Tharman: Mainstream media is not state-controlled

In a Facebook post on MAINSTREAM MEDIA, DPM Tharman Shanmugaratnam wrote:

The mainstream media in Singapore is not a free-for-all. Neither is it the heavily-controlled media that some critics caricature it to be. 

That’s not how things are in Singapore - the media doesn’t wait around for instructions, and it doesn’t excuse everything government does. 

The mainstream media is what I regard as serious-minded, responsible players in an evolving Singapore democracy - helping to take it forward, but airing views in a way that avoids fragmenting society.

That’s not an easy responsibility, because the ability of the media to divide people is a risk everywhere.

In my opinion our media does a better job at advancing the collective interests of Singaporeans than that in several other Asian countries, where the media has added to a divisiveness in society not seen in a long time.

Even in some of the mature western democracies, people are segregating themselves into media bubbles of their own - both in the mainstream and social media - and public trust in the media is now at an all-time low.

THESE ARE NOT the things that Reporters Without Borders looks at, BUT THEY MATTER TO THE QUALITY OF DEMOCRACY in any society, and are worrying many others.

One more point. Our mainstream media carries all the important news of the day, including both sides of the political debate. Singaporeans pick it up. As I said at NTU, “they know some things are more likely to come up on page four than on page one” but they read things and discuss them freely.

So blaming the mainstream media for electoral losses is not a good strategy - it doesn’t square anymore with the reality of a public that reads, follows issues and thinks more critically.

We should keep this going - the mainstream media as responsible players in our democracy, helping to move it forward. We should hope too that the middle in the social media gets stronger, for Singapore’s good..

PM Lee knew the reserved presidential election would be unpopular and would cause the ruling party to lose votes

PM Lee made it clear at a PA Kopi Talk dialogue that he knew the reserved presidential election would be unpopular and would cause the ruling party to lose votes, but said it had to be done because it was the right thing to do. 

"Did I know that this subject would be a difficult one? That it would be unpopular and would cost us votes? Yes, I knew. If I do not know that these are sensitive matters, I cannot be in politics.

"But I did it, because I strongly believe, and still do, that this is the right thing to do," he said.

PM Lee said that while some people think that "we may be going backwards towards racial politics" with the reserved Elected President, the reality "is the opposite".

The current state of affairs, where Singaporeans of different races and religions live in harmony, is not a given, he said.

"THERE IS NOTHING NATURAL ABOUT WHERE WE ARE - multiracial, multi-religious, tolerant and progressive. WE MADE IT HAPPEN, AND WE HAVE GOT TO PROTECT IT, NURTURE IT, PRESERVE IT, AND NEVER BREAK IT."

Referring to the recently-concluded reserved election, Mr Lee said that three Malay candidates had put themselves up for the presidency, of whom two did not qualify.

"But they came forward," he added.

In the 2011 presidential election, there was not one Malay candidate, he noted.

"Was there a Malay candidate? Where were the Farid Khans and the Salleh Maricans? Why didn't they come? It did not cross their minds? No. So why didn't they come? Because they knew that in an open election - all things being equal - a non-Chinese candidate would have no chance," he said.

Citing President Halimah, who said when she was sworn in that she looked forward to the day when reserved elections are no longer needed, Mr Lee said: "I too hope that we will eventually not need such a mechanism to ensure minority representation."

But he said it would take time to work towards this ideal state.

"In climbing towards that ideal state, we need guide-ropes and guard-rails to help us get there and to prevent us from falling off along the way. The reserved election for the President is one such guard-rail," he added.

Gutter politics? That's not what I said: Tharman

Gutter politics is what alternative media engaged in, when they twisted the words of DPM Tharman Shanmugaratnam to attribute to him things he neither said nor believed. 

Here's DPM Tharman Shanmugaratnam's response:

Following my NTU Majulah Lecture last week on the future of education we had a dialogue. Some asked about the recent Presidential Election (PE) - and my views on the PE, especially how we should look at the issue of race, have been reported.

Gutter Politics?

I see that some social media commentators have claimed that I agreed in the dialogue that the PAP had engaged in “gutter politics” in the Bukit Batok by-election. 

That is not what I said, and not what I believe.

The PAP contrasted Dr Chee Soon Juan’s character with that of Murali Pillai in the Bukit Batok by-election, and highlighted how Dr Chee had said he was proud about his past. 

