Transcription
Mr. Corbunwan, Chairman, Mr. Chanyang Kik, CEO of SBH. Excellencies, distinguished guests, ladies and gentlemen, thank you for inviting me to give the closing talk and Q&A. Um, I'm very happy to join you today at this year's Asia Future Summit. Uh, I thank all dignitaries, speakers, participants for the insights you have shared. And I will close the conference with some thoughts on mostly on attitudes and spirits that Singapore should have as this juncture of our very interesting history.
Uh let me give a throwback uh to Gong which in Malay means village. Uh there's only one left in Singapore called the Gampong nor. Yet in our HTB estates, we always describe our housing estates as kongs. You move around the estates, you see banners always describing our kong here, our kong there. My constituency, we have a estate called Kong Admir. You can see uh but those of us who lived in Kong before, spent time in Kong before, we know that today's HTB estates is a far cry from the Kong of the old days. Kong living very easygoing. Everyone knew one another. In my Gong, we drew water from a well. My aunties were always cook. And so long as you are in a gamong, you can go into the kitchen anytime and eat so long as there's food. There was no sense, no strong sense of personal property. And that uh frustrate my mother a lot. Whenever she bring an umbrella, she leave outside the house later you'll be gone. But you are free to take someone else's. That was the social compact of GO.
You compare that with the urban living in HTB today. We live in our own apartments. We cook our own meals. We value our own personal space. And you better not take any items from your neighbor's house. So, so we are not being literal when we describe our HTB estates as gongs. We cherish the modern facilities. We enjoy our privacies. In fact, we are constantly working very hard to improve the facilities better. But what we hope to bring back is a spirit of cohesion, the warmth and the care of Kong. Kong is an expression of nostalgic endearment, reminiscing qualities that we missed even as we develop new towns.
I share this story to make a larger point. In our early years, Singapore's hopes were straightforward. We move from mud flats to metropolis. We want modern roads. We want mass transit systems, comfortable housing, schools, hospitals. The only way was up. And our pioneers pursued progress with single-minded determination. And today, our hopes are more nuanced. We want to leverage our high base of development, seize opportunities, progress further. But at the same time, we are nostalgic for the Gong spirit. We lament certain crafts and certain traits are lost. We worry that old values and ethos may be weakened. In charting Singapore's future, we are a bit like time travelers navigating between the past, the present as well as the future. Hence, today it is too simplistic for us to say that we need the pioneering spirit of the first generation of Singaporeans. Because our pioneers started with almost nothing, they were fearless. They were idealistic. They were fueled by their ambition to achieve something audacious and they have little to lose. They are like the founders of startups you know who devoted all their energy, all their resources, very little to lose but with the hope of creating a unicorn.
Today first world Singapore is different because we have a lot to lose. Our first instinct is and should be stewardship. We must avoid recklessness and wastage. Never squander what an earlier generation built for us. So there's a Chinese saying that wealth does not pass three generations. The first generation builds, the second generation preserve, the third generations unfortunately sometimes squanders it away. When that happens, it is a failure of stewardship. So there are many family businesses that didn't last three generations. But there are also many that lasted many generations or those who lasted inevitably. There are stewards who made sure no one fight over what was accumulated and energy is channeed to build capabilities and grow the wealth further. They form trust structures separate the shareholders from the management team. They hire the most talented people not necessarily family members to run the organization. Countries that have accumulated wealth, we face the ch same challenge. The temptation to spend is there. So there's always a challenge to preserve.
Years ago I was in Switzerland attended the St. Galan symposium. I had a dialogue with a group of international students. One African student asked me and told me, "Minister, Singapore, you are so lucky. You don't have oil. In my country, we have oil." And as a result, it led to corruption and our politicians are always fighting over how to spend the oil money. They say that we are lucky that we have no oil. I'm not sure I agree with her. I think very welcome oil in Singapore. But her point was very striking. What we lack in natural resources has forced us to focus on building strong institutions and human capital. Without striking any lottery of nature, we made our own luck. We must now guard against the squandering of accumulated health including our national reserves. And we must do so with utmost seriousness. And that is why we have an elected president help protect our reserves. Constitution of Singapore stipulates how government can use the returns of investment of our reserves. That's it.
