1. ABOUT THE BIG QUIZ
í Co-organisers: The Straits Times and the Ministry of Education
í Presenting sponsor: Singapore Press Holdings Foundation
í Innovation partner: Shell
í The run-up to The Big Quiz comprises:
1. A series of 12 primers on current affairs topics
2. Talks given by editors and correspondents of
The Straits Times
3. A sponsored segment on students’ say to set questions
THE BIG QUIZ CONTEST
Four quiz rounds in which teams from participating schools will
vie for the top prize: a championship trophy and $5,000 cash
í Open to: First year pre-university students and Year 5
Integrated Programme students from 24 participating schools
For more information, go to www.straitstimes.com/thebigquiz
T
HE National Day
address and National
Day Rally speeches in
August are traditional-
ly a time for some
nationwide introspection, as the
Prime Minister takes stock of the
year past and sets a direction for
the year ahead.
Last year though, Prime Minis-
ter Lee Hsien Loong took that pro-
cess to a different level.
In his National Day address, he
raised some fundamental ques-
tions that he said were critical for
the country’s next phase of devel-
opment.
“What future do we see for Sin-
gapore? What kind of home do we
want for our children? I believe all
of us want to be proud to be Singa-
poreans, and to live in a success-
ful country that meets our aspira-
tions. What does this mean?”
In so doing, PM Lee set the ball
rolling for what was to be the larg-
est public consultation exercise
ever done here.
The exercise, subsequently giv-
en the name Our Singapore Con-
versation (OSC), would take in
the views of almost 5,000 Singa-
poreans in just its first phase. Dur-
ing this phase, people would be in-
vited to participate in a series of
focus groups where open-ended
discussions would take place
about the key challenges Singa-
pore faced.
Thousands more would be en-
gaged through social media and
conversations run by organisa-
tions such as the People’s Associa-
tion and business chambers.
The core effort would be led by
Education Minister Heng Swee
Keat, together with a group of
younger ministers and a team
made up of people selected from a
variety of fields.
A bumpy beginning
OUR Singapore Conversation is
now into its sixth month. Yet, it
remains for some a somewhat divi-
sive issue.
Many who have participated
have emerged from the sessions
to expound the value that they
have gleaned from the process.
But there is a group that re-
mains sceptical about the exer-
cise.
At the beginning, a minor furo-
re broke out online about the
make-up of the committee that
would facilitate the conversation.
Many cried foul at the lack of any
opposition figures among the 26
chosen.
Mr Heng said that the selection
of committee members was “not a
partisan exercise”, and that the
views of opposition members
would be welcome during the pro-
cess. A number of opposition poli-
ticians were subsequently invited
to the sessions. Some like Nation-
al Solidarity Party chief Hazel Poa
attended, while others chose to sit
it out.
Beyond the committee, there
were also those who were critical
about the open-ended format, say-
ing that a lack of focus would ham-
per the ability of the conversation
to produce concrete outcomes.
Cynics pointed to the limited effi-
cacy of previous attempts at a na-
tional conversation.
Yet, Mr Heng and the commit-
tee had stressed continually that
the conversation was not focused
on producing policy recommenda-
tions or finding sacred cows to
slay.
PM Lee said in September last
year that the OSC should not be a
“culling session”.
“I don’t think we should start
our Singapore conversation on the
basis of looking for sacred cows to
slay... I don’t think that would be
a constructive exercise,” he said.
New era of consultation
PERHAPS the most obvious im-
pact of the national conversation
so far came during the two-week
Budget debate last month.
Speeches made by several min-
isters, while laying out the direc-
tion for their ministries, were no-
table for sections that called for
Singaporeans to talk about the
long-term direction that policies
should take.
For instance, Health Minister
Gan Kim Yong wanted a conversa-
tion about a review of health-care
financing, National Development
Minister Khaw Boon Wan wanted
views on the future of housing pol-
icy, and Mr Heng himself invited
Singaporeans to talk about how ed-
ucation policy would change.
In fact, sessions on education
have already begun as part of the
second phase of the OSC, and par-
ticipants are grappling with ques-
tions of stress and the excessive
focus on examinations, as well as
social mobility and inclusion.
Even in ministries that did not
directly invoke the OSC, minis-
ters still sought consultation. De-
fence Minister Ng Eng Hen called
on the public to give ideas on how
to improve national service. He
set up two working groups that
will canvass views from a wide
cross-section of society.
The emphasis on consultation
and engagement marks a depar-
ture from the usual top-down, pre-
scriptive style of governance.
