Closing Statement by RADM Teo Chee Hean, Minister for Education and Second Minister for Defence at Parliament on 6 May 1999.


Mr Speaker Sir

First, I would like to thank Prime Minister Goh for expressing the Government's strong support and acceptance of the report. This is a strong signal of the Government's commitment for the public sector to work hand-in-hand with the people sector and the private sector to achieve the vision of Singapore 21.

I wish to thank all the Members who have spoken in support of the motion for their strong endorsement of the vision set out in the report. I appreciate the time and effort that members have taken, not just to read the report, but to study it and provide their own views and interpretations of what this Vision means to them. This Vision provides a compass, the guideposts as we move forward into the 21st Century. Our discussions in this House have given more substance, fleshed out the ideas, and will contribute towards making this Vision a reality.


In Good Times and in Difficult Times

Sir, when the Prime Minister asked for this Committee to be set up in August 1997, this was before we felt the effects of the economic crisis. Our concerns then were how to retain our sense of belonging as a nation and our sense of mutual obligation to each other as Singaporeans during a period of heady, rapid growth which some thought would carry on indefinitely. Singaporeans had become obsessed with material possessions and pursued self-interest above a sense of community and regard and responsibility towards their fellow Singaporeans. The kiasu Singaporean was becoming the icon epitomising the worst traits of the ugly Singaporean.

Just as the S21 Committee started its work, we were beset by the regional economic crisis. We asked ourselves whether our work had any more relevance - whether the search to strengthen our 'Heartware' was a luxury to be pursued in good times, but to be set aside for other priorities during difficult times. But as we proceeded, we concluded that the economic crisis itself brought valuable lessons for 'Heartware'.

The crisis brought to the fore issues such as the dilemma over attracting foreign talent. It made the arguments on both sides of the debate sharper and more heated. But it helped to clarify the issues for many Singaporeans and brought home how important being open to foreign talent is for creating opportunities for our future.

The crisis magnified the stress on Singaporeans as their jobs and incomes came under threat. The crisis opened up the question of whether Singaporeans would flee in times of crisis for greener and safer shores, or whether they would stay and tough it out to build our future.

The crisis demonstrated how countries whose 'Heartware' was weak would descend quickly into the darkness of burning and killing at the slightest provocation over racial and religious issues.

On Tuesday, Mrs Lim Hwee Hua described how our 'Heartware' helped us to withstand the economic crisis. Observers have noted how we stood together as Singaporeans, and even lent a helping hand to those facing difficulties in the region, as others around us crumbled and faltered.

We are now coming full circle. This debate comes at a time when the economy is showing signs of recovery. As the economy recovers, we must continue to strengthen our Heartware both in good times as well as in difficult times.


A State but not yet a Nation

Sir, yesterday the Prime Minister reminded us that we are a state, but not yet a nation. He put this debate on S21 in perspective. Nation building in an on-going task. It is the work of many generations. Our people are made up of different strands, with different languages, cultures and religions. These strands will not dissolve into one indistinguishable mass, nor would we want this to be so. We are closer today as a people than when we started out as a country 33 years ago. But we should not try to homogenize everyone. As the Prime Minister said we should maximize the area of overlap, while leaving enough space for each group to grow.

Each community wants to retain a connection with its roots. But we also need a unifying vision to draw these strands together - to give us a common goal, a common purpose that we can strive towards together as a nation.

Multi-racialism, meritocracy and incorruptibility have been the cornerstones on which our country is built. On top of these we can add another layer, the five key ideas of Singapore 21 to guide us into the future - Every Singaporean Matters, Strong Families, Opportunities for All, The Singapore Heartbeat and Active Citizenship.


The People's Vision

Sir, the Singapore 21 Vision is the people's vision.

From the outset the Committee set out to consult widely. The five subject committees comprised 77 people from all walks of life. Many people contributed their views and ideas. We counted up 6,000. The names of the people and organisations which contributed are listed in the book. We could not count all, and I apologise to those that we inadvertently missed out.

They include ITE students, professionals and volunteers who have devoted their whole lives to serving others. The media covered many of these sessions. As Mr Zulkifli Baharuddin has mentioned, the Feedback Unit devoted many sessions, over a year, to the five dilemmas. We had TV and radio forums.

I wrote to every Member of this House more than one year ago on 18 March 1998 to request their inputs. I received many thoughtful responses, some running into dozens of pages. Some members even organised discussion sessions and forums to gather feedback so that the views of other concerned Singaporeans could be reflected. Members of this House were sent in advance, draft copies of the report before it was launched by the Prime Minister.

I am therefore puzzled when Mr Chiam and Mr Jeyeratnam seem unaware of this process. Mr Jeyeratnam says that he did not read the report. Neither responded when I requested their views one year ago.

But Sir, this does raise an important point. What does consultation and building consensus mean? In a country with 3 million people, what does consulting 6,000 mean?

The process of coming up with the Singapore 21 report is in itself an example of the possibilities and the limitations of consultation. It was quite an exercise for the 77 subject committee members to consult and solicit feedback as widely as we did. The subject committee members spent countless hours discussing with various groups of people. We had over 80 forums and discussion sessions. In the time we had, more than a year, we managed to have reasonably substantive discussions with some 6,000 Singaporeans. Each of them I have no doubt represents and reflects the views of many more Singaporeans.

But can you speak to every one of our 3 million Singaporeans in every consultation exercise, not just in Singapore but in very corner of the globe? Irene Ng in her column "S21: Not all hearts and minds engaged" in the Straits Times of Tuesday 4 May, recounted a feedback session she attended in London. According to her, a querulous lady demanded to know at this feedback session in London why she had not been consulted by the establishment for her views before?

