Howard Lee

An acquaintance of mine once commented that any statesman can go overseas and talk about a vision. The difference between Singapore and any other country is that, when the Singapore statesman comes home, he has a bunch of public service officers that can turn that vision into a reality.

Given the bold statements and claims that have been floating around in recent days asking Singaporeans to vote in the government with the best track record (ergo, the Peoples’ Action Party), particularly the latest by Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew, I thought this comment to be particularly worth remembering. At the very least, it could help to put things in perspective and give you, voters for the coming general elections, clearer knowledge on who deserves your vote.

In the past few weeks, during the we-are-campaigning-but-don’t-want-to-be-obviously-illegal stage, you would have heard the term “masterplan” battered around a few times. Think general election carrot, and you will find that this term aligned with estate upgrading plans in Bishan-Toa Payoh, Tanjong Pagar, and Jurong.

“Masterplan” is a big word that, from the perspective of an individual, is at best an attempt to say, “We’ve put some thought into it.” In reality, its true meaning is, “We have a bunch of people who have been wrecking their brains the past few years trying to make sure that what you see today actually works.”

From an everyday perspective, you might not notice the difference, and might have mistaken it to mean that the speaker, more likely than not someone from the current administration has delivered on the job.

But ask this question: Did MM himself, for all his capabilities, manage to visualise, plan and implement the estate upgrading for Tanjong Pagar?

If we examine the historical development of Singapore, we will realise that it was the brains and backs of thousands of public officers that turned a pipe dream into the reality that is Singapore today.

Of course, the public service did not contribute to every aspect of our economy and society. But minimally, it did formulate the national framework that enabled the private and people sectors to take root, evolve and multiply. Where the PAP administration played a part all these years was to set the general direction for them to follow, so that the public service can turn visions into tangibles.

There is clearly a distinction between the work done by the public service and advisory/guidance role of the party in power. As such, why then do we continue to muddle the two? The answer lies partly in election rhetoric, but also in the decades of uninterrupted PAP rule, such that we ourselves begin to conflate the public service and our elected representatives.

There is also the “membership alliance” between the PAP and the public service, in the sense that the top tiers of both mix and mingle easily. It is not a casual observation. If you notice the new slate of PAP candidates presented every general election, a great number are from the top ranks of the public service. This close relationship has also been noted in a United Nations research. It gives the perception that the transfer of talent necessarily dictates a transfer of ideals as well.

But the top tier of the public service does not stay for long, particularly if their transfer to political life is a scheduled appointment. This means that, on a daily basis, it is up to those who do not make the move to run the show and implement policies, broken or otherwise, to the best of their ability and hopefully for the benefit of the people.

A good example will be the Orchard Road floods in June 2010. Numerous politicians publicly denied negligence, culminating in the infamous statement by MM himself – “It is an act of God”. That did not stop the Public Utilities Board from embarking on a plan to flood-proof Orchard Road. Is PUB trying to play God, then? Clearly, despite denial by the political leadership of a resolution, the PUB has mustered what engineering abilities it has in an attempt to deliver just that.

You might suspect that, behinds the scene, there was political pressure on PUB to do so given the impending elections. But my belief will be that, on any regular day, our public service has generally delivered on its commitment to serve the public and keep the country humming. If not for altruistic reasons, then for practical ones – no public officer would like to get into office everyday just to be overloaded with crises.

But there will be times when the dominant political agenda conflates with the national agenda for the greater public good, whereby the public service, for lack of will or ability to resist, is unable to fulfill its role in serving the people.

At one end of the spectrum is petty strife. Those who work in the grassroots will tell you about the letters they craft for Members of Parliament to secure preferential public services for their constituents – an attempt to jump queue over due process, but also creating the false impression that MPs are serving the people. In fact, they are not, but merely taking a shortcut around the system instead of pushing for policy changes to make the system better for everyone.

At the far end of this spectrum, the public service might also have to deal with the politicisation of so-called national projects – estate upgrading, the integrated resorts and the Youth Olympic Games, to name a few. These projects have a strong influence on the public’s perception of the political leadership’s success, and hence we can expect political pressure on the public service, the true workers of the projects. These pressures are a shame, and a corruption of the system.

So if you were to ask, are the impossible dreams presented by any political party do-able? I’d say yes. Will they be accomplished for the good of the public, regardless of the political party in charge? For that, we can only pray that the public service can continue to distance itself from the political leadership, and focus on doing what is right for us, the people.

The real hard truth is that, should the PAP not be returned to power come polling day, it will still be the public service that will keep the country going. For sure, it will feel an initial stage of lost without the current leadership, but the nation will not crumble to the ground as the bogeyman has warned. This is because the Singapore public service is not always at the will of the political leadership, inclined as we are to believe otherwise.

I trust that most public officers, if given the chance, will rise to the service of the people and do the right thing, no matter what political climate they operate within.

This article is the writer’s salute to all the public officers who have dedicated their lives and careers to serving the people of Singapore, and particularly one masterplanning team – keep faith with the people.

Picture from Yahoo.

No related posts.