Even when there was consultation
in the 1980s and 1990s, efforts
tended to focus on getting feed-
back on policies proposed, not on
consulting people on the direction
to take.
A maturing electorate demands
more engagement and more ac-
countability, meaning that leaders
are increasingly less able to decide
on policy in isolation.
And the change in style is not
just down to an evolving elector-
ate. The nature of policy options
that Singapore faces is also shift-
ing.
The low-hanging fruits poli-
cy-wise have been plucked and
there are precious few decisions
now that result in clear win-win
scenarios.
Combined with an electorate
that holds increasingly disparate
views, the nature of policymaking
today is often a case of balancing
trade-offs.
PM Lee put it this way in a re-
cent interview: “The society is in
a different phase now. We are not
a teenager; we are maybe a bit
more than a young adult – the
rate at which you can grow is dif-
ferent. The sort of anxieties and is-
sues which arise will be different.
And we have to be able to address
those.”
For Mr Heng, even consulta-
tion may no longer be enough. He
prefers the format of the OSC
where Singaporeans get to engage
one other instead of just provid-
ing feedback to the Government.
He said that the conversation
allows a free airing of diverse
views and brings groups of Singa-
poreans with differing views to-
gether.
“In some countries, the idea of
having people come together to
sit at a table to discuss their op-
posing views is almost impossi-
ble,” he said.
Wherever possible, he hopes
for all complex government deci-
sions to involve some sort of con-
versation and for Singaporeans to
make the open discourse of diffi-
cult issues a habit.
In that sense, he hopes the
OSC process will live on long after
it is officially closed.
jeremyau@sph.com.sg
By JEREMY AU YONG
ASSISTANT POLITICAL EDITOR
Education Minister Heng Swee Keat (standing) listening to participants during the first citizens’ dialogue session, part of Our Singapore Conversation, at the National Library last October. ST FILE PHOTO
T
HE Our Singapore Con-
versation (OSC) is by
no means the first time
Singapore has em-
barked on a national
public consultation exercise.
There have been at least three
previous exercises since 1991.
None of these though was as large
in scope or as ambitious as the on-
going OSC.
The first notable public consul-
tation exercise here was called
The Next Lap. It was led by a Cabi-
net sub-committee called the
Long Term National Development
Committee and headed by then
Acting Minister for Information
George Yeo.
They produced a 160-page
book that mapped out broad plans
to make Singapore a nation of dis-
tinction. The recommendations ul-
timately led to, among other
things, schools going to a single
session, the setting up of Edusave
and the establishment of the coun-
try’s third university, the Singa-
pore Management University.
Five years later, in 1996, came
the next exercise known as Singa-
pore 21.
Singapore 21 was an action
plan to take the country into the
21st century. The project was an
idea first mooted by then Prime
Minister Goh Chok Tong.
A committee chaired by then
Minister for Education and Sec-
ond Minister for Defence Teo
Chee Hean conducted more than
a year of discussions with about
6,000 Singaporeans from all
walks of life. The findings were
then distilled into a report re-
leased in 1999.
Some of the issues raised then
remain relevant today.
For instance, Singaporeans
spoke about wanting to live less
stressful lives while retaining
their drive and also about balanc-
ing the need to attract talent with
the need to look after Singapore-
ans.
The public consultation in
2002, Remaking Singapore, would
also deal with some similar
themes, such as an over-emphasis
on materialism in society.
The committee was chaired by
then Minister of State (National
Development) Vivian Balakrish-
nan.
The process threw up some con-
tentious suggestions that were dis-
missed, like allowing the jobless
to withdraw some of their CPF
funds.
Eventually, of the 74 proposals
it made, 60 received the Govern-
ment’s nod in 2004.
Among the most popular: The
introduction of a five-day work
week.
JEREMY AU YONG
PRIMER
Setting a new pace for the nation
The cover of the Singapore 21 report
(above), which was released in 1999.
The Singapore 21 committee
conducted more than a year of
discussions with about 6,000
Singaporeans from all walks of life.
The idea was first mooted by Mr Goh
Chok Tong (left picture, in white shirt)
and the committee was chaired by Mr
Teo Chee Hean (in blue shirt).
ST FILE PHOTO
This is the third of 12
primers on various
current affairs issues,
which will be
published in the
run-up to The Straits
Times-Ministry of
Education National
Current Affairs Quiz.
THE SINGAPORE PERSPECTIVE
A brief history
of national
conversations
A24 OOPPIINNIIOONN M O N D A Y , A P R I L 1 5 , 2 0 1 3