There is also a risk to focusing only on stewardship because for every story of a new generation squandering away their inherited wealth, there's also one of the tropy because they were so focused on protecting the past that they could not renew and keep up with the times. It is often said that Singapore's biggest threat today is complacency. But then there are different kinds of complacency. One kind is associated with hubris and decadence of success. Empires have fallen because of that. But there's also another that is being too timid, too inhibited, too constrained by tradition and old rules in order to chart bold new directions. Professor Ray Hong said it quite well in his classic book. His classic book is on the demise of the Ming dynasty. It's called 1587, a year of no significance. He attributed the downfall of the Ming dynasty to accumulated weaknesses in the system. But his biggest punch I thought is in the last paragraph of the book. I I read it to you. A highly stylized society wherein the roles of individuals were thoroughly thoroughly restricted by a body of simple yet illdefined moral precepts. By that time the limit for the Ming dynasty had already been reached. It no longer mattered whether the ruler was conscientious or re or irresponsible, whether his chief counselor was enterprising or conformist, whether the generals were resourceful or incompetent, whether the civil officials were honest or corrupt, or whether the leading thinkers were radical or conservative. In the end, they all failed to reach fulfillment. But that's a very scary thought. By that time, it doesn't matter anymore what kind of individuals you have. The entire system inhibits progress. Such severe societal inhibition is a far more insidious form of complacency. When we see hubris and decadence, at least we know we can recognize it and we know it's wrong. But societal inhibition and timidity, they are dressed up as being loyal to the past, faithful to the ethos and values that led to today's success and therefore not to be questioned.
There's an example in Netflix in the corporate sector. Today the company is synonymous with uh streaming entertainment. People may not remember Netflix started in 1998 and their business is to rent you DVDs and they send it to you by mail. But when technology advanced, Netflix went for a breakthrough. So it started a new business model where you pay a monthly subscription and you can rent as many DVDs as possible. they will send it to you. But not content to rest on the success, Netflix took another bold step in 2007 and it developed a streaming platform invested in content including its own production. So Netflix contributed to the demise of its old business of DVD rental. But by doing so, it preserve its purpose of bringing entertainment instantly and conveniently to the world. It is not enough to be a steward, especially in a fast changing world with intense competition. We also need the courage to be enterprising, building upon what was handed to us, transforming it into something better. A failure to be enterprising to chart a new future is just as damaging as a failure to steward accumulated resources from the past. In the final analysis, understanding how the environment has shifted, exercising judgment to know when to harness the courage and resources to seek a breakthrough, what to preserve, what to change is one of the biggest challenge of this generation of Singaporeans.
I live through two such balancing balancing acts in the Ministry of Health and Ministry of Education. I present this to you as case studies. Let me start with Ministry of Health. For decades, our main preoccupation was the spread of infectious diseases like tuberculosis, choloal, measles. With better sanitation, hygiene, vaccinations, and med medications, these diseases came under control. And as healthcare standards improved, infant mortality fell. Life expectancy rose all over the world. But we became victims of our own success. As people live longer, we get non-communicable diseases and that took center stage. And today we worry about heart diseases, diabetes, cancers, dementias driven partly by the lifestyles of progress and the modern living. That is why the measure of success of health care is no longer just lifespan but also health span. Lifespan is just how long you live. Health span is how long you stay healthy. So a king mission in healthcare today is not just to prolong life but to narrow the gap between our health span and our lifespan. And in Singapore is about 11 years and that way if we can narrow it our added years are healthier years. That is why preventive care, population health, better chronic disease management are at the center of our healthcare strategy today. We are leveraging all our traditional knowhow, skills and strengths to pursue this new strategy.
