I was the first person ever to complain that Singapore and DBS should be cultivating its own CEOs, way back in 2006 or so. Read my blogs. I was probably the first person to bring this up with key people in the industry.
It was Lee Kuan Yew who hastily hired John Olds, a retired JP Morgan investment banker who had never run a bank to turn DBS into something that he had not figured out for himself. At the time, LKY was going through this angst of how to take Singapore to the “next level”, heard ideas at JP Morgan Advisory Board meetings, and was clearly impatient. He probably met Olds in the elevator. Ambitious men make mistakes like these.
Many Singaporeans were very proud then, to have their top bank run by a white man from America. It fit the whole edifice. Singapore Inc. was doing well, Singaporeans were properly hired in the Singapore Inc. companies. At that time, DBS’ rank and file was made up of mostly endearing, embarrassing, comfortable, conformist, non-competitive luddites who would qualify as country bumpkins if this were a larger country, the result of years of pampering and strong economic growth. The head of retail in those days was the nicest little old lady I remember vividly, pompously quoted in the local newspapers on the eve of her retirement saying, “my father taught me never a lender nor a borrower be.”
I saw in Olds a retired man who had never run a bank before. He sure knew how to keep his mouth shut when he had no clue what he was dealing with. Olds left before he could be found out, recommending the first white man he could find. Philippe Paillart, who replaced Olds, was not difficult to find – he actually lived in Singapore for most of his professional life with Standard Chartered Bank. His son studied at NUS. A Singaporean without being one.
He was, without exaggeration, responsible for the careers of almost every single senior retail banker I knew in Singapore and the region from his Citibank and Standard Chartered days. He is still the personal mentor of so many Singaporean bankers today who eventually took leadership positions, and mine. He was also one of the main reasons DBS was able to walk into Hong Kong and buy Dao Heng Bank because very simply, he knew the family that owned it, and that acquisition gave DBS the break to become just that bit more the international bank it wanted to be. DBS Hong Kong is an anchor business for DBS today, generating the profits it sorely needs.
Philippe Paillart was the kind of reason Singapore Inc. hires foreigners, to help them accomplish something they can’t on their own. But Philippe was ousted by a testosterone-charged bunch of investment bankers and a board that didn’t quite like his personal style.
Curiously, Philippe was very quickly replaced by Jackson Tai, John Olds’ trusted lieutenant. By this time, the JP Morgan mafia was crawling on every wall in DBS. Tai was competent, but quite a character, an accountant with an attitude. He was one of those foreigners who would have never become CEO in his home country, but Singapore was generous, giving him DBS as his bar mitzvah gift. His wife never moved to Singapore, he lived in a hotel room, suitcase half packed and ready. This was the kind of “foreign talent” deal that should have made Singaporeans really angry with themselves, but the elites were very pleased, out of touch with the ground by this time.
After the JP Morgan clowns left town, we still kept up the white man fiction. Richard Stanley was someone I knew personally from his days in China. A most decent man at heart, but by this time, the dream of making DBS an international force had lost steam. It really did not matter if it was Richard or an untalented Singaporean as CEO.
We need to remember the plot – Singapore’s ambition at that time was to be international – to enter other people’s countries. By the time Piyush Gupta arrived on the scene, DBS had been without a real CEO for nearly two years. It was a serious problem. So it needed someone with an international experience and Piyush had worked in every country in the region, including Singapore, with outstanding references. Also, all banks everywhere were suffering from low price-to-book value. The increased capital requirements. The country needed someone who had the technical skills and instincts as a banker.
Piyush may not have been Singaporean, but he was absolutely at the point in his career to be a perfect fit for the bank of any country that needed to get to the next level, and that was what DBS wanted to be. The only Singaporean I would trust for that role at that point in time was Peter Seah, out-of-job as CEO after OUB was sold to UOB. But Peter was getting old, losing that fire in his belly, and chairmanship suited him better. So, I was delighted when I saw the two men I trusted formed a bond that has worked for Singapore since. Piyush gave Peter the energy and Peter gave Piyush the structure.
—————
The remarkable point about the rant that Leong Mun Wai, that unelected ex-banker, made on his maiden speech in parliament recently is that such chatter used to be found only in the disgruntled underbelly of society, in the internet underworld where the displaced whined endlessly, consoling each other with unsubstantiated assertions, never expecting to be taken seriously in the mainstream. Suddenly, they have a voice. Suddenly, they have to be taken seriously. To this man, Piyush will never be a Singaporean, even if he is one, and it does not cost him a cent to be this cruel.
The genius of racist people is that they are totally selective. He singled out Piyush, but remained silent on CEOs of other Singaporean institutions who are not Singaporean at all. But more importantly, he was silent on all the government-linked companies (GLCs) that do have his fellow Singaporeans as CEOs but that were seriously losing their way in a changing world. It is the elephant in the room, but no Singaporean I know has even started concpetualising how to discuss it.
A host of Singapore Inc. companies run by real, born-in-Singaporeans – Singtel, Keppel Corporation, Sembawang, SPH, Singapore Exchange etc. etc. are all floundering right now and yet nobody turns the story on its head and asks, “hey, what are our own people doing for us?” It is these companies that are shrinking right now. Go read the share price of each of these companies over the past two years – they have been on permanent decline long before the pandemic. Singapore is in serious trouble. They are broken, every single one of them and it’s a topic that requires urgent parliamentary debate.
There was a time when a Singaporean could join a Keppel Corporation or NTUC, speak Hokkien all day, compete on who has the stupidest domestic helper, have the kids walked to school, go to an airconditioned church on Sundays, eat chicken rice at the hawker centre and fly business class on company account just enough to qualify as PPS world traveler on Singapore Airlines every year. What a life. Well, that life has just come to an end because the Keppel Corporations of the world can’t hire everyone now. It is that Singapore has shrunk. DBS and CapitaLand are the only GLCs that have bucked the trend.
In the past, the Singaporean was content in letting armies of Indians and Australians work for the foreign banks and corporations at Changi Business Park because working for a foreign corporation was too troublesome. It involved moving the family, unable to get preferred schools for the kids and spending days in dingy hotels in lousy third world countries for weeks at a time. Singapore Inc. was humming along just fine, the salary was “fist world”, and “sorry, you want me to fly where?”
Every one of these Singapore Inc. corporations is broken, having lost the wind beneath their wings, clueless on where to pick up new wind from and it is truly frightening. Companies like SPH lost their core business, tried property for a while, lost that as well, and are floundering right now. This is where the loss of Singaporean jobs are coming from.
It’s a question that never made it to parliament because the people are still being told that everything is fine. Public officials falling over themselves to give report cards that everything is great. The entire system hardwired to be defensive. Yes, it is great that each of these companies had Singaporeans as CEOs, because now we can start by not blaming someone else for our predicament.
Nobody seems to be asking these Singapore Inc. corporations “what happened to our jobs?” because these are the companies quietly shedding real-life Singaporean jobs today. They also break the legs of Singaporean entrepreneurs by undercutting them on price. Nobody getting rich from the business they get from the GLCs.
For every Singapore Airlines you have an NOL, an unmitigated disaster for all the years it was run by the best Singaporean CEOs, you can name them one by one. Then it magically becomes profitable when a foreigner bought it. Nobody in Singapore would have known that it could be salvaged until it was, by a foreigner.
————
Still it is a good thing that this marginalised segment that Leong Mun Wai represents has a voice now that must be carried, no matter how gutter it is, because indeed they have been left out for too long. The entire conversation has to be re-stated but on inclusive terms, and it takes great leadership to do that. The only thing left for this tiny little country to do is to have an honest conversation. There is no need for the state to pretend it has all the answers to solve all problems. The disgruntled are not without the ability to be part of the solution.
It has been a long journey from the days when Lee Kuan Yew first raised the spectre of “foreign talent”, suggesting that Singaporeans are not good enough for their own country, and then parading pretenders like John Olds that the marginalised could only watch in despair. Not every leader gets it right the first time. The way to honour his intention is to do it again, but this time, carry the population along. This is a good opportunity to turn the topic on its head. It will give a very different tone to the idea of foreign talent and set it in perspective.
The world is changing so dramatically. Did Singapore even try to bring in the Teslas of the world? Do Singaporeans even know that the Thai stock exchange is now larger than SGX? A politically dysfunctional country mocking an otherwise socially cohesive Singapore which is supposed to be a regional financial centre. The SGX does not need to be defensive of the fact that it is now broken, having lost the MSCI Index business to Hong Kong. There are so many geo-political challenges today. The conversation alone can draw up ideas for the future.
Without a strong stock exchange it is impossible to give rise to the next generation of Singaporean billionaires – the current lot are mostly imported foreigners and old time property developers from a past era, not a single neighbourhood boy made good on technology, or a crazy new budget airline. The most prized businesses are all state-owned, and floundering. A Temasek rather invest in a Jetstar JV than allow a Singaporean aviation man become a billionaire. In the US and China, people don’t mind being hopelessly poor as long as they keep hearing stories of a neighbour’s kid making it big.
These can no longer be defensive decisions made in secret. These are now issues to be discussed in public to fire up the imagination of the ordinary Singaporean to be part of the solution, not part of the problem for a brand new world. When we don’t discuss these things in public, we end up leaving the average Singaporean with nothing to discuss except for what they see in front of them, foreigners taking their jobs away.
Singapore is a very small country. A leadership that speaks truthfully and plainly to its people can easily win the energy of the people against insurmountable odds. Generating public relations defensively just to justify doing their over-paid jobs delays the real conversations that need to be had. It is also selfish. The EDB would have done better if it had reported in May just how difficult finding new foreign MNCs has been instead of setting its own moving annual targets ($10b, no, $13b, no, $15b?) and reporting tentative investments of existing corporations as new just to keep up appearances. The MAS would have done better to point out that the so-called fintech investment deals this year are mostly distressed deals at a haircut instead of releasing numbers designed to protect its fintech staff. For what purpose?