Sir, it is obviously not possible on every issue to consult every Singaporean directly. But every Singaporean can provide feedback and express his views. They need not be weighty national issues. As any MP will know, constituents regularly provide feedback and suggestions on municipal issues - should a bush be removed because it obstructs the view of drivers and pedestrians, can the timing of the traffic lights at a junction be adjusted.

So it has been with Singapore 21. We consulted as many as we could directly. And every Member of this House, every Singaporean, was invited to send in his views. That is consultation and feedback.

What about building consensus? During the consultation process, among all the ideas and views expressed, a few surfaced again and again. These ideas eventually became the five key ideas of the Singapore 21 Vision. Not every one might have agreed with them initially, and even at the end not every one might agree with them completely. But that is part of the process. These are the possibilities and the limitations of consultation and consensus building.

With a Vision to guide us and a willingness to build a consensus, we can pull together as one people. We can work towards becoming a symphony - playing in harmony; rather than a cacophony - producing a discordant and meaningless mixture of sounds with each stubbornly insisting on playing to his own tune. That is the difference between a society based on a Vision of consensus rather than a Vision based on contention.


Social Tripartism

Sir, we have achieved economic success through tripartism. Workers, employers and government work together to create a conducive business environment, and create good jobs for workers, allowing the whole country to enjoy economic growth.

Mr Ahmad Magad spoke about the Singapore 21 Vision calling for a new tripartism - a new tripartism this time in the social sphere: the people sector, public sector and private sector working together.

This is a compelling vision with people sector organisations, public sector organisations and private sector organisations taking a step forward together, reaching out to each other and looking for ways in which they can work with each other to strengthen the social capital, the Heatware, of Singapore. WHAT'S NEXT?

Mr Speaker Sir, several members have asked, "So what's next?" Some Members, Mr Chew Heng Chin, Dr Lily Neo, have asked that government should take the lead in implementing Singapore 21.

On the part of the government, the public sector has already been asked to review its policies and programmes, to ensure that they are aligned to the Singapore 21 vision. But should the government do more? Left to itself, the momentum of the Singapore 21 vision created by the debate in this House may slacken and dissipate because of the diversity of issues and interests. I would therefore propose that the government also play the role of facilitator for Singapore 21 to guide the process along, and provide the necessary support.

I have consulted the Prime Minister on this, and the Prime Minister has agreed. Once the House endorses the Singapore 21 vision, the Prime Minister will ask Minister of State for Defence Mr David Lim to consult with various stakeholders of Singapore 21 - the people sector, the private sector and the public sector - to see how their initiatives can be facilitated to make Singapore 21 a reality. This could take the form of a Singapore 21 Facilitation Committee. Its task is not to implement the Singapore 21 vision. Rather it would help to strengthen and sustain the process of active citizenship, and to provide encouragement and visibility for the efforts by the people, private and public sectors as they work to make Singapore 21 a reality.

Sir, Singapore 21 involves, individuals, families, the community and the nation. Singapore 21 is not the responsibility of any one person or body or agency. It is the responsibility of everybody, every agency, every Singaporean, to interpret these key ideas and translate them into plans and actions. Only then can Singapore 21 become a reality.

I urge members of this House to take this message to their constituencies, and to stress these key ideas in their constituency activities and functions. I ask those contributing their time in the people sector, those serving in the public and private sectors to consider how they can work more closely together. All these will help make Singapore 21 a reality. DPM BG Lee, in his address to senior civil servants on 29 March 1999 has already asked the public service to consider how to build the ideas of Singapore 21 into their programmes.

I urge every Singaporean to re-examine himself, his goals, his attitudes to success, his attitudes to his family and fellow Singaporeans; and to come forward to play a greater role in community life. Mr Chan Soo Sen put it nicely in Confucian terms. We also heard stories from the Ramayana. Other Members, Dr Teo Ho Pin, Dr Toh See Kiat, came up with their own views on what the ideal Singaporean should be. Prof Chin Tet Yung put it succintly. Every Singaporean, any Singaporean, can lead a happy, successful and fulfilling life. He can be a good parent, a good neighbour, and an active citizen. And he can say that in all this, he did his best.


Conclusion

Sir, it leaves me now to once again thank members of the House for supporting the S21 vision so enthusiastically, and for providing such thoughtful insights. I also wish to thank all the members of the S21 Committee who have worked for over a year to bring clarity and focus to the varied views which they have heard from Singaporeans from all walks of life.

After today, we will move on to the next phase - a far more challenging phase - of turning this vision into reality. In the past few days we have heard heartwarming stories. Mr Bernard Chen spoke of how his father came to regard Singapore as home. We are glad that he did, and fortunate that he did as Singapore is the better by two members of this House. Members have shared with us their innermost thoughts and personal feelings as they struggled with their own dilemmas. Let these stories from the past be held up as good examples for all of us - committed, active citizens. And let the icon of the Kiasu Singaporean fade into 20th Century history, and in its place emerge the Active Singaporean - the Singaporean of the 21st Century. Beyond looking out for ourselves, every Singaporean must look out for the larger Singaporen family.

It is my hope that every Singaporean, each in his own way, will stand up and be counted, and find a way to make a difference to his family, his neighbourhood, his community, and our country. There can be no effort too small or insignificant. And in the process, we would have built a better future for ourselves and our children. Let us all work together to translate the S21 Vision into reality.

Thank you.