A similar dynamic between preservation and breakthrough is playing out in education. In the early years of nation building, our priority was clear. Reduce the dropout rates for students, keep the students in school. To achieve this, we develop a highly structured curriculum, introduce standardized national examinations like the PSLE. A major policy intervention was school streaming, teaching students differently according to their abilities and that reduced dropout rates to great success. Years later, these very practices that worked also created rigidity and stress. Some students came to believe that they are only as good as the course they are placed in. With the rise of the knowledge economy and the internet, road learning to prepare for national examinations was no longer enough as well. Hence, in recent years, we have injected more flexibility into the system. We reduced the number of school examinations, particularly midyear examinations. I got rid of half of them. Minister Chanjun Singh got rid of the other half. So there are no more media examinations. And we free up curriculum time for students to learn more. We gave every secondary school student a personal smart learning device like an iPad. There is a risk that students get hooked on using the iPad and spend too much time on it and some students did. But on balance this was a necessary but bold move given that the devices have already become an integral part of our lives anyway. But by making personal learning devices part of national education policy we open up a new mode of learning for the students and educators are now involved in guiding students to develop a positive relationship with technology including AI. The latest OECD survey therefore showed that 75% of teachers in Singapore use AI to help them teach or to support students learning and that is twice the proportion of OECD average. We phased out secondary school streaming in favor of a more refined arrangement where students pursue each subject at a level that match their strengths. Instead of streaming by cause, we now stream by subject. But in doing so, we remove the stigma of causes. Our schools and especially institutes of higher learning now provide diverse pathways for progression to cater to the different strengths and interests of students. So these are case studies of health and education.
Beyond these areas, how do stewardship and enterprise help chart Singapore's future in a fragmented world? These are beyond my scope of responsibility. But let me offer some ideas as well. We say today's theme is fragmented world. The world is fragmented in the sense that the postworld war II order has passed. America is no longer willing to bear the burden of underwriting global security and we are entering into a multipolar world with the rise of China, India and also the economic halves of Europe and Japan. But the world is actually still as globalized as ever if you think about it despite everything that has happened and the higher tariffs. In 2001, the year China joined the World Trade Organization, world trade in goods and services is about US $7.6 trillion. In 2024, it is estimated to be US dollar $33 trillion. So even if you take into account of inflation, it is still a quantum jump in terms of global world trade volume. Modern travel is connecting people all around the world. Today, one flight can bring us to New York, east coast as well as west coast of the US. In every major city, we see a confluence of people from all continents. Practically everyone is on the internet today consuming news videos, memes, my Tik Tok videos all over the world and give us glimpses of the happenings, the culture and the humor from different parts of the world. Next year FIFA World Cup will be held in North America. 2008 Olympics will be held in Los Angeles. You just imagine it's quite amazing. Athletes from all over the world compete in this competition with predetermined set of international rules and we obey. If you don't obey, you get disqualified. So when you think about it, the world continues to be deeply connected and globalized despite all the disruptions. It is also undergoing other tectonic changes other than Africa. Every continent is aging rapidly because people are living much longer. Climate change will alter the world in profound and maybe irreversible ways. And we have yet to fully comprehend the impact of technological advances like AI, which at this stage is probably only at the equivalent of the Cambrian explosion during the world's evolution. So to describe the world as fragmented is probably oversimplifying it. Every industry, every aspect of public policy will need to chart new paths ahead because of all these big changes happening around us. Singapore, we are small, we are nimble, which means when the land shifts below us, we are agile and we can quickly find our new footing and reposition ourselves. And there is a lot going for us.