People become confused when their experiences of joblessness is different from what they read in the newspapers. The majority of Singaporeans are now mature enough to want to be in on the conversation, of how the old formula of inviting MNCs to bring their capital has run its course. The Singaporean, brought up to believe that he is the best in all the rankings has no clue why the world has changed on him in this way. He has no idea that whatever he can do, others can do cheaper from anywhere else in the world, with or without a degree from the “best universities” in Asia (enough of these damn rankings).
Singapore does not have the option of a Japan, a country of 125 million, to go insular and circulate within its own economy for 20 years. Even that Japan has become desperate now, releasing the floodgates for Chinese nationals because it needs the inward migration to fund its anemic economy at great cost to its own people. Oh, but the Singaporean does not know all that yet, do they?
————–
Singapore has the unenviable task of reinventing itself in the harshest possible way. The entire Singapore Inc. “wealth-property-SME-corporation-stock exchange-banking-reserves” nexus is straining for a brave and smart Singaporean to try a new paradigm, and to do it in such a way that even if it fails several times, he or she carries the whole society with him or her.
The US and China are currently pouring money they don’t have in propping up their respective domestic markets and changing the rules of finance while Singaporeans are being lectured top-down on the importance of preserving “reserves” that generate almost nothing investing in other people’s economies. A country where buying property is the only way left to become rich is a walking time-bomb, it is a society that feeds on itself, as valuations are inflated artificially to maintain the financial system.
Yes, of course Piyush has to eventually hand over the leadership of DBS to a Singaporean Chinese. But even there, I have stated very clearly in a previous blog why some personalities will not be a good choice for CEO, even if they are great people personally. The personalities I have mentioned in my previous blogs are all good people. Even great in their respective areas of specialties. I was scolded by two people that I might be demeaning some. It is not my intention to get personal or put any of them down. Leadership of a country or a complex organisation in a changing world is not a managerial role for which you can be trained.
I know this from my personal friendships, interacting with a wide variety of personalities in the finance industry, that there is an instinct that is required to manage a complex institution like a bank. I have seen at a very personal level with banks as mighty as Wells Fargo, RBS and Deutsche Bank, how when you get the nicest personality wrong, the bank can lose its way for years to come and damage even the entire country. I know the characters in some of these sad stories personally. For all their geniuses, they can be flawed people, just like Liew Mun Leong, you and me. This is why I make no apology to call out arrogance, hubris and stupidity in the industry, because I know that at the end of the day, I won’t be the fool. The share price of DBS can slide irreversibly, and cause the bank to shed more Singaporeans from their jobs and exacerbate the social wound the country already has.
The truth is also that as soon as Piyush steps down as CEO, the banking industry as a whole will be undergoing yet the next stage of its transformation. It is not going back to the days of John Olds. This is not a matter of taking over “where Piyush left off”. This is not a laundry shop. There is no “management training” for this role. It will be a different business tomorrow.
The entire construction of DBS right now is a reflection of Piyush’s personal mental energy. The businesses in India and Indonesia are not line items on the balance sheet. They are carried by the sheer will power of the CEO. The next CEO might see these businesses as huge costs that he does not want to carry. He or she may want to carry other risks, other priorities that suites their fancy, and justify them as “strategy”. You can train 1000 managers, but choosing a leader in a changing world is about making a bet on one man’s or woman’s instincts honed over a lifetime of experience, over another, and you live with those choices.
I know that Piyush always talks about “innovation” to everyone, but I argue that Piyush is one of the greatest old fashioned bankers of our times, whose instincts for the traditional business of banking is the best there is. I know nobody believes me when I say this. For all its rhetoric of technology and innovation, DBS still makes 60% of its money from the net interest margin that the MAS generously allows the local banks to keep, and that is where the bank will suffer when it does. All the fintech indulgences are no more, no less, than the bank next door. Please hate me for saying this, but I fight very hard to put huge egos in context here.
The new challenge has not even started yet. He has held his ship together very well for what it was in its time. Whoever takes over Piyush will have zero tuition for what is to come. I had warned in my blog in December last year that DBS will start looking very different when zero interest rate starts setting in. Guess what – it is here now, arriving earlier than even I would have thought, and nobody has had any training on how to chart a path forward. Only the MAS can protect DBS, as it has, and even then for a short while.
————
The question that the Chinese Singaporeans should be asking themselves is “where is the Piyush Gupta of Singapore” amongst us? Where is the Singaporean who uprooted his family, travelled to many different countries at great personal cost, had ambitions without a border, did not care what people thought about his accent or colour, was assessed on his task one day at a time, developed the vision and passion, made his fair share of valuable mistakes and is then at the right time in the right place in his career to take on the opportunity to lead DBS when the time comes? If we only we knew one Singaporean who was half of who Piyush is in banking.
But guess what. Singapore did have its “Piyush Guptas” in the 1980s. Peter Seah, Wong Nang Jang and a series of top-class Singaporeans I can recall all worked for the same international banks in the 1970s-1980s, just like Piyush. Peter Seah will tell you stories of how he had to retrench staff in an overseas branch at the tender age of 28 or so. They would have easily been the world-class CEOs that Singapore needs to have. But they had it easy. As Singapore became more comfortable, they came back to Singapore and took jobs in local banks, mostly so that they could put their own children through local schools and raised a family. There was no need for passion. I also told someone recently that I thought Lee Ah Boon would have made a good CEO, so blame Lee Ah Boon for being too comfortable, cherry-picking problem solving roles, instead of rising for his nation.
Ah, but then there was also my rascal friend, Edmund Koh, all that energy messing around with sedentary positions in Singapore for many years, until the big break came for him to enter the world of international CEOs – a three year stint in Taiwan, leaving family behind in Singapore. I have watched a few friends make that transition in their lifetime, from manager to boss. Today he is CEO of UBS Asia Pacific, and rightly deserved, because he shamelessly told his bosses he wanted that position and went out to make it happen.
No, he was not on any MAS international experience subsidy nonsense – a sinful waste of taxpayers money on an industry whose professionals get paid in one month what the average Singaporean gets paid in 1-2 years. No other country baby-sits their already highly paid people like Singapore does and with dismal returns. You’d think that it produces leaders, no only babies addicted to the state. The best negotiate their own destinies. I keep a tab on the current generation of Singaporeans I can see who have that same gumption, Jessica Tan, Tan Choon Hin, the rare exception, not even a competitive minority you can choose from. Sometimes, a country has to be totally dysfunctional to bring out the best in its people, get their arses kicked to sharpen their edge.
The smartest in China today also stay at home, because it is a hugely successful and comfortable country. That is why you don’t hear about too many Chinese leaders of US corporations, because the best are all in China. As the Chinese economy slows, they too will be looking abroad for solutions. Same with the Japanese. The smartest Indians don’t have that choice. The fact that they build such skills in a dysfunctional state makes them twice as valuable. So they travel around the world with all that energy.
Yes, there is a garden snail variety of expatriate Indians, a thoroughly annoying breed in the US as in Singapore, who form ghettos and leech on other societies and still claim their home country is better. Just like the garden snail variety of Australians, unable to get jobs back in their home country but everything about their host country is wrong, if you noticed. But the best ones from any large country, no matter how dysfunctional, India or China or Indonesia or Brazil, are world-class and we under-estimate them at our own expense.
The funny thing about this “Best Bank in the World” nonsense that Piyush pushes is that it distracts totally from the fact that DBS is actually a very good bank. The same so-called “Global Finance” marketing company that gave DBS its award also invented other fictitious titles like “The World’s Best Internet Bank for Malaysia” for Maybank at the same time. I had given my assessment on this nonsense in a previous post.
Our own research shows that Singapore has two other very good banks, UOB and OCBC to keep DBS honest, privately owned but doing just as well. If you notice, both UOB and DBS have had almost identical share prices track record in the past three years. Go check. In fact, this year, our own very thorough, transparent and published research found that UOB is the best retail bank in Singapore because of several clear reasons. Not DBS. Singaporeans know this – DBS does not even have simple innovations like cardless ATMs that UOB and OCBC do, and that is only the tip of the legacy issues it has. Click here to read our report.
We were also the first to publish a survey on COVID response of banks – on this one DBS did very well but only for Singapore, because they were deploying government guaranteed loans. DBS could not come close to matching that of Standard Chartered Bank, which set aside $1 billion of loans, not guaranteed by any government, for COVID-response lending worldwide.
This kind of hyperbole, the “world’s best bank in the country”, attracts beleaguered banks from third world countries, while European banks laugh at DBS being the only bank left in the world where customers have to go to the branch during the pandemic lockdowns to reset their password. Peter Ma, the chairman of Ping An Group, with over 100 million fully digital bank customers against DBS’ five million, congenially finds DBS tiny and Piyush amusing.
But that’s Piyush. He does not want to be the best CEO in Singapore. He wants to be the best CEO in the world, and we should not belittle that ambition. That’s how CEOs do, and carry their organisations with them. That’s how Singapore gets its international reputation built, by the ambition of individuals. It’s his calling card. Piyush has been infecting his Singaporean managers with a disease that is not easily found in Singapore, passion. There are things he has been teaching them that will start to make sense only later in their careers.
The fact that Singapore has such a great brand name in the US capital is because Lee Kuan Yew spent his personal time staying in the homes of and building relationships with people like Henry Kissinger and the Bushes. The reason Singapore’s CapitaLand does very well in China is because Liew Mun Leong loves every minute he is in China. The reason Singtel was able to acquire a string of telcos in Asia and Australia after it was listed was because Lee Hsien Yang was willing to take the plane out, flying economy if he had to, to close deals at a moment’s notice when he was CEO. I know that these are “loaded” names now, but I am not mentioning them for any reason other than why the best Singapore companies are what they are today. Maybe the fact that Liew Mun Leong’s story is flawed should alert us to the fact that nobody is beyond scrutiny.
