    A fundamental contradiction apparent to everyone but government it seems. Does productivity needs mentioning?

    Conclusion

    In 2014, the US state of California convicted Juan Malaluan Tenorio, Jr, Glyn Cordova Villegas, James Quijano Leoncio, Philip Tolentino Sarmiento, Laurence Viernes, German Zagada and Jude Dagza Leoncio up to 3 years imprisonment. All 7 were found guilty of using forged nursing school transcripts from the Philippines to become Registered Nurses.

    Draconian it may be but lives were in harm’s way. However, at a minimum, citizenship / PR approvals and various employment passes needs to be rigourously reviewed even if it cost tens of millions. That is a small price to pay to maintain not only the integrity and reputation of the Singapore economy and its institutions but also the quality of the labour force. The whole process including those who employed foreigners must be subject to closer scrutiny.

    The apologists may argue there is a difference between qualifications from degree mills and fake qualifications but this is mere semantic of irrelevance to Singaporeans displaced by foreigners of dodgy qualifications. It is worth remembering that in the past overseas degrees from many well known universities were regarded as somehow second class.  When there is easy acceptance of getting ahead not by merit nor excellence but by cheating and obfuscation, then meritocracy has plunged into the cesspool of degeneracy.

    Besides, can anyone imagine the CEO of a famous brand like Daimler Benz ever risk tarnishing the brand by going…….. cheap?

     

    Chris K

    *Chris is a retired executive director in the financial industry who had mostly worked in London and Tokyo. He writes opinions and commentaries mostly on economic and financial matters.

     

    Source: www.therealsingapore.com

  • Ng Eng Hen: Deployments To Sensitive Units Are Not Based On Race

    Ng Eng Hen: Deployments To Sensitive Units Are Not Based On Race

    A person is deployed in a sensitive unit in the Singapore Armed Forces based on his ability and beliefs to ensure that he is not a security risk, not on his race, said Defence Minister Ng Eng Hen on Monday night.

    He also revealed that the SAF has started to deploy Malay servicemen onboard ships as sailors who will go out to sea. Previously, Malays in the navy were only deployed as “sea soldiers”, who primarily patrolled naval bases.

    Dr Ng was speaking to a 200-strong crowd of students and academics in a forum that was organised by the National University of Singapore and the Government’s feedback arm Reach.

    Responding to a question on a perceived bias against Malays in the SAF and why they have been excluded from the Navy until now, Dr Ng said it was a “practical issue” of having halal-certified kitchens onboard ships. “(This is) because in a confined space, it is hard to have a halal kitchen. If you spend months out at sea, it is difficult.”

    But provisions have been made for Malay Muslims who are willing to serve, said Dr Ng. “So we made and found some accommodation and started to have Malays in the navy as well, if the person is willing.”

    He also reiterated that Malays now serve in the army, navy and air force, adding that with Singapore’s small population, the SAF does not discriminate against anyone and promotes its servicemen based on their ability.

    “We want to get the maximum out of each person in the SAF…we are putting the best people in the best positions.”

    But for sensitive positions in the military, the SAF is not blind to the fact that “people can be blackmailed”, said Dr Ng. “We ask ourselves, can we trust this person in that position to make sure he will not be made use of, that he will not be vulnerable.”

    During the 90-minute forum, the Defence minister also fielded other questions including women doing National Service and how to make it more meaningful to serve the country.

     

    Source: www.straitstimes.com