Dr Chee and his colleagues in the SDP responded by arguing that questions of character should not be raised in elections, and accused the PAP of gutter politics for doing so.

I stand by what the PAP and my colleagues said. 

The PAP was not engaging in gutter politics. The character of candidates is at the heart of politics: voters look at a politician’s actions over time, judge his motivations and integrity, and decide whether they can trust him.

If Singaporeans ever come to ignore the track record and integrity of politicians, in the PAP or any other parties, it is Singapore that will end up in the gutter. That has been the story of many nations.

For the record, I was asked by a member of the audience at the NTU lecture for my views on whether the media landscape should be opened and the mainstream media “not controlled by the government” - he cited Singapore’s low ranking by Reporters without Borders - and whether I approved of the “gutter politics” by the PAP in recent elections such as in Bukit Batok.

I said that Singapore had become vastly more open compared to when I was younger. I added that “the sense of constraint is far less now. Yes, you get pushbacks, and sometimes you may not like it, and I don’t agree with every tactic by every one of my colleagues. But I have to say that if there is something that defines the PAP, it is its insistence on character, honesty, and being true to Singaporeans.”

I did not entertain the assertion about the PAP engaging in gutter politics in Bukit Batok. It is an assertion that is recycled from time to time, and has been the SDP’s position. But having seen social media commentaries claiming that I had agreed with the assertion, I am making my views clear.

More generally - are there occasional differences of views on issues within Government, or within the PAP? Of course there are, and that’s healthy. But once any course of action is decided, there is no question that we take collective responsibility for it in the leadership.

The mainstream media

On the question about the mainstream media: I have said this before, here and abroad, but it’s worth saying again. 

The mainstream media in Singapore is not a free-for-all. Neither is it the heavily-controlled media that some critics caricature it to be. 

That’s not how things are in Singapore - the media doesn’t wait around for instructions, and it doesn’t excuse everything government does. 

The mainstream media is what I regard as serious-minded, responsible players in an evolving Singapore democracy - helping to take it forward, but airing views in a way that avoids fragmenting society.

That’s not an easy responsibility, because the ability of the media to divide people is a risk everywhere. 

In my opinion our media does a better job at advancing the collective interests of Singaporeans than that in several other Asian countries, where the media has added to a divisiveness in society not seen in a long time. 

Even in some of the mature western democracies, people are segregating themselves into media bubbles of their own - both in the mainstream and social media - and public trust in the media is now at an all-time low. These are not the things that Reporters Without Borders looks at, but they matter to the quality of democracy in any society, and are worrying many others.

One more point. Our mainstream media carries all the important news of the day, including both sides of the political debate. Singaporeans pick it up. 

As I said at NTU, “they know some things are more likely to come up on page four than on page one” but they read things and discuss them freely. So blaming the mainstream media for electoral losses is not a good strategy - it doesn’t square anymore with the reality of a public that reads, follows issues and thinks more critically.

We should keep this going - the mainstream media as responsible players in our democracy, helping to move it forward. We should hope too that the middle in the social media gets stronger, for Singapore’s good.

https://www.facebook.com/TharmanShanmugaratnam/posts/1829813087048174

LKY is still right that Tan Jee Say has no qualifications.

LKY was right about Tan Jee Say in 2011. LKY is still right about Tan Jee Say today. 

There are 400,000 manufacturing jobs in Singapore and Singapore is on the push towards Industry 4.0, transforming the manufacturing sector.

The manufacturing hub is in fact made up of the following manufacturing sectors:

Aerospace, Electronics, Chemicals, Biomedical sciences, Marine & Offshore, and Water

Take AEROSPACE. There are over 200 aerospace companies in Singapore. Singapore has garnered a quarter of the Asian MRO market. Singapore has become the leading aviation hub in Asia-Pacific today, contributing over a quarter share of the region’s Maintenance, Repair and Overhaul (MRO) output. Leading players such as ST Aerospace and Goodrich carry out comprehensive nose-to-tail MRO services from airframe maintenance to engine overhaul to aircraft modifications and conversion.