The other funny thing about this “World’s Best Bank” nonsense that Piyush tries to push is that the one category of people he could not capture the imagination of was his own people – the Singaporean customers themselves. It’s actually the same mistake that Lee Kuan Yew made – make us “world class” and the people will thank you for it. No, they won’t. Not if they can’t see themselves in it. Not if you didn’t carry them along in the story. Our own Net Promoter Score (NPS) survey show that DBS already ranks much higher than UOB and OCBC, but that’s because of POSB and it’s heartland effect. Instead, Piyush sets himself up like a lightning rod to be roasted by a pretender in parliament. Every leader has to learn this lesson at least once in his life.
But it’s a fine line between being loved and being respected. There was a time when Sim Wong Hoo grew Creative Technology to be a global company, living out of a suitcase in America, giving no less than Steve Jobs a run for his money. But in Sim’s case, Singapore smothered him with love and massaged his passion until it became placid. The same politicians who spurned his initial effort to list Creative on the Singapore Exchange, made him a star and were taking selfies with him after he was successfully listed on NASDAQ, turning him into a philosopher and taming the beast in him. It was only a matter of time that his empire unraveled, because the competition in Silicon Valley was too vicious for someone who didn’t spend enough time in the battlefield.
—–
I have plenty of issues with Piyush, all at the level where the best banks in the world struggle with – transitioning from legacy technology (I think DBS has a huge cost around its neck), that deal with Manulife (patently not right), what APIs are supposed to do (compared with Salesforce, please), the core net interest income business (shrinking) etc. I do think India and Indonesia are really serious problems for DBS, they will unravel after Piyush leaves. But those are my opinion, and I am happy to be proven wrong.
I do not need to cut Piyush any slack because he holds his own. It would be so very different if I were dealing with a lame duck Singaporean CEO who hides behind his entitled behaviour, as some do, and not having the same mettle to engage on the issues at a global level. This is where the intangibles that affect share price come from, the fiction of being seen as the best on the global stage.
You can’t teach a Singaporean president’s scholar why any of this is important. A leader needs to have this beast inside him and instinctively finds his journey. Piyush gave to Singapore the gift of his skills and his passion, honed over a lifetime, not paid for by even one cent of taxpayers money. If you want to put a figure on it, that’s S$20 billion, the premium that DBS’ capitalisation is over the next largest Singapore Inc. company on the stock exchange, all from one leader’s energy. There is no Singaporean run state-owned institution that comes close. That’s higher than the annual target EDB sets for itself for all the companies it brings in to give Singaporeans jobs . Also, operationally, it is a far more complex organisation. All the fiction needed for CEOs to do what they need to do.
Singaporeans let the CEOs of Singapore Telecom, Keppel, SembCorp, SPH and a whole string of other Singapore companies get away too lightly without scrutiny. There are many national banks in Malaysia, Thailand, Hong Kong, Indonesia, Philippines, Taiwan and even South Africa who would cry to have the price-to-book ratio that all three Singaporean banks have held, even now under stress during the pandemic. But DBS, being much larger, has held up more Singaporean jobs than several Singapore Inc companies put together (and here I protest, because banks should be leaner).
———-
I kept saying “Singaporean Chinese” in this essay. I should have said “Singaporean Chinese male”. The diversity agenda has been on the table for more than 20 years now, but the boys did not miss anything until it is their jobs we are discussing. At no point has anyone asked why Singapore corporations are underrepresented by the best of all of its population, both male and female.
When you see that the world’s largest corporations in the United States are now increasingly represented by the best Indians, Singaporeans should be saying to themselves, “wait a minute, we have Indians here, what happened to our own Indians or Malays?”. There was a time when the best athletes in high school were the Tamil boys. They’ve disappeared. Having a world-class Singaporean Malay leading a corporation like Changi Airport would set an electric tone on leadership for the entire region. The Indonesian GDP is now US$1 trillion for goodness sake, as against Singapore’s US$380 billion and widening rapidly. It is just a matter of time before the richest Singaporean billionaire is Javanese. Get used to it.
Singapore has an amazing opportunity to demonstrate a world where the best people from the world’s three largest civilisations work harmoniously and bring out the best in each other. But the Singaporean Chinese is now the new “bumiputra”, grumbling, complaining and even demanding for a world that no longer looks like what he was promised in the brochures where only his children are the best at everything. Now they know what the Malays in Malaysia feel like, or the whites in the bible belt in the US, marginalised in their own countries.
But there was a time when the Singaporean Chinese was the most decent, generous, accommodating and hardworking people by any standards anywhere in the world. Lee Kuan Yew called them his “raw material” without whom this county would have turned out very differently. He was murmuring these thoughts to those around him on that boat trip around the harbour a few years before he died. Like a strict father, he had not treated the Singaporean Chinese as being good enough for their own country. He kept experimenting with the idea of “the best in America” who could take this little island to its next level. Only in his last days did he start publicly conceding the idea that a country is always only as good as its own people.
When a Singaporean Chinese talks about how his grandfather came to the country without a cent on his back, he doesn’t realise that he is no longer talking about himself. He doesn’t recognise his own grandfather in the new immigrants. Still, in any country, harmony and opportunities for minorities and foreigners come only when the majority population is strong, engaged with a sense of purpose and direction. So it is in everybody’s interest that the Singaporean Chinese finds his wind again.
The fact that all these issues are now on the table being discussed at different forums in Singapore is a very good thing. The fact that it is a very difficult conversation is only natural. LKY called it “primordial instincts” at play and that it can be very dangerous. But this is a really mature people now. This is not a lazy population. These are not a small minded people. It is a people with enough skill and gumption to make it anywhere in the world, if they have to, and some already do. No milk has been spilt.
It is still possible to rectify the mistakes and do it better this time, the people not the government carrying the ambition. Government does not need to be the solution to every problem, nor should they set themselves up to be. It just makes them defensive. The foreigners who do become CEOs of Singaporean corporations can be truly proud that it is the height of their own careers to have this challenge to make a difference to a world-class population. Of course, a Singaporean is not about to hand a Singapore Airlines over to a foreigner to run, but JY Pillay and Chen Choon Kong, who gave the company its DNA were both born in Malaysia, so if you want to strain at gnats, about half of Singaporeans still generate new families from Malaysia and elsewhere every single day today. Go figure.
The urgent task is to retool all of Singapore Inc. corporations, and if the challenge is communicated correctly, the Singaporean himself does see the value of having foreigners share the yoke and chart a course into the future. We can start by saying thank you to Piyush Gupta for choosing to become a proud Singaporean.
ED this is an absolute masterpiece! 👌🏼
Yes i agreef ..in fact talented indians like gu p ta should go back ..tobsave the 1 bn indians in a very mesdy country. Sg dies not deserve your sacrifice si when are you gip ta saying tai tai (chinese bye bye) n thevrest ofbthe talented flock. Tai tai
I am enlightehened to read different views from all angles. I think Dubai ( UAE ) is a good model to study.. There are plenty of similarities between Spore and UAE.. Basically , less resentment towards Govt as regards to foreigners / foreign talents workibg there.. Trust we might find clues.
It was a great article, i’ve ever read. Author has deep understanding of facts and has articulated it very well.
Look forward to read more posts from you.
Thanks!
No it is full of flaws. fl
Why Singapore will need more and more foreign talents in future.
1. Our educational system does not produce enough of the right kind of talents needed in the 4th Industrial Revolution. Our schools are Marks Factory that train our students to behave like robots who will eventually be replaced by robots. Students have to unlearn and relearn immediately after graduation. This raises the question of what’s education for if it cannot be applied in the real world?
2. Our Societal system rewards conformity and punish disruptors. In such a society, Creativity is seen as a threat to status quo. The Government immune system is resistant to change and anyone who suggests system changes are seen as unappreciative of the good work of the government. If they pushes harder, they’re branded enemy of the state. This active discouragement of open voices stifles Creativity and the spirit of enterprise.
3. To compensate for stifling creativity, the Government force feed Creativity through generous grants for Start-ups and innovation grants. This works like pulling the hand-brakes while stepping on the accelerator of a car. The car moves very slowly, consumes excessive petrol and pollute the environment. Most startups failed due to long learning curve since they’re not prepared in early life in Entrepreneurial Spirit.
4. As such, the demand for talents cannot be met, we have no choice but to bring in large numbers of foreign talents to fill up the demand. This process marginalised the locals into mid-range jobs while the foreigners take both the high end and low ends jobs. This societal design creates tensions which will become a time-bomb if it goes unaddressed.
5. The solution starts with Early Childhood Education to build resilience in our kids at age 4 onwards. We must allow them to think on their own, ask embarrassing questions, test out ideals, and not block them from Creativity. We must not tell them their not good at any subjects. Instead we need to teach for the love of learning and not for grades. We have to continue to same openness in Primary and Secondary schools.
Our children have to become better humans to control the robots, algorithms and automation.
If we care for our children, we must stop training them to be better robots, regurgitating exams answers which only test on efficiency, analytical mathematics and memory power. All these are better done by the robots.
We need to teach them human values to unlock their multiple intelligences and think in interdisciplinary overviews.
Parents who pressure-cook their children and rob them of their idealism and childhood and playfulness will regret in later life.
Well said both Emmanuel Daniel and Jack Sim
Very relevant points Jack Sim. I read out your post to my better half and both of could only nod in agreement with the thoughts you have put forward 👍
Great views Jack Sim. Have tried many times highlighting to MOE but it’s futile. So how to change for the better for the next generations?
As a huge proponent of more Creativity, I fully agree with your second point. How conformity is rewarded over disruption. But the latter is exactly what we do desperately need now, more so with the advent of the pandemic led environment. All we see and hear are about closures of businesses and lack of support. But what about the ones who are riding this wave and doing well because they came up with new ideas? It’s high time we do more in Creativity.
Very well written article. Surprised to see such openness. It is most Welcome!! Someone has to shout that the emperor is naked.
