For a small country like Singapore, our domestic and foreign policies are inextricably linked.

For a small country like Singapore, our domestic and foreign policies are inextricably linked.

"Foreign policy allows us to create opportunities for Singaporeans. And domestic policy prepares Singaporeans to seize these opportunities. Both go hand-in-hand to advance the interests of Singapore and Singaporeans," Dr Tony Tan said.

He was speaking at the 10th S Rajaratnam lecture on 28 November.

Singapore cannot rely on having friendly relations to safeguard our national interests and sovereignty.

Singapore has resolutely pursued an independent foreign policy in which our interests are not subservient to anyone else, Dr Tan said.

Diplomacy is not to be confused with foreign policy. Diplomacy is a tool of foreign policy.

Diplomacy is not about having friendly relations 'at all costs'.

Diplomacy is about "promoting friendly relations as a way to protect and advance our own important interests."

Singapore must stand firm to preserve our fundamental interests. Even when we come under 'heavy pressure', Singapore "should not shy away from standing up for our vital interests, even if things inevitably turn sour for a while."

Dr Tan also said we should not seek to appease or ride on the bandwagon for fear of retaliation, especially when Singapore's vital interests are at stake.

"At the end of the day, our policy decisions must be based on one simple question – is this in Singapore’s interest? Where possible, we should try to find a mutually beneficial approach to resolve issues," said Dr Tan.

Cruise down Singapore River 1987

For more than a century since 1819, Singapore River and its banks were the focal point of all global and regional trade passing the island. 

Commercial activities concentrated along the banks of the river attracted squatter colonies, hawkers and backyard industries. Pollution became a major problem as garbage, sewage and industrial waste were dumped into the river.

Starting in 1822 and for more than 100 years, multiple committees had been established by the different governments to study the state of the river and propose alternatives on improving its navigation and solving pollution.

The last colonial commission to clean up the river was set up in 1950s and it estimated the cost to clean the river at about S$30 million.

However, the implementation on the commission’s report failed to achieve its targets due to financial difficulties and complexity of the problem.

It was only in 1969 that then-Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew set the machinery that would result into the clean-up of the river as a part of an overall strategy of urban development of the city-state.

http://global-is-asian.nus.edu.sg/index.php/clean-up-of-the-singapore-river-before-and-after/

Tony Tan: Singapore’s Foreign Policy Approach

When independence was thrust upon Singapore in 1965, our region was in disarray. Singapore faced ongoing conflict within our immediate neighbourhood, coupled by the threat of communism at our doorstep. Singapore did not have a defence force then to safeguard our sovereignty.

We had no foreign policy to speak of. And while we knew it was important to make friends to secure Singapore’s interests, we were acutely aware that Singapore could not simply rely on having friendly relations to safeguard our interests and sovereignty.

Singapore has resolutely pursued an INDEPENDENT FOREIGN POLICY based on one key principle.

We make as many friends as we can while insisting on our right to be treated as a sovereign country, where our interests are not subservient to anyone else’s.

At times, Singapore may have differences with other countries, including bigger powers. Skilled diplomacy is then needed to manage such delicate situations and keep a fine balance to our external relations.

But diplomacy should not be confused with foreign policy. Diplomacy is a tool of foreign policy to advance our national interest, just as Free Trade Agreements are tools to advance our economic agenda.

While it is important to carefully consider any positions we take and to make as many friends as possible, we should not seek to appease or ride on the bandwagon for fear of retaliation, especially when Singapore’s vital interests are at stake. It is in the implementation of our foreign policy that diplomacy comes in and takes an important role.

At the end of the day, our policy decisions must be based on one simple question – is this in Singapore’s interest? Where possible, we should try to find a mutually beneficial approach to resolve issues.

But we must stand firm to preserve Singapore’s fundamental interests, even if we come under heavy pressure, or if it means a temporary downturn in bilateral relations.

Since our independence, there have been several instances where we have been tested by big and small countries on issues fundamental to Singapore’s sovereignty and national interests.

Some of these include issues concerning our sovereignty, such as the dispute over Pedra Branca; issues concerning the honouring of important international agreements such as the terms of the Water Agreements with Malaysia, as well as the Points of Agreement (POA); or issues concerning our rights to apply our laws and enforce our penalties, such as the death penalty and other punishments, in a fair and non-discriminatory manner.