Singapore is also seeing a growing number of aerospace design and manufacturing operations. Increasingly companies leverage off Singapore’s existing capabilities in precision engineering and electronics, to support the production of complex aero-engine components. (http://bit.ly/1PwDKav)

MARINE AND OFFSHORE: Did you know that Singapore is actually one of the world leaders for FPSO (Floating Production Storage and Offloading) conversions with many firsts. For example, building the largest oil producing and blending unit with a total capacity of 600,000 barrels of oil per day and the first FPSO with drilling capability. 

CHEMICALS: Singapore is one of the world’s leading energy and chemical industry hubs. Singapore’s contribution to the industry is vast, both in terms of output and research, and the Republic is constantly working to stay at the forefront of the industry’s advancement. In 2010, the chemicals and chemical products sector contributed S$38 billion of the manufacturing output

Our edge: Jurong Island 

ELECTRONICS: It is the major industry underpinning Singapore's economic growth and accounts for 80,000 jobs. In addition, manufacturing of finished electronics products creates many spin-offs to other segments of the economy, such as precision component manufacturers, chemicals and materials suppliers, electronic manufacturing systems companies, and logistics service providers.

Singapore is home to:

- Nine of the world's top fifteen fabless semiconductor companies, and close to thirty IC design centres

- Fourteen silicon integrated circuit (“IC”) wafer fabrication plants, including the world's top three wafer foundries

- Fifteen semiconductor assembly and test operations, including five of the world’s top outsourced assembly and test services companies

- Six of the world’s top integrated device manufacturers

- All of the world's top three hard disc media manufacturers

- Four of the world’s top five Electronics Manufacturing Services (EMS) providers

WATER: Singapore is recognised as a ‘Global Hydrohub’ with about 180 water companies. These companies represent the entire value chain of the water industry, spanning from upstream component players (e.g.membrane and pumps manufacturers), equipment OEMs, and system integrators, to downstream EPC players and project developers.

LKY is right. Tan Jee Say has no qualifications and he is wrong about manufacturing.

Why Tan Cheng Bock's appeal was dismissed: Textual Analysis of Arts 19B and 164

The issue before the court:

Is Parliament restricted to choosing from the terms of office of the Presidents elected directly by the citizens of Singapore, as the Appellant contends?

Textual analysis of the specific provisions in dispute: Arts 19B and 164

Art 19B(1) is crucial in that it introduces the concept of a reserved election. That is apparent from its title: "Reserved election for community that has not held office of President for 5 or more consecutive terms”.

Article 19B(1)

"if no person .... has held the office of President"

It speaks not of a President who was elected to the office but of one who has held the office.

This choice of words is potentially of wide application.

There are potentially two categories of persons it could cover:

those who have held the office in their own right, pursuant to an election;

and those who do not hold the office in their own right but exercise the functions and powers of the office for a time.

"for any of the 5 most recent terms of office of the President"

The "5 most recent terms of office” referred to here are those terms of office held by Presidents under the Constitution as it stands after the APPOINTED DATE (i.e. the date the 2016 Amendment came into effect).

The practical effect of this interpretation is that any term of office held by a President before the appointed date cannot be counted, as it would have been a term of the office of the President as it existed under a previous version of the Constitution, and not a term of the office of the President as it exists after the coming into effect of the 2016 Amendment.

Can the Government start counting the terms of office held by presidents before the 2016 Amendment?

This is where Article 164 comes in.

Art 164 is a transitional provision for Art 19B.

Article 164

What Art 164 does for Art 19B:

Art 164(1)(a) mandates that Parliament shall specify the "first term of office” to be counted for the purposes of determining a reserved election under Art 19B;

Art 164 clearly contemplates that Parliament may choose a term of office that commenced either before or after 1 April 2017 as the first term.

Thus it is clear from Art 164 that the Government can start to count the terms of office held by presidents before Constitution was amended in April 2016.

The Past 5 Presidents

Of the five terms of office of the President preceding the 2017 election, the following may be noted:

President Ong, President Nathan and President Tan each held office pursuant to elections held under the framework of the Elected Presidency as it was prior to the 2016 Amendment.

President Wee, alone in this group, held the office pursuant to an election by Parliament, under an even earlier iteration of the Constitution than his successors.

President Wee continued to hold the office after the Elected Presidency was introduced and a specific transitional provision, Art 163, was passed at that time that was of particular relevance and application to him alone.

Article 163, transitional provision. Applies only to Wee Kim Wee.

Art 163 applies only to President Wee, being the person who held the office of President immediately before 30 November 1991.