Very thought ful suggestions by Jack Sim.
Emmanuel such a long story praising DBS Gupta as if he is a Magician
How come DBS has been losing hundreds of million dollar for the past few years only recently making 2 million dollars last year ?
Really? How can a co be losing hundreds of millions for years and still solvent???? No need insider info to see u are wrong
I believe lky is right to seek DBS develops into at least a regional bank and seek American ceo to lead dbs as US is most talented in banking & finance. However, in 90s and 2000s, sg and dbs are still relatively unknown and so had difficulty in getting good ceos to lead Dbs. Consequently, those Americans were not up to mark until Gupta is recruited. Now he is grooming sporeans to takeover as Part of succession planning . Hence, it is ridiculous to expect Govt to groom sporean ceo earlier like Daniel suggested because ceo at the times before Gupta were of poorer qualities. I agree peter Seah is good banking talent but still OUB was still a basically sg bank only. Any sporean who was interested to be ceo of dbs should work for international banks first so that they could be groomed to be ceo like his friend in UBS.
Daniel’s criticisms of local CEOs of GLCs, I feel, not all true. Govt has decided that GLCs should be businesses of property development, construction engg, infrastructure and facilities Engg, utilities and telecom as we don’t want them to compete with MNCs and ending up stealing their intellectual properties or being bought by big MNCs as red dot won’t have the critical mass to support competitive product R&D. Many GLCs are just privatised from public services. So glcs’ performance must be tied to Sg and could be disrupted by technology or crises. Such business environment in foreign mkts are dominated by corruption and political nuances. Hence I don’t think ceos are fully responsible for the current poor performance
Just a simple question- Y must/will P Gupta eventually hand over to a SG “ Chinese”- y not to anyone regardless of ethnicity who merits the job/position👍🙏
1)agree, leadership succession should be to someone capable regardless of ethnic or even nationality.
2)our fore fathers came and their generation can do all kinds of job regardless hardship to build Singapore, why our current and younger generation couldn’t? Along the way, what makes Singaporeans think that certain jobs are only for immigrants?
3)during my past hiring experience, I came across Singaporean fresh graduates who are brain washed in universities they are elites and they deserve better than others. Such flaws in our education system worries me.
4) Government sector seriously needs restructuring. The challenges, competitiveness in private companies are not in the government sector culture. No innovation, in some cases, just a comfy shelter to have a stable job. Some may be quick to jump to defense but those who have been through documentation process at government institution, sitting at the waiting hall watching the counters processing at snail speed will agree.
I don’t think u are being fair to Govt and Govt linked cos. It is in the nature of their businesses that they cannot appear innovative like consumer goods or internet cos – who to provide very varied solutions in town planning? Or construction? And GLCs are treated with political nuances by fellow cos and foreign govt’s and yet they cannot bribe in an environment when corruption thrives. Just imagine that it is so rampant that agents for such thing exist
I think it’s by default of the way the senior team is structured. No one of outside of that demographics.
I agree with you. Singapore was built up by foreigners . Chinese from China, Malaysia, Indians and Malays. We succeeded because we did not pursue a race based country. We are all Singaporeans , so it would be stupid to create a chinese bumiputra society here.
the Chinese aren’t even native inhabitants. This land ultimately belongs to the ancient kingdom of Bharat(present day India)
Oh, now you lot are claiming Singapore as well? The Indians aren’t native inhabitants either, moron. Bharat, my ass. It’s arrogant CECA thrash like you that antagonizes Singaporeans.
Not claiming India or Indians have anytjing to do with Singapore’s development. But the least an Singaporean should know is about the name of his country. Singapore is sanskrit language (indian) word. Singha (Lion) + Pur (city). Now go figure how did it get this name 🙂
I hope all Singaporean remember why you have an opportunity to buy homes? Maybe a HDB at first , then you upgrade or get another? Who are you going to lease the homes to? Locals?
Foreigners are important in every society. They compliment the country with things someone wish to do and not.
Unfortunately vwhat is portrayed in the post was that most Singaporeans are too comfortable, this is not wrong.
Ultimately, it is because of foreigners, our lives become better, we got more variety of goods, variety of food, culture and all in SG. There is a “safe heaven” implication here with our neighboring countries… But when they become better and better, we will lose this stigma quicker than we know it. An island country ultimately is a challenge to run. Hopefully more Singaporeans can really understand that the only way to improve is to accept challenge and compete accordingly.
Disagree totally and I am Indian origin myself . Read your history before making irrelevant and potentially disruptive comments .
CECA moron, India never came to our shores. It was always a Javanese kingdom, and an ancient Chinese kingdom. STFU you STINK
Tell me more about this ancient Chinese Kingdom.
Lim Kah Ho
It was also built with a lot of western money and work. And some of it was (and still is) mine.
If you want the best person for a job, race should not be an issue, and it is a pity that Covid-19 has brought out a lot of the worst characteristics of people. Racism, narcissism, bigotry and small-minded, ignorant nonsense were never part of LKY’s vision – which was one of the main reasons that Singapore became wealthy, based on western legal and administrative systems, modern economics – that led to its success including considerable international investment.
Mark, the British, Spanish, Portugese RAPED AND PILLAGE their way through this part of the world. Would you let China bring her wealth and political structure so that they can share their vast cusisine with you?
It’s about time someone wrote about the “bumiputerization” of the local diaspora of the middle kingdom.
The “bumiputrarization” has started with Gen Xs…
Their parents were probably aware that if their kids, especially the sons, are deemed not street smart enough, for whatever reasons… they should join the armed forces.
These are “shelters” for those who don’t perform well in school, the slightly slower than normal, the recalcitrant yet remorseful… those types that were deemed too good to let waste nor not very useful to use for anything else.
They go on to be groomed to become the core of non-commissioned officers if the forces, especially in the branches reserved for them.. the Air Force and the Navy.
And after 45, they have a second career in our schools as
Operational managers cum discipline masters .
These are truly fictitious roles, generally to keep them employed for longer.
I could go on.. it’s a thesis on an entire generation.
The above is just a synopsis of sorts.
Thank you ED. I would rank your piece as of equal importance and shock value as LKY’s “White Trash of Asia”. I hope it evokes soul searching in all of us.
It’s called Karma. The Chinese displaced the native Hindu and Malay populations and tried to play down their history and contribution to their own land. the ‘Pioneer generation’ is just euphemism for when our Chinese forefathers first migrated to this land. If there is anyone who deserves the ‘spoils’ of Singapore it should be the original inhabitants.
Lets just give it back to the indians. The swear blood and tears of the pioneer immigrants means nothing. Much less the brits. After all the indians made what singapore it is today. Reparation time!
What in the actual fk did i just read. Your comment is purely ignorant and downright imbecile.
Who are the original inhabitants? The polynesian who has since emmigrated to Fiji?
The Austronesians who are still here. The same people who raided ancient Ceylon, the southern coast of India and reached Persia inland for plunder and trade.The same people that reached Egypt before anyone else to trade and also to raid eastern Africa. The same people who brought back Hindu priests and Buddhist priests to cultivate the people of their various kingdoms. Do not spout pseudo history if you are unlearned.
A bit a hack job, not always accurate judgment but brilliant
Our other 2 local banks are equally successful and run by Singaporean. How much of a protected market and captive business contributed to DBS success. As LKY said, the government provided the regulatory environment for banks to profit. I believe a more thorough analysis would add to the objectivity of your pouring all these praises on Piyush. I think we should not just brush aside LMW’s points on foreign talent.
Your other main point of faltering Singaporean run companies are valid and indeed they should be held to account.
At the end of the day it is finding the right person for the role (race and country neutral) and all things equal, provide Singaporean the advantage. I am not sure sufficient effort was exercised in the search for DBS CEO then.
That LMW did not question the legitimacy of Samuel N. Tsien (a British Citizen born in China) and went straight for Piyush (a Singaporean born in India), speaks for itself.
Brilliant Malaysian Chinese and Indians are denied their destiny in Malaysia because of the Bumiputera mentality, and Malaysia will never attain its true potential because of that. Cornerstone of Singapore’s continued growth and prosperity is due to meritocracy and egalitarianism. We should never allow a Singapore version of Bumiputera status to take hold here.
What meritocracy.
I believe the national conversation was meant to take place during election campaigning and the initial Parliamentary sittings. The timing of the setting up of the NS square suggests that is the only OB marker. NS is so systemic for the bumiputeras, occupying up to 10 years of our professional lives. What is your take on this?
Emmanuel,
Thank you for such eloquent and informative prose!
I smiled when reading:
“Just like the garden snail variety of Australians, unable to get jobs back in their home country but everything about their host country is wrong, if you noticed“
Yes, I noticed. Hence, my decision to avoid Melbourne, where a lunatic Premier is running
the asylum.
Your comments made me think of a group of expat Australians and indeed other highly-paid nationalities who are working in a prominent bank here in Singapore, making critical IT decisions…)
A very well articulated Singapore syndrome with Piyush as a case study! Having worked in Singapore and known some of the people mentioned, ED provides a valuable commentary and lesson. Time to peel the banana skin?
World’s best bank is banking industry boasting. There isn’t such a thing becos each bank is a creature of the type of economy it serves and the regulatory environment it is subject to. If DBS (or any of the other 2) really become the world’s best bank, we the depositors and consumers paid for it through the essential trade-off between bank capital and bank profitability.
Great article. Will be interesting to see who will be appointed as the new CEO of Starhub.
Well articulated and touching, too. And article gives some good ways forward on how to get our mojo back
Brilliant mind, brilliant analysis. Singaporeans wake up to the fact that you may actually be in the wrong hands since some time now. This dialogue is long overdue
Thank you for speaking the truth
ED, Congratulations on a well written article and insights. For Singapore to succeed, she needs to seriously re-examine placing real talented Singaporeans at the helm and nurture talents from the very start instead of the “hand me down” mentality because of his or her scholarly pedigree period. Foreign talents are important and we need to attract only the very best to incrementally value create.