What can be some of Singapore's new goals? First, big power contestation and tariffs have disrupted existing trade, redistributed global division of labor, creating new flow of commerce. Southeast Asia as a result benefited from increased manufacturing investments and intraasia trade continues to grow strongly at around 8%. PSA our seapport and Changi airport. They are like the two lungs to our economy injecting oxygen the rest of the economy and every sector and plugging Singapore into the vast international network of sea lanes and aviation routes. So no matter how trade pattern shifts and changes PSA through PSA and Changi airport you can maximize options and flexibility and this applies to all businesses and so that you can trade freely with different parts of the world. Then as trade flows through Singapore it brings along new activities, energy and dynamism. So Singapore can be the nexus of the global supply chain.
Next, geopolitical constatation can put multinational companies in the bind. Some of them because of their country origin or where they are located geographically find that their access to markets can be affected. Sudden and frequent policy changes added to the uncertainty. In such a climate, Singapore offers a stable and credible environment to do global business. And this is because of our reputation, rule of law, strong protection of intellectual property rights, excellent infrastructure, political stability and our good relations and access to all major markets. As a result, MNC's from all over the world, US, China, EU, Japan, India and beyond, they have located their global and regional headquarters and core functions. Here, Singapore is where they strategize and execute global operational plans. We can stand out as a trusted hub for decision making.
Third, although Singapore is renewable energy disadvantaged, we don't have solar, we have very little solar, we have very little wind, we have charted a trajectory to evolve into a more sustainable economy. We plan our land use meticulously incorporating as much green space as possible. We control our vehicle population like no country do and by 2040 we have a goal of suspend substantially transiting all private vehicles to be low emission vehicles and we have implemented an economywide carbon tax so that business decisions take into account the environmental cost of carbon emission. We aim to have emission peak before 2030 and achieve net zero by 2050. Singapore is too small to make a difference to global ambition. But through the unique policies of our national green plan that I mentioned above, we can be a model for sustainable development.
And finally, for companies seeking breakthroughs, Singapore also offers a springboard for future growth. To do so, we have to create the right environment for innovation. We will need the talent base, the right research and innovation ecosystem, and a small but sophisticated reference market to try out and scale new products and services. We also need to ensure that regulatory practices and rules do not stifle innovation. This is something we need to continue to work hard on. Rules and regulations are always well-intentioned. They accumulate over time and we have grown comfortable with them sometimes and so it takes a lot of enterprising zeal to review, streamline or even sunset them. But it is a necessary act of enterprising courage. If we succeed, we can re-engineer Singapore to be a crucible for innovation. So the nexus for global supply chain, trusted heart for decision making, a model for sustainable economic development, a crucible for innovation. And these are some of the promising possibilities that in my view we can create for Singapore's future in this new world.
Gustaf Muller is a prominent composer and conductor of the 19th century. He once said, "Tradition is not the worship of ashes but the preservation of fire." I believe a combination of strong sense of stewardship and enterprising courage will usher in Singapore's continued success. And this demands responsibility, prudence, renewal, and courage. Only then can we ensure that the fire of tradition continues to illuminate our paths towards the future. Thank you >> for such a thoughtprovoking speech. I think it is indeed a befitting closing speech to get us thinking. And to all of you who stayed with us to the very last program, how's the going? It has been a long day. I know because I stay uh throughout the day as well. Our mind is like, you know, running a marathon. Well, the good news is that the end is near. We are now entering the last stretch of the marathon. And if you feel a little lethargic before the minister's speech, I hope the minister's speech gave you a mental boost. And so we are now at the Q&A session. Uh the format is very simple. >> Oh, we can go home. >> It's like dessert. I will ask a few questions and since we have a very engaging audience today in order for you to have enough time to ask your burning questions I will restrict myself to maybe two or max three questions then I will open the four and I'm meaning to say uh you can start thinking about your questions now or you can scan the QR code and send in your questions. But please pardon me. I will give priority