What this provision does is to make it clear beyond argument that:

(a) President Wee held the office of President;

(b) He continued to hold the office after the 1991 Amendment; and

(c) President Wee was the first President to exercise the enhanced powers of the Elected Presidency and was empowered to do so as if he had been elected by the citizens.

The FOCUS of Arts 19B and 164

The FOCUS of Arts 19B and 164 is on those who have held the office of President and not those who have been elected to that office in a particular way:

(b) Both before and after the introduction of the Elected Presidency framework, the President was elected, albeit initially by Parliament and only later by the citizens.

Nothing in the text or context of Arts 19B and 164 suggests any concern over or preoccupation with the method by which they were elected;

(c) Although President Wee was elected by Parliament, by virtue of Art 163, it was indisputable that he did, in fact and in law, hold the office under the framework of the Elected Presidency.

Conclusion

Chief Justice Sundaresh Menon summarised the appeal court's interpretation of the plain meaning of Arts 19B(1) and 164, having regard to the text of the provisions in their statutory context, as follows:

(a) The counting of "terms of office” under Art 19B(1) may include terms already served, as well as partial terms of office that were uncompleted.

(b) Art 164 allows Parliament to specify any of the past five terms of office of the President that immediately precede the 2017 election as the first term to be counted under Art 19B(1).

(c) The focus of Art 19B(1) is on those who have "held the office of President” without any distinction made in relation to the method by which they were elected.

(d) The definition of "President” in Art 2 applies to Arts 19B(1) and 164.

The reference to "this Constitution” refers to the Constitution as it has stood and as it stands from time to time since 9 August 1965 and in this particular context, it is the Constitution as it stood at the date of the election of each of the Presidents in question. H

ence, Presidents "elected under this Constitution” includes those elected by Parliament as well as those elected by the citizens.

(e) It was therefore open to Parliament to specify President Wee’s last term as the first term under Art 164 for the purposes of Art 19B.

To read the judgement in full:
http://www.singaporelaw.sg/sglaw/laws-of-singapore/case-law/free-law/court-of-appeal-judgments/22934-tan-cheng-bock-v-attorney-general

How Education Shifts Will Make Our Future: Tharman Shanmugaratnam

To face a tumultuous future with challenges, Singapore’s education system will need to keep evolving as it has done over the last 50 years, said DPM Tharman Shanmugaratnam at the first Majulah Lecture organised by the NTU on Wednesday (Sep 20).

“The biggest mistake we would make is think that because we are doing well in the PISA test, or we get a good rating by the Economist Intelligence Unit or anyone else, that therefore we keep things as they are,” Mr Tharman said.

Education policymakers will only know how well measures have worked 20 to 30 years down the road.

Singapore’s education system must keep experimenting and having a “sense of dare” to prepare for the future.

Mr Tharman said “by changing and experimenting, by having a sense of dare, we are best preparing ourselves for a range of eventualities in the future”.

ACHIEVING INNOVATION AND SOCIAL COHESIVENESS TOGETHER

Mr Tharman said Singapore, as with other societies, is at a very early stage of a “whole new wave of disruption", and the future of jobs remains a question.

The future will be tumultuous, Mr Tharman said. As with other advanced societies, the future of jobs is a big question for Singapore.

“Will there be enough jobs, will we become societies that are divided between those that can make the most of technology or those who are displaced and disempowered by technologies?” he asked.

“And we know in Singapore, that that challenge translates into us becoming a truly innovative society. That has to be the change in our society … not just a few bright sparks, not just firms that are at the frontier but a pervasive culture of experimentation, willingness to take failure, to try again, to bounce up, to celebrate every new idea and everyone feeling that they benefit from us being an innovative society.”

Mr Tharman said jobs will not be an issue if Singapore meets that challenge.

The second challenge, he said, is in maintaining a sense of togetherness in society. And the third, is in becoming an innovative society - with individuals and people with a mind of their own - while retaining a deep sense of community.

Mr Tharman highlighted five areas in the education system in which Singapore needs to keep up a momentum to tackle the challenges.

ENSURING SOCIAL MOBILITY AND AVOIDING RIGID DIFFERENTIATIONS

Mr Tharman said the Government wants to do more earlier on in a child’s life to give them a fair chance of success.

“As some would put it, you have got to mitigate the ‘lottery of birth’,” he said. Mr Tharman said this is especially the case for those who start off with a disadvantage. 