Thank you very much, really enlightening. Hope the ones in ivory towers will read this..
There has been white washing . That French man was a disaster . The jp Morgan Bankers are over paid . You are part of the system . I too have been in this bank for decades . Ask the HR to break down the employees segmentation . Look at the high influx of Indians in IT and other segments .
I appreciate the balanced argument for and against Foreign Talent. Tired of mindless (and self centred) arguments against foreign talent.
If we want to grow as an individual and country, we do need the fire for the fight. Many just want hand-outs.
Agreed
..talented indians go back home ..your country in mess. Go help your country…. zgo gu p ta .. tsi tai
Yes foreign talents go back to india ..ypur country needs you ..it is so messy ..save tge 1 bn indians ..go back
Gu p ta ..tai tai (chinese bye bye taibtai(
Why dont you go back to China and stop them from making a mess in India.
Why don’t you “Emmanuel Daniel” come up with new idea of opening his OWN BANK and hire ONLY locals ? Why you still remain writing blogs on others 😂
Wow. I really clapped for this article. Opened my mind
Talk so much cock got use? Action speak louder than words. Put your words into action and show what you can do. Change the way that is not good. Prove your point by making actions not by talking all day and nothing changed. And no not by voting for useless opposition works too. If you think DBS need a local CEO, then you go be their CEO and bring them out of their Low point. If you can’t , then this article is totally pointless at all. Singaporean need action takers not talkers. Talkers are no different from naysayers who just only know how to complain. If you not happy about your life, environment, go make a change and not posting and ranting thru a post. Doing and talking is 2 different thing. It is only when you step into teow shoes and act then you realised it is not what you had think all the while!
Every solution should start with conversation right? This article is the start
Insightful.Let the best man be the CEO.Will make all the difference.
A good article , especially on GLCs decadence. Author exhibits racial , ethnic and personal biases .
Some factual errors on views of certain CEOs
Lastly remember the Indian parable of 3 blind men and
The elephant .
Was there a slightest hint that the CEO of DBS must be of certain ethnicity? E. Daniel is drawing a racial line and insinuating a racial bias by mentioning “Singaporean Chinese”, “Singaporean Chinese male”. It was only mentioned that it is DISAPPOINTING that after so many years, a true-blue Singaporean (of any ethnicity) cannot helm DBS. What is wrong in expressing a feeling and hoping for a change.
To cut your long story short (i was unable to complete reading). The problem is we all had global search of talents in the SAF. And none has any commercial experience!!
Another reason is PAP never want any of these CEO run for President later.
There wasn’t slightest hint that the CEO of DBS must be of certain ethnicity. It was only mentioned that it is disappoiting that after more than two decades, a true-blue Singaporean cannot helm the bank. E. Daniel is drawing a racial line and insinuating a racial bias by mentioning “Singaporean Chinese” and “Singaporean Chinese Male”.
The author said that the GLCs are all declining. Couldn’t agree more but I would add that the main reason is that many of the senior executives of these GLCs are parachuted in from the military, civil service who do not have the fire and experience other than a good qualification. They May do well as civil servants but the mentality is different when you are in the commercial space
Many fundamental issues with our economy have been eloquently raised in this article. The one I would like to pick up is EDB:
“The EDB would have done better if it had reported in May just how difficult finding new foreign MNCs has been instead of setting its own moving annual targets ($10b, no, $13b, no, $15b?) and reporting tentative investments of existing corporations as new just to keep up appearances.”
My contribution in Feb 19:
https://www.straitstimes.com/forum/letters-in-print/re-engineer-established-industries-to-help-pmets
Hopefully, more Singaporeans will pick this up and hold EDB to higher standards given that they are just not performing for the task they were created for – to create jobs for Singaporeans.
There are numerous hints and attempts to draw ethnicity rivalry and attempts to belittle Chinese especially males .
This article was intended and pitched to stir up feelzings
And draw attention to the author site and related biz .
His comments on Edmund Koh and Philippe is clearly off tangent and biased . Philippe was a tyrant and clearly deserved to be removed . Next you gave too much credit to Piyush . His forays into India and Indonesia will come to haunt him & Dbs .
Why pass over to Singapore Male Chinese
He can pass over to any Singaporeans
That’s what we want
Writers’ an indian. No surprise here.
Singaporeans First, Always.
it seems like you have not understood the article at all, but it shows what it is saying. Biased and racial discrimination. Well done to you!
Fantastic – an alternative historical perspective and several truths that need to be publicly aired and admitted into our public discourse. Just feel I need to make a small correction in your second-last paragraph. I would argue that the two men who gave Singapore Airlines its DNA were JYM Pillay and Lim Chin Beng. They had a respectful and mutually supportive relationship which brought out the best in each other. Lim Chin Beng was born in Bandung, Indonesia.
DBS is no longer singaporean bank
Good article. Definitely agree last 10 years TLC as a whole has been in disturbing decline.
But one point on home grown tech giants. You are missing SEA. Even bigger Market cap than dbs built in 10 years and growing even more. Ambition? Nothing less than tencent for Asean and Latin America. And if they get their digital banking license, maybe dbs/uob/ocbc will get a run for their market share in the region too. So Sg inc is reinventing… just not all owned by Temasek and Govt any more – which may be a good thing.
Brilliant article.
Do not give too much credit to Piyush la.
He is hard working not super power or non replaceable .
His strategy of going into India & Indonesia will backfire .
Next , look at the amount of India Indians in Changi biz park & mbfc tower 3, You can see an non-proportional increase .
Ask the staff union of DBS or HR depart to give a detailed breakdown .
Author published Asian banker that gives DBS award last year 2019. He didn’t declare too.
Sadly, this long winded tirade is nothing but a racist rant.
1. You regard the current debate over whether DBS should have a Singaporean CEO as a racist ploy. Yet the language and your resort to calling the first few CEO of DBS as white and inexperienced bankers in itself is racist.
2. Your statement, by implication, that Gupta can never be Singaporean, even though he is a Singapore citizen, misses the point that he wasn’t a citizen when he was first appointed CEO. He became a citizen only after he was appointed CEO.
3. You running down Chinese Singaporean CEOs in the companies that failed shows your obvious racial bias. They were inexperienced CEOs coming out from the military, or CEOs who have failed in their previous roles. They failed because they were bad choices made by the powers that be and not because they were Chinese Singaporean. By your sick reasoning, no Singaporean Chinese should be a CEO.
4. Your article has a subtle racial bias, and is a disgrace in a country where racial vilification is illegal.
Singapore success story is about becoming what? Basically, it can be summarized as being among the wealthiest nations with good environment and utilities that support a good life.
It is a good place for every layers of people to rush here and earn good money. The exchange rate is favourable in Asia from China to India. She attracted many layers of people. They love Singapore, but not necessarily Singaporean human beings. In fact, they may hate Singaporean Chinese male (from the writer). Loyalty is hard to gauge when the majority human beings of that nation who served Army by the years to protect the nation is being disregarded or not loved.
Cow, goat, fowls, fish, ham and sausage served mankind well. We love to eat boiled, fried, steamed or barbecued. Fruits and vegetables, rice and beans take time and efforts to grow on selective soils, harvest and render good to fill our stomach.
Loyalty to another country, community, race and beliefs is more difficult than one’s own wife, mother and children. The American loves the Saudi Muslim but not Iran. Intimately, not so much love for fellow American with Black or Mexican ancestry as compare with those of Britain or Dutch.
Foreign talents love Singapore because we need thier love more than anything, anyone or any country. Singapore also love them. It is universal values of human beings to enjoy beef steak, chicken drumsticks, lamb and pork chop well cooked and seasoned.
I find the xenophobia shown by the opposition really pathetic. Playing to the gallery for votes – it is no different from Trump appealing to dumb white trash. I hope Singaporeans are smart enough and educated enough to see right through it. Do you think Google has any qualms about Sundar Pichai as CEO? They take the best talent in the world, they don’t gave a flying fuck whether he is born Indian or born American. Do you think PepsiCo had an issue with Indra Nooyi (then) as CEO? Does it matter that she was not American-born? Isn’t the great American dream that ANYONE can make it big there? So the Singapore dream is limited to local-born only? FUCK YOU. By the way, I am local born and bred and I STILL THINK LEONG MUN WAI IS FUCKING STUPID.
It really boggles the mind that someone is complaining Piyush (who has been a brilliant CEO for DBS by any commercial measure) is not local born. FUCK your stupidity. I don’t give a fuck where they are born, I give a fuck whether they are GOOD. PERIOD.
I guess your language speaks volume about your character and belief system.
NS for citizens, jobs for foreign talents
What a brilliant and thought-provoking piece of article, especially on the points of other failing GLCs.
Also we should seriously stop this new tendency of blaming foreigners and going through the rabbit-hole of becoming xenophobic, and support meritocracy wholeheartedly.
PSP has proven a disappointment in its 1st performance in Parliament. playing to the galleries, taking a cheap shot on piyush because he is an Indian, may help PSP electorally but put Singapore in a bad path of racial tensions. As someone correctly pointed out, why he didn’t say anything about OCBC ceo being a PRC citizen? Hope Tan Cheng Bock can help mentor his party members
Everyone will have his/her time. #freeriders
It must be the most difficult article you have ever written. It is heart breaking… But the Truth is still Truth itself. Singapore was truly The Exception, but Singaporeans Never was The Exceptionist. The soaring eagle above the storm is The Exformist . Amen.
Well written piece but I think it missed a few points.
1. Many local companies are failing because they are led by ex-generals. NOL and SPH are good examples. What does an army general know about running a company?
2. Even Singapore is led by an ex-army general and quite a few of our ministers are ex-army heads.
3. Most Singaporeans are not against foreigners. They’re against the free flow of foreigners, some with fake degrees, coming here, obtaining PR’s and even citizenship at the citizen’s cost. Let’s face it, who wants to spend a good 2+ years of their prime life doing National Service only to lose out to a foreigner who had a headstart because they need not go through NS?