Each time and at each test, we have stood firm.

And because of this, there will always occasionally be downturns, even between the closest of friends. But we should not shy away from standing up for our vital interests, even if things inevitably turn sour for a while. Nor should we hesitate to seek solutions through diplomacy, negotiations or third-party settlement of disputes.

What is important is that we as a nation have the confidence to stand together and weather such occasional turbulence.

Diplomacy is not just about having “friendly” relations at all costs. It is about promoting friendly relations as a way to protect and advance our own important interests.

We don’t compromise our national interests in order to have good relations. The sequence matters. But that is not to say that we should underplay the importance of friendships in international relations.

Let me take one example – the Yemeni civil war. As the crisis worsened in April 2015, MFA arranged for a coach to evacuate eight Singaporeans and nationals from Brunei, Cambodia, India, Malaysia and Vietnam out of Yemen to neighbouring Oman.

Our goodwill was reciprocated as other countries rendered assistance to Singaporeans as well. Such cooperation was only possible due to the wide network of friends Singapore has developed over time.

Ultimately, foreign policy serves to safeguard Singapore’s interests and Singaporeans’ freedom to chart our own paths.

As a small country, Singapore is often buffeted by forces that are beyond our control. In fact, the world today is one in which no single dominant player, let alone a small country like Singapore, can determine the trajectory of world events.

This does not mean that we should simply accept our fate. But it makes it imperative that Singapore remains nimble and adaptable to global trends.

As a small country, Singapore should continue to support an open global architecture and a rules-based multilateral system. We cannot afford to have international relations work on the basis that might is right. Respect for international law is essential for peace and stability.

And in the face of complex, transboundary problems today, we need a spirit of constructive interdependence to find solutions to global challenges, because no one country, large or small, can succeed on its own.

Singapore should also look to its immediate neighbourhood for opportunities and a collective voice. ASEAN has been, and will continue to be, a key cornerstone of Singapore’s foreign policy. Collectively, ASEAN has a population of more than 600 million people and a GDP that makes the region the 7th largest economy globally. A united and successful ASEAN will ultimately benefit Singapore and Singaporeans.

For a small country like Singapore, domestic and foreign policies are inextricably linked. Foreign policy allows us to create opportunities for Singaporeans. And domestic policy prepares Singaporeans to seize these opportunities. Both go hand-in-hand to advance the interests of Singapore and Singaporeans.

- Excerpt of speech by Dr Tony Tan at the 10th S Rajaratnam Lecture on Tuesday, 28 November 2017 at 1430 hrs at the Shangri-La Hotel, Singapore

Full text of speech:
http://sglinks.news/article/510079/mfa-press-speech-by-dr-tony-tan-keng-former-president-of-at-the-10th-s-rajaratnam-lecture-on-28-november-2017-at-1430-hrs-at-the-singapore

Lee Hsien Loong: Every dollar counts

With rising expenditure, every dollar counts. 

The NIR (Net Investment Returns) Framework allows the Government to treat 50% of net investment returns from GIC, MAS and Temasek Holdings as revenue for budget spending. 

This year's budget of $70 billion is propped up by about $14 billion from net investment returns derived from reserves. 

This means $1 out of every $5 that the Government is spending in this budget comes from income from our reserves.

These facts debunk the lies spread by Chee Soon Juan and SDP that the government hoards the billions in Temasek and GIC.

The Singapore Government is a prudent government.

While others spend first and then look for the money to fund their spending, the Singapore Government's approach to spending is to set aside money for future spending and then spend from what has been set aside.

This ensures the Government's ability to fulfil their obligations and also the sustainability of the schemes and programmes rolled out.

Examples:
PG Package
Medifund Endowment Fund
Edusave Endowment Fund
Senior Mobility and Enabling Fund
Comcare Fund

By setting aside money for future spending, the Government also ensures that future generations will not be burdened.

In good years where there are surpluses, the Government also makes transfers to Endowment and Trust funds to build them up.

How Lee Kuan Yew handled a protest in Hong Kong against him

I have seen how Mr Lee Kuan Yew responded to protests. This was in Hong Kong - Dec 7, 2000. It was an episode I will never forget, as it revealed what, in the end, counted most for him.