to those who raise their hands and ask the questions in person later. Fair enough. And I also would like to remind our audience that this is indeed a bilingual forum although so far none of the speakers spoke in Mandarin. So I would like to remind that you can actually ask your questions later. >> This is special treatment for me. me. >> Uh, Minister, you can choose to answer in in >> so let's get started. Minister, in in in a short span of about two weeks, uh, you gave two important speech. One at the parliament debate on the president's address and one was just a few minutes ago. They all touch on very important political issues. So it is quite clear at least to me that you did not speak as the health minister but as a senior member uh of the 4G. >> I was talking about the health of our political system and today I spoke about the health of our economy. >> Okay. You can really stretch your portfolio as a health minister >> enterprising courage. So let us focus on the speech that you gave just now. In your speech, you talk about stewardship and enterprise or enterprising spirit. Relatively speaking, our political leaders including yourself, past and present, talk about stewardship quite a bit, but not so much on the letter. But I think it is crucial to talk about this in getting Singapore moving forward. So how can we as a nation uh to get the the civil service, the business community and our people to think more about enterprising spirit and what could be the possible challenges. I think we we have many businessmen and private sector executives sitting in the audience. To them I feel is second nature. they know they have to be enterprising otherwise how are you going to open markets and grow your business. So your question actually specifically target at institutions okay in public service >> because I think we also set the tone and set the environment uh for the whole Singapore. So I think at least there are three levels that we need to work on this and they are not new to us. You know, >> in my career, I've seen them being done like the Japanese always have a Kaizen uh >> Kaizen spirit. They implemented in every company. >> Kaizen spirit means every it started in Toyota. Every operator can pull a string and stop the assembly line in order to improve things or they spot a problem. I think we we had that before uh implemented in the public service. It is worthwhile thinking about this kind of initiatives. Get everyone to have a voice to spot what is wrong, what can be done better and be able to correct it. Empower our individual officers. Second is actually HR and how you recognize people, reward people uh and do we reward people that can best adhere to the rules and implement the rules or do we also recognize people that know when to break the rule or revise the rule or sunset a rule? >> I think we need to recognize both. >> Yeah. In the past when I first started as a civil servant, we don't have that many rules. So if you can come up with a rule, wow, very good. Now this person can come up with a new rule, regulate, make sure we raise standards. But we have reached a stage that we have so many rules and we have to start recognizing people that can reduce the rules. But finally, it goes back to leadership setting the tone. Um I purposely use Ray Hang's example of Ming dynasty. That's an extreme example. is a couple of hundred years Ming dynasty reached that stage where it doesn't matter anymore what kind of talent you have that's very sad state we have still a lot going for us so I feel that government and leadership and leadership of every organization can set the tone that stewardship is very important at this stage but balance it with enterprise it's not easy because when you're not enterprising enough you'll get criticized When you're not steward enough and you want to spend more risk money, you also get criticized to be able to judge what to keep, what to change. As I said, that's the biggest challenge of the day. You talk about leadership then something crossed my mind political leadership and some comandators are saying that uh because many of our ministers come from similar background so there's a risk of a group thing. Do you think group thing will will then hinder enterprising spirit and and group thing is a dangerous thing. >> Yeah. uh when you have decision makers all thinking the same way nobody argue with nobody is a dangerous thing to some extent that probably what happened in late dynasty and even you sit around a table you have a different view but tradition say you have to say something else yeah so everybody just follow a certain line of thought and that is a dangerous thing but I would not equate group thing with people coming from similar backgrounds >> yeah because we are all different you ask five journalists all come from PH sit around a table they have five different views right correct yeah so they have to write it like that now uh I I think we sometime underestimate that people are much more sophisticated than they are just because we went through certain similar uh experience it may mean that the similar experience give us some camaraderie some common reference point being able to work as a team but everyone is still your own