NS is a necessity of survival as a nation. it can’t be u go for yr ns n lose a job to a FT. – really biased and irrelevant. in the analogy.
Dear Author,
Your article is a bit long but nonetheless quite good but is cover only one side of the story therefore incomplete.
To balance your article, you might want to consider adding some content regarding why these top Foreign talent that you mention choose to come here? Quite sure they did no have pity on Singapore and therefore decide to come here. These Folks are afterall in your own assessment top talent therefore I am quite sure what they can get in return from this tiny red dot must have been sufficient to make them choose to stay here. If they are indeed top talent, quite sure they should have plenty of great offer from other countries, so what truly make them choose to stay here? If you have Insightful answer To these questions, then maybe this country and these top talent truly deserve/ do not deserve each other and not a one sided affair after all.
In my humble opinion, this article is not very well balanced. I agree with the fact that Liew Mun Leong’s maiden speech is pretty pointless and distasteful. A job should be given only to the best candidate, man or woman, out there who is up to it. All that protectionism rhetoric is quite damaging to the economy.
However, it does not justify such a long article degrading the quality of the Singaporean workforce, and its openness and receptiveness to the concept of “may the best man win”. At least, I personally subscribe to the idea of meritocracy. The world is changing constantly. Globalization has already been digitalized. If uprooting is the only way in the author’s opinion to gain invaluable overseas experience in order to hone one’s skill to take up leadership roles with an unique acumen, then the author is probably too old for this time. Such views might have already been shattered by the pandemic, whereby everyone is under some form of lockdown for an indefinitely period of time.
I think we should definitely purge distasteful protectionism, instead of promoting it with one’s own version of it, which was shouting at me from this article. We don’t have to put the entire population down to prove a point. I am pretty sure the author’s defense mechanism was triggered when I lamented that the author is probably too old for this time. Especially when I don’t know anything about the author as a person. So do spare a thought for the entire population, which probably cannot be statistically represented by the handful of people that one knows, when writing such an otherwise potentially thought provoking piece.
The answer is New Singaporean never experience HUNGRY!
You inflated Piyush performance.
Biased views
It’s a very long article 😃 truth blended with wrong facts will negates the credibility of the author.
Creative was listed in Nasdaq 1992 after our local secondary board known as Sesdaq rejected SIM WH application for listing. Bad mistake by our local authority. Later SIM WH was invited back to list on the Main Board in Singapore 😂😂. Creative delisted in 2007 from both exchange.
The first selfie front facing camera Motorola A835 was introduce in late 2003. Smartphone with selfies not so prevalent at that time.
The first commercial camera phone was the Kyocera Visual Phone VP-210, released in Japan in May 1999. It was a cordless phone as distinct from a cellular mobile phone. Most camera phones are simpler than separate digital cameras.
Creative was successfully listed on Nasdaq in 1992 after one year of due diligence by the American. That was 1992 and most mobile phone still uses LED screen. HOW TO TAKE SELFIES???
The author BULL 🐂 without checking the historical facts (overkill while trying very hard to convince the reader, using misguided examples)
The next question what other lies did he surreptitiously blended in with the truths we may never know !!
Just my two cents worth, please enlighten me.
I standby to be corrected.
The author meant “selfies” in a generic sense, as in taking photographs with Mr Sim.
Goh Kheng Hua is another example of the fine educational system in Singapore. Explains why we have to bring in foreign talents by the boat loads.
Singapore needs the best people to run its Banks, Financial Institutions, IT, Business Corporations etc. when there are no qualified locals to do the jobs. No choice, but to have foreigners recruited. Our country being multiracial should never be racial bias, although this can be a factor, not often discussed openly. For senior positions, we have to select the best regardless of local racial bias/sentiments by some quarter of our population.Recruited expats should however be given acquaintance courses about our culture & people before assuming their positions. They would then have some ideas of what is meant to work here in the Singapore environment. Understanding multiracialism is always a WIP, even for us Singaporeans. More so, for the top executives selected to work in our country. I am one of the very few multiracial Singaporeans that have many friends both locals & expats. I lectured to Chinese, Australian off-campus Uni Biz courses that focused on Cross-Cultural intricacies. I believe I have knowledge on cultural matters both Asian & Western. My fellow Singaporeans have openly confided with me on several racial issues in Singapore & neighbouring countries. However, personally I believe that a minority of the minorities group are seldom listened to …. I have said this quite often. Anyway, hopefully our society especially the young generation will become more open minded.
My analysis on why we are in this situation :
1. Not enough places in local universities for Singaporeans, especially when it comes to professional graduate programs.
Not everyone who does not make it to NUS, NTU, SMU… Or does not get a course of their choice, can afford to study overseas.
Also note that overseas counterparts do not have such stringent requirements to join a graduate program.
All this puts Singaporean students at a disadvantage.
2. Graduate programs need to be tuned in line with industry needs. This could be in the form of industrial attachments. The supply needs to be continuously tweaked to meet the demand.
3. Certain jobs in the IT industry such as programming are shunned by most Singaporeans. Most locals rather be business analysts, Team leads or project managers. This perception needs to be changed as programming is not a dead-end career with no prospects. Programmers can progress to become Designers, Architects, specialists in niche areas….
Then again, the IT industry is known for stress, long hours, and thankless jobs where the implementers are blamed for failures and the management takes credit for any successes.
In addition, it must be noted that “CECA” is just a small percentage holding PMET jobs, the largest group would be Malaysian Chinese followed by PRCs, the former group can easily without any effort masquerade as locals. Most are accepted as locals even if they don’t masquerade as locals.
Most GLC companies are still stuck at 5B revenue or less even though they have been doing businesses for last 20 years . A local GLC IT company grow its annual revenue from 300M in 1996 to 2B in 2020 despite the fact it spearheaded a lot of digital Govt initiatives ..
Awfully miscalculated decision crafted single handedly reflected in our economy.
In nineties, SPH run by late Lim Kim San was enjoying its best period, UOB run by Wee Cho Yaw n his lieutenants too had their best days, PIL lead by its founder Chang became leader in shipping field to name a few.
We won more but lost some. Of course SG lost a iconic gem – FnN to a Thai billionaire under LHL.
To err is human but to reverse mistakes need strongmen to rectify errors. It’s not too late so immediate correction will suffice instead crying over split milk.
Hi Daniel,
i do agree with you on quite a lot of your comment regarding Singapore inc. i have sold most of the share on those.
they all lack the Ump. as you said not hungry. the problem is most of those appointed to the post are ex-Military officer, politician etc… what do they know about business? they just collect the big paycheck.
Piyush Gupta is a good appointment, whether he is singaporean or not it doesnt matter to me aqs long as he can grow the company. as you also said the singapore bank make a lot of money through interest income, so they have a big cushion there.
but i dont agree whenever you mentioned Chinese, it sounds racist to me. that you are targeting this group.
what i like to point out to you are those middle manager job that singaporean are loosing out because we keep letting in foreigner. if we don’t train our singaporean from the bottom up, how can there be good singaporean manager in the future. the job lost we are talking about is not the CEO, it is the middle manager role.
so please get it right otherwise there would be more well educated singaporean driving Grab or Taxi.
PSP has proven a disappointment in its 1st performance in Parliament. playing to the galleries, taking a cheap shot on piyush because he is an Indian, may help PSP electorally but put Singapore in a bad path of racial tensions. As someone correctly pointed out, why he didn’t say anything about OCBC ceo being a PRC citizen? Hope Tan Cheng Bock can help mentor his party members
Here is an angry middle aged man who is probably sidelined for most of his adult life, maybe constantly bullied at the playground during childhood. Trying to draw attention to himself and his infinite “wisdom” by giving lots of “i told you so” statements.
About the article – what is Emmanuel Daniel’s point ? Are he trying to justifying both Piyush and his stay in Singapore ? Deh, at least Piyush is the CEO of DBS a Singapore citizen now.
First, one does not have to look very far. The 4 biggest banks in the world at this moment are Chinese (Industrial & Commercial Bank of China, China Construction Bank, Agricultural Bank and Bank of China) and not that from US or the Western democracies. Certainly not Indian. There are 19 Chinese banks in the Top 100 Bank In The World List. How many Piyushes are there in these 19 Chinese banks ? Piyush is not exceptional. He is being rewarded handsomely. Is it is the same with the top Chinese bankers ?
Second, Emmanuel is singing and crowing about western democratic systems especially the banks and mainly in the US. Are these not imminently failing before our very eyes ? Indians running big corporations is not the solution. The rot is in the political institutions in USA. This is the same with in Singapore.
But does Emmanuel think the US is going to let their largest companies run by overseas Indians forever ? The US has evil intents behind this façade. They are wooing India, arming India and want to see India go into proxy wars with China, Pakistan and Russia.
Third, I disagree that the Chinese are bumiputras in Singapore. The sad fact is that jobs are taken away by cheaper, faster but not necessary better foreigners and the inefficient GLCs. Foreigners and CLCs cannot justify their stay.
There are many things wrong with CECA. There are 3.5 million Singaporeans but there are 1 million Indians here in Singapore. And the total population of Singapore is 5.3 million. You decide – are we being invaded by Indians ?