He had gone to Hong Kong to receive his honorary doctorate in law from the Chinese University of Hong Kong.

In the month leading up to the ceremony, some student activists had mounted a campaign against Mr Lee, denouncing him as a "notorious dictator", a "legal terrorist" and as being "anti-Chinese education".

They challenged the university's decision to confer on him the degree - the first foreign political leader to be given such an honour.

Their agitation was part of the thriving protest culture in Hong Kong, as if to proclaim like a loud-hailer its democratic credentials after its transition in 1997 from British rule to Beijing's control.

I was covering Mr Lee's three-day visit to Hong Kong as The Straits Times' senior political correspondent, and was struck by how little the student activists actually knew about Singapore.

It was telling that the 21-year-old student leading the campaign - the students' union president - had never been to Singapore.

Despite the controversy, Mr Lee turned up in Hong Kong out of a desire to maintain Singapore's good relations with the territory.

At the ceremony, the university gave Mr Lee a glowing tribute - he was hailed, among other things, as "one of the great statesmen of the last century in any country, and a brilliant politician, who has become a valued adviser of many governments besides that of Singapore".

The accolades seemed to roll off Mr Lee.

He wore a no-nonsense expression as he faced the 4,000 graduating students before him.

While some students withheld their applause, none turned their backs on him, as urged by their students' union.

The mood was taut. A clutch of student protesters, cordoned off at the far end of the convocation area, chanted: "Shame on Chinese U!", "Shame on Lee!"

Amid the muffled clamour, Mr Lee addressed the graduands in a matter-of-fact tone.

With his forthright manner, he held their rapt attention as he told them that the future of Hong Kong was what the people and leaders of Hong Kong made of it.

Then he stated some hard facts on Hong Kong's future which would prove prescient.

Pointing out the political chasm between Hong Kong and China, he said he believed there could be advances for Hong Kong to have a more representative and participatory government "if they can persuade the leaders in Beijing that they are willing to work within the framework of the People's Republic of China and Special Administrative Region constitutions".

He warned that failure to do so would find the Chief Executive and the people of Hong Kong locked in a "frustrating process of attrition" with Beijing.

He could well be describing the political situation in Hong Kong today, with the city in a deadlock over an electoral reform proposal by Beijing.

But, at the time in 2000, some foreign journalists were more seized with the students' protest than Mr Lee's analysis. They pressed him for his response to the protest.

Without a pause, he responded: He did not come to seek the approval of the protesters in Hong Kong. "I've been called many bad things before and I have survived them all. I have been elected in Singapore eight times in eight democratic elections by the people of Singapore."

And that was that, his final word on that subject.

Following the event, several Hong Kong newspapers called the protest against Mr Lee a failure.

- Irene Ng, then ST's senior political correspondent

People naturally do not like to pay taxes. It hurts the pocket.

People naturally do not like to pay taxes. It hurts the pocket.

Yet, they expect the government to DO MORE for the needy, to provide assistance to the lower income group to give them a leg up, to take care of the needs of the elderly, especially the infirmed, to provide not only quality but affordable healthcare and nursing homes, to ensure that Singapore remains competitive and to create good jobs for Singaporeans (which means world class infrastructure and that means spending), and so on.

We have a rapidly ageing population and a shrinking working population. The former means greater government spending and the latter means less revenue collected.

50% of net investment income from GIC and Temasek are already being used for budget spending.

Instead of being upset that taxes will be raised, one should ask how those tax dollars will be spent and how the tax dollars will return to Singaporeans in benefits and whether benefits are worthy of the 'pain' you make in paying a little more in taxes.

A government that is squeezed of funds will be limited in what they can do for the country.

In many countries, governments spend first and then look for money. The result is a huge debt burden for future generations.

The Singapore Government's approach to spending is different.
They first look for the money they need for spending and set that money aside for future purposes and then they spend from that money that has been set aside.

This ensures that future generations of Singaporeans are not burdened by a debt incurred by previous generations.

That is why schemes like the Pioneer Generation Package worth $8 billion and the Silver Support Scheme pose no financial burden to Singaporeans, and no matter how the economy performs, the Government will be able to honour its promises in these schemes to senior Singaporeans - because they have already found the money for these schemes.

We have a prudent and responsible government.