man or woman with your own views. So it's much more important that when you run any organization, any team make sure everyone has a with a valid voice is listened to and you have to make a judgment weigh the tradeoffs and then you can move forward. To have a lack of views means there's no enterprise. >> You must have a diversity of views. Make a hard decision and there's enterprise. because I restricted myself to two or three questions, I will move on to the speech that you gave at the parliament. Okay. Uh and we know that for Singapore to move forward, we have to be we have to stay united. But in your speech, you warned that Singapore came dangerously close to mixing race and religion uh during GE 2025. and race and religion are are the traditional fault lines in our society. Of course, besides race and religion, there could be other fault lines. >> Uh inequality could also cause uh fault lines. Uh sometimes immigration policies could also cause fault lines and and in today's context even sexual orientation could also cause social division. And so as coordinating minister for social policies and I'm asking this because I I remember correctly that uh you you did not speak extensively your role as a coordinating minister for social policy. So I thought I would take this opportunity to ask you what do you see as the greatest challenge uh for Singapore to remain united and to stay in harmony and what will be your priority as a coordinating minister? >> Yeah. Yeah. Social cohision that's core of every society and every country. uh and in fact even you look at foreign policy is often a projection of your own domestic concerns which is often social concerns economic growth if your economy don't do well ultimately it translate into social problems so everything starts from social which is soul of every nation you know um today we have three challenges that's threatening social cohesion not just us every country has uh race and religion, rich and poor, foreign and local. I think you mentioned it all three in your in your questions. So social cohision is a bit like tending to a very delicate garden. You have to tender to it, prune it and beautify it. But at the same time, you are still subject to the weather, the rain, wind, you know, insects. U so this is the challenge uh of social cohesion. We have to recognize there is centrifugal forces that always try to pull society apart but there's also centripal force that can force society together. So tackle address the centrifugal and neutralize if you can the centrifugal force strengthen the centropal force. Centrugal force are the three I mentioned race and religion always be sensitive to it. never think that you will go away because this is very b primal instinct of people to be closer to people of your own race. Um and in Singapore we have managed to create an environment where we state a basic principle of our governance. Every Singaporean must be equal, must be treated equal. But that said, every race, every community have a real different relationship with the state because the culture is different, the history is different, the religion is different. It's like parents saying that I love my children equally, but it's actually it's not possible to love your children the same. They are all different, but you love them equally, but they are not the same. It's a little bit like that. So in a country likewise, we must be able to treat every race community equal equally. But it's not the same. Yeah. >> Equally, but >> not the same. Yeah. But yet different. Yeah. Because your relationship with the state is different. Yeah. Um and what is important is for every community to know that nobody can push to the limit. We always respect the fact that there's a big common space. And so long as we respect that, I think we have the basis of creating good race relations. Um, second is rich and poor. Uh, especially with globalization, with technological advancement, rich and poor divide will grow will grow further and it's happening in many countries. But we managed to keep our genie coefficient down. Yeah. To go against it largely by taxation and redistributing. But what I think is most important to make sure that this doesn't become a threat to social cohesion is that for the rich they must give back. They must behave in an egalitarian way. >> Yeah, we know that rich and poor is different. Outcomes are different. It's not equal but you can be egalitarian. We can't be an equal society but we can be an egalitarian society. And we know of many tycoons and rich people who behave just normally like a normal Singaporeans interact with you no air. Uh and that I think give a lot of people comfort. When you are high and mighty you flaunt your wealth that is create a very different atmosphere. So I hope we kept our very egalitarian culture. And finally the issue that is actually the most serious in the western world is foreign and local. So here we must be always very sensitive although we are an immigration immigrant society the fact that we are grown roots here when there are too many foreigners Singaporeans as welcoming as we are as embracing as we are will become uncomfortable so we must always be careful there is a limit to we we need