By the way, what has Piyush done ? He has been rewarding shareholders and top management and helping himself to the cake as well. Has profits trickled downward to his workers in the banks who bring in the money ? Isn’t this the same rot that we talked about in the politics of western democratic institutions ? Is he not propagating a failed system ?
you are propogating fake news with fake data. 7 % of Singapore citizen population of 3.5 million is Indian, that is 250k, whole 75 % is Chinese ie 2.6 million. there are 500k PR of which 60 % is from south east Asia, and 30 % from other Asian countries. India could at most be 15 % of PR ie 75k. then, there are 400k EP / S pass holder. no breakdown is given but since PR comes from EP / S pass holders, likely it will also be at most 15 % ie 60k. grand total of Indians are 400k. look, whichever way you look at it, it is tiny compared to Chinese population, which would be 10 times more. I am excluding work permit holders, as these are low end manual workers like construction workers and domestic maids. these people have no rights to Singapore citizenship, earn very low income and do jobs which Singaporeans don’t want to do. a lot from Bangladesh, India, Pakistan, Indonesia, Philippines, PRC. if you are not happy that construction workers are from these countries, please feel free to replace a with PRC or Singaporean, it is irrelevant
https://mea.gov.in/images/attach/NRIs-and-PIOs_1.pdfhttps://mea.gov.in/images/attach/NRIs-and-PIOs_1.pdf
Population of Overseas Indians
Population of Overseas Indians
Sl.No. Country Non-Resident Indians (NRIs) Persons of Indian Origin (PIOs) Overseas Indian
117 Malaysia 2,27950 2760000 2,987,950
168 Singapore 350,000 300000 650,000
201 UK 3.510,001 413000 1,764,000
202 USA 1,280,000 3,180,000 4,460,000
175 Sri Lanka 14,0001 600000 1,614,000
173 South Africa 60,000 1,500,000 1,560,000
Singapore has a population of 3.5 Million. We have 650,000 from India. We have 250,000 Singaporeans of Indian extraction. We have Malaysian Indians probably about 100,000 here working in Singapore. We have Bangleshis and Pakistanis and others from the Indian sub-continent e.g. Nepalese, Tibetians etc. Total – more than 1 million Indians and people from the Indian sub-continent.
Problem is we are a small country – 722 km2. Our government is not transparent with the population numbers of foreigners and foreign workers in Singapore.
Singaporeans are not xenophobic. Because we are an immigrant society we are more tolerant of foreigners coming into our country to work. But don’t you think it is time that we look after the interests of Singaporeans instead of giving away our best jobs to foreigners ?
In allowing MNCs and financial institutions to openly operate in Singapore, why are we sacrificing our locals for second rate PMETs from third world countries ? Because they are cheaper ? Our top two universities ranked 11th. and 13th. in the world best universities and yet our graduates drive Grab, delivery foods and are hawking for a living. Why ?
I am sorry to say that I am very proud of my country Singapore but not at all proud of the government. Everywhere else in developed countries when so many locals PMETs lose their jobs to foreigners, you will have protests and overthrown of the government except in autocratic Singapore.
first of all, I completely agree with you that Singaporeans must look after Singaporeans, and all Singapore jobs should be prioritized for Singaporeans first. but if people are only targeting Indian foreigners, but keeping silent on the much bigger numbers of Malaysians (mostly Chinese) and PRC/HK foreigners who are taking up a lot more jobs than I smell racism, and not a concern for Singapore jobs. The numbers you showed from India sources actually proves my point. there are 300k PIOs. These are people who are not Indian nationals, but foreign nationals with Indian ethnicity. 7 % of Singapore citizens are Indians ie 250k. the other 50k might be Malaysian citizens with Indian ethnicity, or even US / UK citizens. so 250k from that 300k are Singapore citizens. 50k foreigners. the other 350k are Indian nationals, so total foreigners of Indian ethnicity is 400k, of which 350k are Indian nationals. this against a total foreign population of 2.2 million (5.7 million minus 3.5 million citizens). that is not even 20 %. and a huge majority in construction industry. and there are 1.8 million foreigners who are not Indian nationals, nor other foreign nationals of Indian ethnicity. where do you think most are from? think Malaysia and PRC / hk
With due respect, you sound like a whiney disgruntled minority who, for whatever reason, has a huge chip on your shoulder. Perhaps you didn’t quite make it in life and feel like everyone, especially the institutions at hand, are solely and squarely responsible for that.
Well, life’s short and given your age I think it’s time to grow up.
A thought proboking article but not able to reflect the real situation.
On the cruel reality, 99% of SGers you meet in the street, do not depend on DBS success to be world number 1 or world number 199. So is Mr Gupta.
Mr. Gupta should be thanked by his employer and employees, whenever if they deemed fit. Singaporeans do not need to thank him for a single bit.
Singaporeans do not deserve Mr. Gupta, because he is not a god with a golden finger, but deserve a governance that will fire the CEO if they can’t perform decisively and award if they perform, and let the highly paid CEO stays, if so they match up to the expectation to the income as well as the well being of the locals, whom they pay the CEO and draws from the tax payers’ monies.
You can call it protectionism, i called it: fuck off, if you can’t perform, if you perform, get what promised in your contract and thank you sincerely through your employer and stock market, and if you do good for your employees, they will decide what words they should say to thank you for.
Singaporeans are not interested to thank, as Mr. Gupta deserves to be awarded with 10s of millions per year, if he is so due deserved, when he contributed to grow his own org to what he is paid for, and answerable.
No one is god with a golden finger. UOB has a local boss that excels equally well, if not better.
Emmanuel are you a European with black backside (INdian) or an actual European ?
For someone who’s in the finance industry, his lack of knowledge is disgraceful. He got many things wrong.
– First, Thailand’s stock market isn’t bigger than ours. They’re HOPING to be bigger. (https://www.businesstimes.com.sg/asean-business/thai-bourse-aims-to-surpass-singapores-capitalisation-by-2023)
– Next, the CEO of SGX is Magnus Brocker. It was under him that we lost the MSCI license, not a local CEO.
– And Keppel Corp was actually doing OK until covid started.
– Last, he took issue at why Singaporeans never voice out issues with Singaporean CEOs who run SPH and NOL into the ground. Last I checked, we had plenty of issues with paper generals. Lol.
After which, he had a racist attack on Singaporean Chinese. You mean got no Singaporean Malay or Indian have an issue with CECA??
Overall, a very distasteful article. I’m shocked and appalled that for someone who spent decades in the financial sector, he can get his basic facts wrong.
Thanks for pointing the accurate facts out. His tone is one of cow play cow moo, consistent throughout the entire article; thus I read the article with some tinge of salt.
Part of the problem is the heavy reliance on MNC and the outright pandering to these companies in order for them to setup shop here. Yes, jobs are created and but behind it are the tax incentives and generous grants. Many of these MNC are here for pure financial considerations and have no obligation to train a local core. The next major problem are the GlCs themselves and the article somehow have left out the elephant in the room; why so many ex scholars especially those with fancy rank titles of Generals are helming these companies? As the author has put it well, you need the beast in you to do well as a leader of a corporation, not someone who has been cloistered by the state, whose confidence is honed not by the trials and tribulations of the real world, but by the patron state who constantly proclaim their superior being status to the rest of us common folks.
If the DBS board was to sack or reitire the current CEO…. dbs shares will in all likely react favourably …PG is not a banker only a bank execitive and a mediocre one at best
Dear ED,
Your piece has generated a lot of discussion.
1. Piyush has done well 4 himself so there is no need 4 anyone 2 b thankful he has taken up Sgp citizenship.
2. the key takeaway 4 me r:
a. Sgp Inc has a BIG PROBLEM as no one in top leadership is voicing the inadequacy of our local talent due 2 systemic issues of rote learning education, elitism n inbreeding (gov, GLCs, rewarding the obedient n compliant, etc.).
Mr Jack Sim, our iconoclastic World Toilet creator, shared his possible solutions in the comments section a few days back r gems 2 think about n act on.
b. the refusal 2 acknowledge that many of our biggest GLCs r floundering due to ‘assigned or anointed’ elites from the scholarship system, especially from the the military, local CEOs not performing WILL kill Sgp Inc.
3. As 4 bringing in race is unfortunate as it could have been someone other than Piyush that triggered the discussion.
Do we need foreigners that hv skills, knowledge n experience that Singaporeans don’t hv? The answer is a logical YES. e.g. the researchers in A*STAR, the technopreneurers that bring their ventures into Sgp, the billionaires that hire Singaporeans in the companies they invested here, etc.
Tks u. Bless Singapore n Singaporeans n friends of Singapore.
There is no need to thank Piyush beyond the normal accolades we give to good CEOs. I don’t think Piyush is even asking for it. the whole controversy happened because PSP MP, trying to play to the gallery to the Chinese majority to improve his party’s electoral prospects, started attacking Piyush. It would have been better if he questioned why DBS need Indian AND OCBC need PRC ceo. then his point of home grown CEOs may come across as more sincere. right now, it feels xenophobic, and he probably isn’t, but using this to gain electorally. Such irresponsible behavior by political parties that have clout (and PSP certainly has due to Tan Cheng Bock) will lead Singapore to a dysfunctional democracy. in this regard, PSP can learn a lot from WP
1. The issue of “Incestuous Board” in Singapore Inc, could be a contribution for the non-performance of the companies cited in the article. Here is an extract of the article written by Prof Tommy Koh, entitled “In defence of Lim Chong Yah” (https://tembusu.nus.edu.sg/news/2012/in-defence-of-lim-chong-yah). He mentioned his observation about Singapore Inc ” …I would also call attention to what Conservative British Prime Minister David Cameron said recently when he opposed the payment of extravagant salaries and bonuses in the financial industry in London.
He said that there was an incestuous element in the composition of boards. As a result, there was a certain “I scratch your back, you scratch my back” phenomenon at work.
I think that his comment is probably applicable to Singapore, where the talent pool is smaller, and the same people serve on multiple boards.
I also suspect that there is an unspoken competition among some of our leading companies to see whose chief executive officer will receive the highest salary. ….”
2. So, in the short term, perhaps identifying good foreign talents in management and subject matter experts to sit in our Singapore Inc Boards could help to put those companies back on growth path. Singaporeans are generally good planners and executors to bring good results.
Hi Capitaland had virtually nothing in its portfolio when it started? I would suggest that you check and re check your facts before making such a broad statement. I was a shareholder of DBS land before it was bought out and merged with Pidemco. DBS was highly profitable with good assets under its portfolio. The merger only increased the combined company’s balance sheet allowing for a quicker expansion and consolidation of costs. Furthermore DBS land had many assets in China.