So when the government says it will raise taxes, instead of getting upset, we should look at the reason taxes will be raised, how the money will be spent. Ultimately, it's about keeping Singapore successful and giving Singaporeans a bright future.

PM Lee on raising taxes during the PAP Convention

On raising taxes:

PM Lee said at the PAP Convention that government spending has gone up, and is expected to rise further in the days ahead.

The Government has enough revenue for the current term of government but as spending goes up, Finance Minister Heng Swee Keat was right to say that it will be a matter of 'when' and not 'whether' taxes will go up. 

"WELL BEFORE THE TIME COMES, we have to plan ahead, explain to Singaporeans what the money is needed for, and show how it will benefit everyone, young and old," said Mr Lee.

In the past few years, the Government has been pumping in money to develop different schemes and programmes that will help enhance Singapore's competitiveness, while creating more opportunities and jobs for Singaporeans.

This includes a $4.5 billion Industry Transformation Programme, which provides support to firms and industries while driving innovation.

On the infrastructure end, additional MRT lines like the Thomson-East Coast Line are in the works to form a more connected and resilient train network. Other policies for childcare and the elderly will also require funds.

A thirst for learning

A thirst for learning and a relentless drive to improve. He learned how to use the computer at age 70.

At 19, Mr Lee Kuan Yew taught himself Mandarin through two sets of books “Mandarin Made Easy” by Chiang Ker Chiu, and a 4-volume booklet produced by the Prinsep Street Chinese School, teaching Chinese through English. 

In 6 months, he had learned to write 2,000 characters, and understand their meanings as individual words and in some phrases. But he could not speak Mandarin.

In the 1955 general elections where he contested in Tanjong Pagar.he made his first speech in Mandarin.

I got a friendly reporter from Sin Pao, Jek Yeun Thong, to write him a 1-page speech.

He spoke to a crowd of over 20,000 people and was barely understood. But the crowd was with him and they cheered me.

Elected as an Assemblyman and being Secretary-General of People’s Action Party, he decided to learn Mandarin, both spoken and written, so that he could understand and speak to the people around him

He studied for 1 hour every day during lunch. His teacher was a young pro-communist activist from his branch. The text books were Marxism made easy in Chinese.

By the May 1959 general elections, 4 years after his first Mandarin speech at Kreta Ayer, he was able to make Mandarin speeches off the cuff.

In 1961 PAP’s best Hokkien speaker, Ong Eng Guan resigned his seat in Hong Lim.

" Goh Keng Swee came to see me in my office at the City Hall, dolefully, he looked me in the eye and said, 'Learn Hokkien, you be our Hokkien speaker, no other way'. I did so, furiously and assiduously, spending 1-2 hours a day in between my work as PM.

After a few weeks I made my first Hokkien speech based on my Mandarin and the snatches of Hokkien I remembered from my youth.

My teacher was Radio Singapore producer of Hokkien programmes, Seah Cheng Tit. His enthusiasm and skills plus my determination and total concentration, made for progress.

My first street rally in China Street was unforgettable. The little kids around the lorry from which I spoke, laughed hilariously as I spoke in Hokkien.

I took them seriously. I said, children don’t laugh I want to learn in order to speak to you because I have something important to say to you. At the end of 3 months by polling day of that by-election campaign I had mastered enough basic Hokkien to stop them laughing at me." - Lee Kuan Yew, speech in Parliament, 24 Nov 2004

COMPLACENCY is our enemy

COMPLACENCY is our enemy.

Complacency sets in WHEN THINGS ALWAYS BECOME BETTER.

During the last 50 years of nation building, things got better and better even though in between, there were some crises such as the Sars crisis, Asian financial crisis and the global financial meltdown. 

The Singapore Government had handled each of the crises well - enough to shield Singaporeans from their full impact so that many cannot even name the crises that have blown over.

Has success allowed complacency to set in?

Is the state of affairs in SMRT confined to itself, or a manifestation of the complacency that has crept into the general population?

Perhaps it is time to pause and ask ourselves, as individuals, if we are still setting high standards for ourselves. Are we putting in our best efforts and doing justice to the tasks we have been assigned and entrusted with?

Complacency is the path to failure. A certain amount of paranoia is necessary for survival. Being paranoid keeps complacency at bay. Time to take stock.