foreigners to work in various trades and we need the top talent to come here to grow our industry but there's always a limit At some point they will fight for space they'll fight for jobs they'll start to feel that uh culture is being impinged on and I think we cross those lines at some point in our history and we have to quickly adjust and calibrate. I think to a great extent in US and Europe they cross those lines and politics change in those countries uh I I think in a very prolonged way and they're still dealing with it. So these are the centrifugal force but most important work on the centrifal force that brings Singaporeans together. I think there's no running away. We need time. We need the passage of history for us to build common experiences. For for me 2015 SG50 with the passing of Mr. Lieuanu was a very poant moment brought a whole society together. think back what we have achieved what we need to how do we need to go forward covid-19 to me I was deeply involved but it was a very precious and valuable experience somehow we are all in it together we all panic together we're all in great uncertainty together uh but somehow we pull through and it's because we trusted each other trusted government trusted people trusted each other and we pulled through with in comparatively very good results. So this through these experiences these are the centrial force that pull us together through time keep on working at it and I think we'll have greater social cohesion over time >> in order to encourage you to ask your question in Chinese minister I I will follow up I will ask a follow-up question Okay. Centrial force. Yeah. Yeah. Oh, so roots. Foreign [Music] Embracing avoid that. Yeah. Now the floor is yours. Uh we welcome any questions. >> Thank you. Thank you so much for your profound insight and wisdom. Uh Minister, um just wondering what um is your greatest hope? >> Can can you introduce yourself? Uh >> oh, I'm sorry. My name is um Patrick Lie and I'm a member of SIC. >> Okay. >> Um what is your greatest hope and deepest fear for Singapore and its health care system? Thank you. biggest hope and deepest fear. Yes. Okay. Deepest fear is my deepest fear and capacity cannot catch up with demand for healthcare. Um because of aging, people living longer, more and more people were falling sick. Yeah. uh and if we cannot expand our healthcare capacity fast enough or we don't have the resources to expand fast enough, I think the system will deteriorate. So that is my biggest headache today because you can see the demand for health care going up uh in a in a very high rate. So we are building hospitals uh one in the east, one in Tonga. We are looking at the possibility of opening a not uh developing a nonprofit hospital as well. We're building new poly clinics. Uh so capacity expansion is one but more important you need to rein the demand. Rein demand by making sure people are healthier which is why population health and preventive care is now front and center of our strategy. Healthcare is different in very in numerous ways. In most public service, I realize this. You tax when it's something that's not good. So like pollution, congestion, we tax. When something is good, the public good and you want more people to consume, you subsidize. So education, primary school almost fully subsidize. Yeah, these are good things. Health care is something where it is not good for you to fall sick but I subsidize you. Yeah. So that is ironic but because it is healthcare is a basic essential service we have to subsidize but be mindful subsidy create excess demand of something that's actually unpleasant and therefore in every country healthcare demand is going up exponentially especially with uh an aging population. We have to watch that very closely. Never let health care our economy. In the US, health care is 17% of GDP. In most developed countries is 8 to 12%. Singapore is spending about 4.5% GDP on healthare and it's because of the way we spend healthare. So we have some headroom but nevertheless don't take that for granted. Control health care responsibly. But uh you actually also give incentive for people to stay healthy. >> Yes. >> Uh I mean I just look at my the you got how many steps a uh I just converted some of my health points to to to so that I can I can use it to offset my medicial. >> Oh yes. Very good. Very good. Well done. >> This was the I think the last >> it just implemented not long ago. Yeah. >> So my uh just now was the biggest fear. My biggest hope for health care is what I mentioned just now. The health span and lifespan now is 11 years. If it can go down to seven years, eight years, I'll be very happy. We have solved a big part of our healthcare challenge. Okay. Okay. [Laughter] sensitive question. Okay. Okay. Okay. [Music] Scenario. It's good. Fore! Foreign! Foreign! [Applause] 4G. The Dear Hi Minister, I'm Anna from OCBC Bank. So this is a light-hearted question. You have often spoken about innovation and new technologies and so I'm wondering what's your favorite Tik Tok or Instagram trend that's caught your attention recently and how can we use such platforms to inspire Singapore's culture of enterprise and adaptability? I I don't equate Tik Tok trends