I agreed many Singapore company fail because the are lead by scholars without experience. However I disagreed the he is that good, a good leader will train his staff to eventually take over which I believe he fail miserably, DBS have not be that profitable as compared with many other banks.
They are many Singaporean banker who can preform and bring DBS to greater heights but not given the opportunity because of our system.
If he is that good, why not go back to India and help the country and create better jobs and bring their banks to the international front.
While going through the article I wondered why the author feels the need to vent his frustrations in such a straight talk, given the fragility and privilege of the average Singaporean (not to say that I am not privileged). After reading some of the bucolic comments attacking the author here, looks like one might come to sympathise with the way he feels about the hopeless decline that Singapore is staring at in the coming years. If I was Singaporean and starting a fund here I too would be investing mostly in property here, and seeking foreign markets.
The author ignores the harsh realities of Singapore ; it is, no matter how much one denies it, an experiment in Sinicization. Modernity has come as an effect of that experiment, primarily because of the meteoric rise of China. Without the rise of China and the presence of an American security and economic umbrella, Singapore would not be where it is today.
Politics in Singapore is a walking talking contradiction, it says one thing and does another. This will never change because in choosing between modernity and Sinicization, the latter will always win out. It is futile to compare Singapore to America, a melting pot and possibly the most forward looking nation on earth. America has become the country that it is instead of remaining another blip in the Anglosphere because it holds itself up, on many fronts quite badly, to very high ideals. Americans have the freedom to be the masters of their destiny. The same cannot be said for Singaporeans. Sinicization for Singapore means Chinese schools, Chinese food, Chinese heritage, Chinese marriages, Chinese narratives of history, a general Chinese complexion of society and a higher Chinese complexion of management and leadership.
The role of the Chinese in building Singapore is always front and center, even though others may have played their part just as much. The “pioneer” generation created “meritocracy” largely to ensure that Singapore becomes modern not just in infrastructure and wealth, but also in its people. The desire was for Singapore to be a fairer society, because if left to its own devices the Chinese elites would keep all the cream and leave only but scabs. Those they would displace – Malays and Tamils, whos land Singapore is originally – would be the hardest hit. “Meritocracy” and “regardless of race” came to be much after Operation Coldstone and the outing of Lim Chin Siong. Lim in most likelyhood would have been the leader of Singapore in which case Singapore would have been a largely Hokkien speaking nation. Sinicization was the political bedrock of Chinese communists in Singapore and nothing will change the facts. The Chinese worker, second class in the country in which he was born was championed by the Barisa Socialis. In modern Singapore, hidden in local markets between HDBs, the Hokkien, Tamil and Malay underclasses remain invisible to the foreign talent, tourist and investors, in a world away, enamoured by the downtowns and gardens of Singapore. Singapore has pioneered another underclass – a class of temporary, migrant coolies, nannies, and sex workers, all come to motel Singapore and in six months to a year are gotten rid of when Singapore has gotten what it wants out of them, ‘fairly’ exploited and compensated to take back home a paycheck in SGD. To merely speak of them in human terms and the immorality of modern day slavery in Singapore might get you labelled a communist in Singapore.
Singapore’s modernity is the reward for its 70% by the Middle Kingdom. Deny it all you like, but Singapore is rich because it is an English speaking gateway to China for the rest of the world, not a center of innovation or a world leader. That would not happened without the Chinese population – a population that is conditoned to be subjects of the emperor for centuries. Baked into the culture of the Chinese is to work hard, stay loyal to the emperor, strive for more material wealth, not complain about what you receive and watch the kingdom succeed. In this is inherent the sucker’s payoff and discontent can always be directed towards outside barbarians or those who are lower down in the order of color, birth or genes in the emperor’s grand scheme. As far as Chinese civil society is concerned when it comes to leading the Chinese, it is taken for granted that it is weak and will concede the Chinese genius and the achievements of it’s labor to be the property of the emperor. This system, a pyramid scheme upheld for centuries, frustrates the intelligent Chinese to give up on civil society or democratic rule. He knows that only two things can lift him and his family up in life – the power of the emperor and working hard to have the best rice paddy. What place is there in such a society for the non-Chinese genius who defies the odds and builds a better rice paddy than the Chinese subject ? Noone quite knows, not even the emperor and that is the one thing that matters more than others.
Sinicization ensures that Chinese cannot innovate their way into a free universal society where anyone can succeed based on some idea of “meritocracy”, “regardless of race”. Success in Singapore is a combination of maintaining Singapore’s complexion, being in the good graces of the government, and staying competitive and open to the world while ensuring the Chinese majority doesn’t feel left out. To succeed in Singapore is to groom the Chinese majority first and look after it’s interests. It’s a balancing act for which you need to be made by a higher power – that is either China or USA. That’s the secret of success in Singapore, you need a bigger badder older brother that has your back. This manifests itself for the Chinese and European men in Singapore but not for the Indians. Lower down the rung are Hokkeien speaking Chinese whose ancestors threw in their lot with Barisa socialis, and Tamils and Malays who are broken in the education system from the time they are young children. The position of leadership in a culture like Singapore’s will always be with the man who is made, and not the one who worked his way up the so-called ‘meritocracy, regardless of race’.
The author laments the state of GLCs and decades of marginalization of talented Singaporeans of all colors to a point of his own frustrations. The xenophobia he cites reeks with the ugliness of Singapore’s racist underbelly and possibly even the authors personal experiences in Singapore’s high power distance work culture. A culture that has stifled innovation and risk-taking by prioritizing security for it’s privileged elite and a political class increasingly making populist cacophanies for electoral expediency. All this happens in the background of a corporate system married to kleptocracy and preferrentialism. Failure is natural, although it is minorities in Singapore that will be hardest hit by the coming storm, losses are essential part of any capitalist system. The failures of trickle down neo-capitalism in Singapore will only lead to further marginalization of its underclass making them more dependent on the state ; money will be offered to appease those disaffected by the system and the loudest voices venting their anger on outsiders. A stimulus will be touted as progress for a while until the time someone is brought in from the outside (most likely a man, most likely white) to cut and make Singapore leaner and meaner again. That too will fail. Unless corporate Singapore learns that losses are important and that failing Singaporean companies don’t have to be bailed out and the markets should be allowed to adjust, new blood will never make it in Singapore. Meritocracy can’t produce this risk taking attitude as meritocracy is achieved in an umbrella of security. It is imprudent for the young to be beholden to the belief that the elites of yesterday have cstles that need to be inherited via meritocracy, no matter how disfunctional. Furthermore, if capital is not adjusted for building newer better castles then they have no choice but to leave or work with the outsiders who can bring capital, talent, skill and build or help in building a newer castle. Xenophobia is the cheap trick, a play on the darker side of Singaporeans greed, supreriority complex and the desire to have it all for themselves and caste the other out. It is bait increasingly large number Singaporeans are taking and most of them will be worse off for it.
Singapore’s success story is a Chinese reaffirmation of the success of a centralised homogenous, race conscious culture. It’s success is part of a larger story – the success of overseas Chinese in search of “Lebensraum”, a larger Chinese living space connected to the middle kingdom via an economic umblical cord. Regardless of the floozy we hear about LKY being precient in seeing the rise of China, it was only a matter of time before Singapore saw the role of the bigger brother. Regardless of face in foreign policy, Singapore can’t afford to cross China the wrong way whether it is on democratic reforms, Mao or Hong Kong. Singapore is a modern version of an extended Chinese living space ; it’s history, propaganda, identity and foreign relations are determined and often white-washed by the dominance of the Chinese. Singapore’s success has been a double edged sword for its minorities – on the one hand they have security for women, better infrastructure, a less corrupt government, a global city and participation in a bigger market and exposure to a culture that creates greater wealth than their indigenous culture. On the flip side, it is a loss of ancestral land, political authority, marginalization in civil services and education and being passed over in roles of leadership because of the majority race will outgroup them.
Considering the realities of Singapore’s racial composition and it’s history it’s would be concerning to anyone to suggest that Singapore can reset and settle the demographic clock from LKY and the modern era. It’s and undeniable truth that before anyone was true-blue, this was the ancestral home of mostly Tamils and Malays. The true-blue Singaporeans, as they are referred to in the media, are the children or grandchildren of immigrants ; it should be noted here these are Singaporeans of all colors and hues with the majority being Chinese. Singapore’s success model is based on a win-win between them and the foreigner that comes to Singapore. The Singapore-born benefiting from the presence of a more competitive and enterprising foreigner that opens Singapore to a bigger foreign market and new technologies keeping Singapore competetive. The foreigner in exchange gets to work in a global melting pot where he is accepted and can hopefully integrate. This is, to put it crudely, a play of how Singapore and foreigners benefit from each other. It works as long as it’s fair play. Introduce into the pot racism, xenophobia, cronyism, kleptocracy, entitlement, and you have a potential future full of hubris, resentment and decay.
The ordinary person – Chinese, Indian, Malay cannot be reasoned out the moulds that generations of conditioning by society and state has shaped them into. They have to see it for themselves, then they will follow. What brings this about is either enterprise and leadership or the stroke of circumstance, or both. Singapore ‘pioneering’ generation had both these ingredients, they were at the cross roads of a changing world and found leadership to steer the ship. Singapore is at a crossroads of a changing world again, if it cannot lead it has no choice and will become more insular. Enlightened despotism worked for Singapore for a long time, despotism alone will fail to do the trick.
It’s a fallacy and Indian washing to claim that “Tamils” are considered natives of Singapore. Go and brush up your general knowledge —- Chinese had settled in Singapore since the 10th century and no where did any significant pop of Tamils or Indians being credited.
Stop your silly grandiosity of Indianization. SIA and PSA are no where considered “failing GLCs” as claimed by you. Together with Singtel and many others.