To: cc: (bcc: NHB NASReg/NHB/SINGOV) Subject: Statement by PM Goh at Parliament, 30 June 2000 Singapore Government MEDIA RELEASE Media Division, Ministry of Information and the Arts, 140 Hill Street #02-02 MITA Building Singapore 179369. Tel: 837 9666 ==================================================================== For assistance call 837 9666 ==================================================================== SPRInter 4.0, Singapore's Press Releases on the Internet, is located at: http://www.gov.sg/sprinter/ ==================================================================== STATEMENT BY PRIME MINISTER GOH CHOK TONG ON CIVIL SERVICE NWC AWARD, PUBLIC SECTOR SALARY REVISIONS, AND REVIEW OF SALARY BENCHMARKS, IN PARLIAMENT ON FRIDAY, 30 JUNE 2000 Cost of Good Government and Price of Bad Government In 1966, the Government sent me to study Development Economics in Williams College in the US. It was a special course for officials from developing countries. I was then a young officer working in the Economic Planning Unit. 2 My class of 20 came from 16 different countries in Asia, Africa, Latin America and southern Europe. 3 We were taught theories of economic development, quantitative programming and other useful subjects. But what we were not taught was the importance of good government as a pre-condition for sustained economic development. This was assumed. But alas, it was an assumption that did not hold true for most of the countries represented in my class. What has happened to these countries since then is instructive. 4 For example, three of the countries have broken up – Pakistan, Ethiopia and Yugoslavia. Nine countries have experienced civil wars, social upheavals or violent changes of government at some stage in the last 35 years – Philippines, India, Egypt, Uganda, Liberia, Mexico, Colombia, Bolivia and Honduras. 5 That leaves only four countries out of the 16 represented in my class without severe political and social strife – Kenya, Tanzania, Malaysia and Singapore. Kenya and Tanzania are not exactly models of economic growth. 6 If I were to do a Ph.D, I would study the relationship between economic development and the quality of government. 7 Empirically, there is clearly a close correlation between the economic performance of a country and the quality of its government. The more competent the government, the higher the economic growth of the country when measured over a long period of time. 8 There are, of course, other reasons why some countries do better than others, why their economies grow faster, why their people enjoy a higher standard of living, and why they have peace and stability. 9 These include a country’s natural resources, its location, and its people. All these are important factors no doubt, but I believe my Ph.D thesis will conclude that the most important factor behind a country’s economic performance and the standard of living it can provide its people, is the quality of the political leaders. 10 There is much wisdom in an old saying that an army of sheep led by a lion is stronger than an army of lions led by a sheep. The former will function as an effective unit. The latter will end up with the lions fighting amongst themselves and the sheep being eaten. People are no different. They have to be led. A people led by a superior government can produce exceptional results. On the other hand, an able people led by a mediocre government will underperform. Worse, if they are led by a fanatical government which fears being challenged, clever people might even lose their heads. 11 Cambodia is a tragic example. Pol Pot and his Khmer Rouge killed off millions of their own people. 12 Uganda is another example. Under Idi Amin, it lost many of its talents. My friend from Williams College, a native Ugandan, had to flee the country. Ugandans of Indian origin who ran the economy were chased out. Today, 21 years after the end of Idi Amin’s reign, Uganda is still suffering from his misrule. 13 India has millions of talented people. Silicon Valley is full of Indians. Indian Singaporeans have contributed significantly to our development. Yet India remains a poor country. It is weighed down by a bureaucratic leadership that prevents India from performing to its full potential. 14 I believe that India is capable of achieving much more. When I was in India in January this year, I put this question to several Indian leaders when we discussed the importance of talents. To what extent of its potential is India performing today? 15 Their estimate was 30 to 40 percent. Good Government 16 Different people will have different definitions of a good government. My own criteria for a good government are: (1) It must be honest, fair and just. (2) It must be capable of forging national consensus and social cohesion, and willing to take painful decisions for the overall good. (3) It must be able to anticipate the future to head off problems and be nimble enough to adapt and seize opportunities when circumstances change. In times of crises, it must be resourceful enough to overcome them. And, (4) It must be able to improve the standard of living of its people, maximize their potential and involve them in building a better society. 17 I have led this Government for 10 years now. How it has performed is for you to judge, by my criteria or by whatever criteria you choose. In particular, scrutinize our performance in the last 5 years from the time we argued in this House that Ministers and civil servants must be paid market-based wages. Has the performance of my Government justified its wage? 18 Compare the salaries of Ministers and senior civil servants with the benefits you receive from having a good government. Look at it from the viewpoint of results, that is, the value of output and not the cost of inputs alone. Has my Government given you “safe homes, stable jobs and fuel to dream of all the tomorrows?”, as a member of the public put it. She wrote to express her appreciation for my “keeping the country well oiled and well run”. 19 You might not have systematically evaluated the performance of the Singapore Government, but many international consultancies have. 20 I would like to refer to some of these professional third-party evaluations, not to blow our trumpets, but to underline the value of a good government. 21 First, Singapore's economic competitiveness. This year, for the seventh year running, the International Institute for Management Development in its annual World Competitiveness Yearbook ranked Singapore the world's second most competitive economy after the US. Another think-tank, the World Economic Forum, thinks we have done better. In its 1999 Global Competitiveness Report, it ranked Singapore as the world's most competitive economy for the fourth year in a row. 22 Both analyses regard the effectiveness of government policies as a key factor contributing to the overall competitiveness of a country. In the World Competitiveness Yearbook, Singapore came out first on the extent to which government policies are conducive to competitiveness. In the Global Competitiveness Yearbook, Singapore was also ranked first in many areas of government, including economic policies and public sector competence. 23 The Straits Times and Zaobao recently carried a survey by the Political and Economic Risk Consultancy (PERC) on the quality of various Asian governments. The report by PERC showed Singapore to have the best quality of political leadership among the major economies of Asia. Singapore's economic policies were also deemed to be the most effective. The PERC report said, "A nation's per capita GDP is a good example of the effectiveness of a particular government's economic policies." It goes on to say that if it were to go back fifty years and pick those countries of Asia which would be dominant economies today, Singapore would have been considered an economic backwater compared to places such as Manila. But Marcos rode the Philippine economy into the ground, whereas Senior Minister guided Singapore to our achievements today in an "amazingly short period of time.” 24 Another PERC-produced report in March, Asian Intelligence, also reported that its respondents had "consistently rated Singapore as having one of the best bureaucracies in the region" and that "Singapore is widely regarded as a place where things get done, and get done efficiently." 25 But it is not only in the area of economic policy that international analysts have rated the Singapore Government highly. In "The Economic Freedom of the World: 2000 Annual Report", published by the CATO Institute in Washington DC and Canada's Fraser Institute, Singapore scored full marks for its legal structure and property rights. In PERC's Comparative Country Risk Report 2000, Singapore's judicial system maintained its top position in Asia. PERC commented, "Singapore's legal system has an excellent reputation among businessmen for being fair and effective, if a bit harsh at times." More recently, Lord Woolf, one of Britain's most senior judges, was so impressed by the smooth functioning of the Singapore judiciary that he wished the courts in his country would follow some of the processes here. 26 In the area of health, the World Health Organisation earlier this month assessed Singapore to have the world's sixth best performing health care system among 191 member states surveyed. 27 Our education system has also come in for praise from foreign experts. US Education Secretary Richard Riley, when he was in Singapore recently for the APEC Education Ministerial Meeting, commented that there was a lot the US could learn from Singapore's education system. In the third and latest International Mathematics and Science Study some years ago, Singapore’s 13- year olds came in first among 41 countries in their ability in science and mathematics.