Giving meaning to the rallying call

Schemes, policies a good start to 'inclusive society' but it's the people that define a society

By Ignatius Low, The Straits Times, 10 Mar 2012

WHEN Acting Minister for Community Development, Youth and Sports Chan Chun Sing speaks passionately about something, he goes off-script and his grammar sometimes goes awry.

But there was no mistaking the poignancy with which he closed the debate on his ministry's budget estimates yesterday.

He said that in his last 10 months at the helm of the Ministry of Community Development, Youth and Sports (MCYS), nothing pained him more than to read newspaper reports of people dying alone in their houses.

'Nobody knows that he or she has passed away, and they only found out when the smell of rotting body filtered through the windows and the doors and the neighbours reported it,' he said, in response to a clarification from Mr Ang Hin Kee (Ang Mo Kio GRC).

'I think we can do better, because this will never happen in a kampung. This will never happen when we know our neighbours well, check on them to see whether they are in need of help or not.'

His eventual parting shot to fellow members of the House: 'Schemes and policies do not make an inclusive society. We do.'

That statement (delivered twice and with pauses for effect) shows how far a Government that has tended to shy away from sloganeering has come.

In fact, the 'inclusive society' received rather a lot of airplay not just during the Committee of Supply proceedings for MCYS, but over the entire nine days spent debating the Budget as a whole.

In the process, the House went on a long journey that started with the harder issues of how to financially provide for such an ideal in increasingly uncertain economic conditions.

The journey ended, fittingly, yesterday with a thorough discussion of the nuts and bolts of implementation: who needs help, how much to give and what resources to beef up so that everything works the way it should.

Whatever one might think about the amorphousness of the concept, the 'inclusive society' has been a useful and effective rallying cry for Singapore's politicians during this year's debate.

Under its aegis, MPs have succeeded in drawing attention to at-risk groups that include not just the usual suspects - namely the elderly and the low-income - but also lesser-discussed groups like the disabled, special needs children, divorced parents and unwed single mothers.

And ministers have unhesitatingly invoked the term in rolling out a broad panoply of help schemes that cut across policy areas as diverse as housing, health and transport.

Minister of State Halimah Yacob was the latest to wear it proud, quoting former United States president Franklin D. Roosevelt as she reminded the House: 'The test of progress is not whether we add more to the abundance of those who have much; it is whether we provide enough for those who have too little.'

It is a distinct shift in tone for a ruling party that, even while doling out dollops of cash to the needy through housing and health-care subsidies, was always extremely wary of being seen to be doing so, for fear of blunting the incentive among the poor to work and lift themselves out of their quandary.

Yet the party may have little choice. There is a growing realisation that more people are falling behind because of forces beyond their control.

Global demand and a surfeit in liquidity are causing the cost of property, utilities and food to rise, not just in Singapore but in many other countries. At the same time, a widening income gap is making it harder for the poorer families to catch up as the rest of society progresses on.

The looming reality of an ageing society is an important factor too. If the Government does not proactively give help, an inordinate number of Singaporeans could plunge into the 'at-risk' category and go without the right jobs, income, housing, health care and companionship.

As Mr David Ong (Jurong GRC) astutely noted yesterday, the game has changed from simply 'adding years to life' to 'adding life to years'.

Yet even though the Government coordinates its agencies better, simplifies its schemes and better resources areas of need, much will depend on the way the broader community responds.

As Mr Chan pointed out, all the best-laid plans on helping the disabled will not work if employers do not give them a chance. The schemes to boost community and home-based eldercare will also not take off if Singaporeans say 'good idea, but not in my backyard'.

Is there hope, therefore, that Singapore can in fact achieve the ideal 'inclusive society'?

The answer is still very much a 'maybe', but the Budget debate has offered some cause for optimism.

The many speeches in Parliament over the last week give a sense that the community is becoming more willing to help. Volunteerism is up, and numerous case studies cited by MPs show that ordinary Singaporeans are working hand-in-hand with the Government to make a difference.

The new generation of leaders is also showing a renewed sensitivity to concerns on the ground and a willingness to respond to feedback. In the rush to grapple with the issues of the day, many forget that the Budget debate marked the 'debut' of key members of Singapore's fourth-generation leadership.

Having been in their appointments for almost a year now, Mr Heng Swee Keat, Mr Tan Chuan-Jin, Mr Lawrence Wong and Mr Chan are now in a position to sketch their philosophies and share their plans. They demonstrated not just a good grasp of the technical details but also a fiery passion for effecting change.

All this should augur well for a strong partnership between the Government and the people. Indeed, the nation requires nothing less for the difficult economic and social transitions ahead.

Speak less, impact more: Ng
TODAY, 10 Mar 2012

As the Committee of Supply (COS) debates drew to a close yesterday, Leader of the House Ng Eng Hen reminded Members of Parliament the "real work" is just beginning.

"The real work for the fiscal year begins for the Government and us as MPs, to ensure that the full benefits of these programmes reach out to our residents," said Dr Ng, who is also Minister for Defence.

Dr Ng said: "The Budget debate and COS sessions witnessed articulate, passionate arguments and advocacy and a healthy dose of verbal sparring."

Nevertheless, he added: "For both front and back bench, let's aspire: Speak less, impact more. Focus more on substantive issues, debate core policies."

Dr Ng also pointed to the "many significant firsts" in this year's proceedings. It was the first Budget and COS debates of the 12th Parliament after the 2011 General Election and the largest Parliament, with 98 MPs, since independence, for instance.

"There was another significant first, but on a regrettable note," said Dr Ng. "We entered into Budget debate with one less MP, who was expelled from his party," he said, referring to Mr Yaw Shin Leong's expulsion from the Workers' Party last month.

"I wish that such occurrences should remain few and far between," he said. The episode reminds MPs to "uphold high standards of integrity and honesty for this office that we have been appointed", Dr Ng added.

In a light-hearted moment, Dr Ng commended Speaker of Parliament Michael Palmer for his "sustained attentiveness" throughout the debates, saying he imagined Mr Palmer as a poster boy for an energy drink advertisement.