Establishing worthwhile leadership
We have had a single party
dominate our lives with little opportunity for polyvalency. In their drive for
inherited succession, they have shut too many good people out. For the good of
the country, this needs to change. The PAP’s singular grasp has already limited
diversity in representation, in socio-political thought, and in political
strength. Just ask how many non-Chinese Permanent Secretaries we have. Not
many. Why? Majority-minority ethnic preferentialism? Then, compare that to the
ethnic Chinese who have served as Law Minister. Meritocracy? Expedience? Ask
the same question again! And never mind ethics and right and wrong. Never mind
the wives who were recruited into governing positions. Just to be ‘balanced’
would go a long way.
For starters, we would begin to
see things without a dominant perspective over our shoulders – political,
ethnic, whatever. What we have now is just more of the same. We have dominant
Party members falling asleep in Parliament. Is there any better demonstration
of a reality that says ‘I’m not supposed to make much of a difference, I just
need to be here.’ (to show my face!) Could it be any worse? What we have is a
dominant, institutionalized party that manages a seemingly subservient
diversity. That is not much use. We have been captive to a weak plea of
vulnerability that has been used to justify hegemony. Managing the well-being of
a country effectively requires more than token justification. Ultimate
decisions concerning political liability are decided by Parliament, not by the
Courts. Uh huh. What should be done? Perhaps we should vote in all of our
Opposition Party leaders, together with their strongest party members into Parliament? Would that create a balanced
diversity? With no unknown salary arrangements,
no ‘kakinang’ appointments, no Parliament sessions guaranteeing the truth of a
disputed issue, no…….aiyah, never mind, lah. The people’s wellbeing is at stake
– and that’s where the real vulnerability is. No time to play ‘hero lai liao’
(hero coming now) political leadership games. That was always a Tarzan movie
fantasy in the 1950’s! It is up to the common people to change things for the
better. And we can do it if we work together. Cohesively. The greatness of
being small is that you can move fast when you want to if you have the will.
Elected leaders need to make time to
learn what the challenges are and what their individual strengths are. That is
the sacrifice of time and effort required - to learn how to do the job well.
This is eminently doable in a small place.
And if you’re learning on the job, then you should work twice as hard.
No time for being a glorified ‘flyboy’ and treating meetings outside the
country as a travel perk. The world needs limits on such leadership styles, and
more Zoom meetings would be a start. Time and tax dollars get wasted and
nothing improves. People come dressed up, talk, eat and go home. Where is the
accountability on real progress? Oh, we made great progress. Really? And what
does the reporting on it reveal, if anything at all? These days, depends on who
controls the narrative! Ah, yes. Leadership
training for political leaders does not exist anywhere. For us, Ministers
doubling up is simply futile and for show. All we have ever had are jacks of
all trades, masters of none!
We did better when we brought in good local private sector leadership.
Like Richard Hu from Shell Corporation. But we didn’t maintain that
effort. Richard came into Finance and
was good. Then when Peter (Chen) retired
as CEO from Shell and came in, he didn’t stay beyond his first term. Why? I have used the word ‘kakinang’ here and
there but have not done so lightly. Some candidates lost at Election time, only
to return to be fielded again, until they eventually got into Parliament and
then down the road, were appointed Minister even. Others have not. One of the most regrettable
losses was that of Seet Ai Mee, who would have been a leader of considerable
accomplishment. Never returned to the field. Why? As her Pastor of several years,
I knew her well. Even the hand-washing story involving her which was made an
issue of at election time, was handled by Goh Chok Tong in very weak fashion,
something she even described as an own goal.16
And what did other prominent persons have to say about such progression or lack
thereof? Not much, and I knew quite a few. Same church stomping ground. So much
for shared values and community and Christian contributions to politics.
We failed big tent togetherness when we had the chance. A few marvelous
exceptions here and there, like Phil Yeo. But not enough. As time passed,
prospects seemed to thin, and we went the ‘kakinang’ route? And to say ‘now
you’re a leader, go lead!’ makes it work? You might remember my earlier
comments on the education minister in discussing the PISA illusion. Nothing
personal. But did he know what he was talking about? No. No time to learn. So
go out and say something that sounds good. Just be aware of the optics. And
we’re already blind, as is. Same with the Deputy Director-General of Education
at the time. No idea at all about what he was saying. And the Director-General
of Education? Ah, that was Ho Peng, Ho Ching’s sister. (Ho Ching = the then
Prime Minister’s wife).
Nor will the SAFOS ‘General’ notion help us much. We’re just maintaining
comfort levels for a select few. Look back at the section on meritocracy in Ch
10. To begin with, many with the right connections have been awarded
Presidential scholarships, in some cases even
by father to son. And have they served the people? Or are they too busy
being comfortable, while the unconnected but caring and intelligent never have
a chance? There has not been a single successful SAFOS recipient who has
done great things in the civil service. Of course you can mention former
Rear Admiral Lui Tuck Yew, who, after his LTA (Land Transport Authority)
‘leadership’, has gone from one Ambassador post to another. Not necessarily an
indicator of great achievement. Our idea of greatness? What to do now, in the
face of the failure of the cross-functional scheme? Let the Opposition
parties find others, for they have many? Get every Opposition leader elected?
They will do better because they’re more intelligent? Maybe. Probably more like
they will have a different motivation towards serving the people and the
country, sufficiently different enough to enable them to make the right
decisions for the people’s well-being. And they will learn as they go. Ken J,
Soon Juan, Cheng Bock, Lim Tean, Pritam, Harpreet, and so many others, too many
to name. Then some positive change can happen, as we reshape the lay of the
land, piece by piece. Enough of selective playing at political leadership. Our
children’s children cannot afford that.
As a bit of closure, I walked the ground one last time. The physical
appearance of the roads, the trees and the unending apartment buildings, all
continue to be neat, orderly and impressive. But that orderliness has
insidiously extended itself over time into both mind and personality with a
certain repression, so that incoming newbies wreak a fair amount of havoc as
they ignore established behavioral norms! Trash everywhere along the Jurong
roads. And we are already a hotter city, as is.
One early morning in the heart of town, having coffee with an old friend
after a late night, there is a commotion at a lounge entrance across the road
from where we are sitting. 2 guys and a girl emerge; some feisty words are
exchanged, and then one guy grabs a trash can and trashes the other guy. Man,
he didn’t see that coming! I start laughing.
RK, cool drummer and old friend who taught me a neat chord sequence when
I was a young guitarist, says stop for God’s sake don’t laugh they’ll come over
here. A police car passes by but apparently does not see them. The trashed guy
moans in a corner. I’m still laughing. The trasher grabs the girl and goes back
in. It was funny. The movies have come to town, I guess. But that’s what
we’ve become now? Global city? Nah, that one just reminded me of a house party
in off-beat cha-cha days! Someone would get either pissed or pissed off,
someone would get called out, and a bicycle chain or something would come out.
Lots of gangs in those days. Has much changed?
In the
end, every Country needs global vision and perspective, and both emerge out of
real identity. We had real identity. Our government mucked it up. Now that identity
founders. We traded in our developing social ethnicity for a ‘global city’ notion
with PRC and CECA folks awash, and got what? An ongoing elite who keeps saying
its all fine and good? We just need to
talk less and start improving things. Perhaps there is still a chance that we
can show the world what harmony in a small multi-ethnic multi-religious place
can be. But it will need leadership with vision, commitment, and really hard
work.
Your call, Singapore.