KidSTART, he said, is among major initiatives that provides help to primary school students who are progressing slowly in mathematics.

“So we will do more, and we must succeed, because we must avoid at all costs a permanent underclass in Singapore,” he said.

He also highlighted the need for more flexible pathways. Citing France as an example, Mr Tharman pointed out that what appears to be an egalitarian system of education in the country, where students go through a homogeneous education system, resulting in very inegalitarian outcomes.

He said between 30 and 40 per cent of French students end up repeating at the primary, secondary or at both levels. A large number of students, Mr Tharman said, leave high school with not just a lack of paper qualification, but with a lack of confidence when they go out into the real world.

“We should avoid the extremes of either uniformity or rigid differentiation,” he said.

Mr Tharman said this flexibility is something Singapore has embarked on, for example, when it merged the EM1 and EM2 streams, and then did away with the EM3 stream.

It instead introduced subject-based banding in primary schools.

More recently, Mr Tharman said subject-based banding has also been introduced in secondary schools.

“We are moving towards a more modular and flexible system of differentiation that reflects that - few people are strong in everything and few are weak in everything,” he said.

“We should avoid the simple egalitarian option, but differentiate flexibly, keep every path porous, and never pre-set the path for any child for all time.”

REDUCING ACADEMIC LOAD WHILE DEVELOPING POTENTIAL 

Mr Tharman said if the idea is to develop a culture of innovation and creative ability, more space and time needs to be provided for young minds to develop these traits.

“The science tells us that having the time and space for your mind to wander when you are young is critical in developing creative abilities. If we spend a large amount of time working on high-stakes exams, you don’t develop the creative part of your brain.”

He said taking out some of the academic load will also allow students to have a diversity of experience outside of classrooms.

He said doing so requires the need to change admission systems. The Direct School Admission Programme has been broadened in secondary schools, to ensure the weightage of admission based on academic abilities is reduced.

This also needs to happen in universities, polytechnics and at the Institutes of Technical Education (ITEs), he added.

“If we don’t change the admission system, parents don’t buy the talk. Otherwise, if we take out a load from what is taught in schools but the admission systems are unchanged – high-stakes exams and admissions based on them - the private tuition industry goes into overdrive,” Mr Tharman said.

He said the changes would encourage students to develop in diverse ways, discover their interests and allow their minds to wander, all important experiences that will pay off in the years to come.

The fourth shift in education is the need to develop one’s potential throughout life. This, Mr Tharman said, is important because to achieve innovation, a deep mastery of skills is required.

He said this mastery comes from experience, from thinking and doing over time.
“Whatever job you are doing, if you stay active, if you keep learning, your brain stays alive. As a team, young and old together, that allows for highly innovative teams. It is also an inherently democratic process of learning. The blurring of blue collar and white collar – everyone moving up together.“

But Mr Tharman said Singapore still does not have a culture of employers investing in their workers for the long term.

MULTICULTURALISM HAS TO START YOUNG

Finally, Mr Tharman touched on the Singaporean identity, saying that experiences in life deepen multiculturalism, and that it has to start at a young age. He brought up the example of co-curricular activities in Singapore sometimes being too “ethnically-defined in practice, in ways that sometimes puzzles”.

“Football today is different from what it was in 70s and 80s, you look at our national team. All very good players. But it used to be a much more multiracial team in those days,” Mr Tharman said.

“Volleyball, basketball, table tennis - the first thing that strikes people – 'Chinese' game. How about the rest of the world? You have all sorts of countries playing basketball, volleyball and table tennis. In our region itself, the Indonesians, the Filipinos, are top in basketball and volleyball. We are trapping ourselves too easily, and it is not difficult to change.”

Mr Tharman said in holding to ideals of multiculturalism, Singapore cannot just guard against global trends but has to deepen and develop an identity.

Mr Tharman told the audience to think of the national anthem, which goes, "Marilah kita bersatu, dengan semangat yang baru" (Let us unite with a new spirit). He juxtaposed it with a "new spirit" in education.

“That new spirit was not intended just for the day we became a new nation 52 years ago. Every so often we need that new spirit in our society, and that how we go forward together.” 

Source: CNA/mn

Singapore Friendship Polyclinic in Xiamen, China, jointly set up by Singapore and China

The polyclinic has a special VIP line for Singaporean expatriates in recognition of Singapore's contributions in building it.

Set up in 2011, the facility is modelled on Singapore polyclinics and was built with nearly 10 million yuan (S$1.9 million) of funds jointly raised by Singaporeans and the Xiamen municipal government, which also granted 2,000 sq m of land for the building.

Donations came from Singaporeans who live and work in Xiamen as well as organisations such as the Singapore Chamber of Commerce & Industry in China, the Lee Foundation, United Overseas Bank and the Khoo Teck Puat Foundation.

Renowned Singapore architect Liu Thai Ker designed the polyclinic for free while the Temasek Foundation donated $650,000 to fund a staff training programme.

The polyclinic was set up to support China's push to improve public healthcare. China has made reforming its beleaguered health-care system a top national priority.

Tharman on PAP, Honest Politics and an independent mnedia

ON PAP, HONEST POLITICS AND AN INDEPENDENT MEDIA

Mr Tharman said that Singapore is vastly different today from what it used to be. 

"I grew up in the 60s, I was politically very conscious and aware, and in the 70s, I was active in my own way, and I joined the ruling party in 2001 – I would say Singapore has really changed."

Singapore today, said Mr Tharman, is a "vastly more open and liberal place compared to what it used to be, believe me. I was an activist. Vastly more liberal and vastly more open. And the sense of fear, the sense of constraints is far less now. Yes you get pushbacks. Sometimes you may not like it. It doesn't mean I agree with every tactic by every one of my colleagues."

But if there is something that defines the PAP, Mr Tharman said it is its insistence on character, honesty and being true to Singaporeans.

This trait of the PAP shows up almost all the time, said Mr Tharman.

"And sometimes the PAP falls short, and action is to be taken on individuals. So just bear in mind that that was one of the colours of the PAP, that emphasis on character, and it shows up in a variety of ways.

But it is a vastly more open society than it used to be. Vastly more open politically, and people don’t have to be frightened.

Every political party and political campaigns have a range of tactics, said Mr Tharman.

Mr Tharman also expressed great faith in Singaporeans and their ability to judge. They don't take what they read lightly.

"And Singaporeans have the social media as well. People talk more openly, they exchange views more openly and they make judgement. And that, at the end of the day, is the test of how we’re progressing."

Tharman on race and the reserved Elected President

Is the reserved Elected Presidency for the Malay Community an indication that Singapore has regressed as a society despite growing up reciting the Pledge that has the words “regardless of race, language or religion”?

This question was posed by a student to DPM Tharman Shanmugaratnam at the Majulah lecture held NTU.

DPM Tharman said:

“Speaking as a citizen, I really feel proud that Mdm Halimah is our President. That we have a Malay president after 47 years. And a woman.

"It is understandable that questions are raised on the reserved election. It is also understandable that most people, including myself and I’m sure most people here, would have preferred a contest."

He said, "It is encouraging that people want race to matter less in the future. It is encouraging because it shows that we value what we say in our pledge,"

"But the ASPIRATION for race not to count is something that needs working towards.

"It cannot just be a pledge, it cannot be just an incantation. Sometimes it requires a conscious act of the state."

"If along the way you see decades after decades, that you don’t have a Malay president, I think that what we say loses its meaning. That’s the reality."

"The reality of the matter is, not just in Singapore but anywhere else, including the most mature democracies that everything else (about a candidate) being equal, race, ethnicity, religion, matters."

He cited an editorial by Malaysian publication Mingguan Malaysia, on how it was unimaginable that Singapore had a Malay president when 75 per cent of its population was Chinese.

"An insightful piece, because they are not great fans of Singapore. But they decided to write an editorial commending what happened... But we are not a special people. We have to work to be different and continue on this journey."

MAINTAINING MULTICULTURALISM REQUIRES 'CONTINUOUS WORK'

Mr Tharman said that the starting point in Singapore is a cohesive society but it requires "continuous work" to maintain multiculturalism.

“It requires conscious action, conscious acts of the State, which work if they are supported by people," he said.

SENSITIVITIES OF GROWING UP AS A MINORITY

Mr Tharman said:

"Never forget, that growing up as a minority is different from growing up as a majority. It is different. Never pretend that it’s the same. It requires extra action, extra empathy, and that sense of sharing the same boat together."