as innovation. It's creative. It's creative. Yeah, it's quirky and it's funny and I sometimes follow them. But innovation is something a lot more serious. I mentioned the example of Netflix. I describe it in two paragraphs. But the uh the kind of energy uh resources that Netflix have to invest in to make that switch from DVD which is someone else's content versus now streaming a lot of which is own Netflix content. Well, that's a huge change. Yeah. The book >> and now you make me answer in Chinese. So the original purpose and mission of Netflix didn't change. Yeah. But the format have changed totally. uh and that is the extent of innovation. Um I I think for us is to bring all our traditional strengths and techniques to bear to look at what are the areas that we can innovate it. I gave some ideas. I think the things on sustainable development, supply chain, we are very strong. Uh innovation is where I think we probably need the most work to create that kind of ecosystem to support innovative companies. Uh lastly, I think we already established ourself as a hub for decision making. Global HQ, regional HQ will all be here. Strangely, when I go through my FYP, I don't see a lot of trends. No. Um it all depends on your consumption behavior of Tik Tok. So when I open my Tik Tok usually is a lot of football, a lot of movie trailers, uh sometimes something's on exercise and healthier living. So rarely do I see trends. You got to tell me what are the new trends and my next video I can use those. a a challenge for you. Uh your next Tik Tok uh maybe try to drive home the importance of enterprising spirit. >> Let me think about it because so far I've been focusing on health. >> Hi uh my name is K. I'm from OCBC. Uh first I want to thank you for all your video clips on all the medical policy that really brought uh medical terms and policy to a very understandable level. But actually going forward as a young senior in Singapore, I'm obviously very concerned about health care and I think one of the the thing you mentioned about the fact that we're going to have more hospitals etc etc. How are we going to actually attract a lot of this medical professional to actually enter the industry or come to Singapore or to support that growing demand for health care in the coming years? >> Thanks. >> Healthcare is a very well sought after career by many young Singaporeans. So if you go to a primary school today and you see 20 students, one will be a nurse based on the proportion and the numbers that we recruit today. Out of 15 students, one will join healthcare. So we are taking in six, seven, eight% of every cohort into healthcare. I cannot wish for more. Actually if we want to hire more we can but I think we must be part also for healthcare. Uh there are so many other sectors know banking >> media >> media. Yeah also need talent. So so I think for healthcare uh take our fair share. uh at that rate we can staff most of our positions including nursing but not enough and so we top up so majority of nurses from our projection will still be Singaporeans and PRs and then we need to top up with foreign nurses um so we also make sure I mentioned earlier that foreign local is always sensitive so when it comes to nurses make sure the core and the majority are Singaporeans minorities ority we import from overseas and import from many sources, attract them and recruit them from many sources. And that way I think we have a system that patients can accept, Singaporeans can accept. So all in all, manpower while it is a big challenge in many countries, so far for us so good. Yeah. And we want to keep it that way. To keep it that way, we must make sure number one remuneration must be competitive. Yeah. otherwise nobody will join. Number two, there must be career progression that is attractive to healthare workers and we do so across the board. Yeah. And thirdly and probably most importantly, Singaporeans must continue to respect healthare workers. This is so important to be a nurse, to be a doctor, to be a allied health professional, physiootherapy must be a proud thing. Yeah. and so far I believe our healthcare workforce feel proud about what they are doing. >> Hello, I'm Selena Ling from OCBC as well. >> I just want to come back to your speech earlier. Uh I like the way you open with the idea that >> you know Singapore must be careful about complacency and possible decline. So we know that Singapore's economic success of course gives us a lot of confidence. But how do you think we as a people and yourself as a leader should stay grounded, self-aware, humble and open to renewal? Thanks. >> It's probably the unique feature of being a member of parliament of this government. uh as I mentioned in parliament recently the law in the constitution only ask an MP to be a legislator in parliament and to run the town council that's all but it is the policy of this government to say in addition you shall be a volunteer called a grassroot adviser and that takes up so much of our time doing home visits attending events all of which is actually you are not required to do by law. Yeah. Uh so I think it's a good policy to make sure that we have no weekends so long as you >> good for health. >> Yeah. You you don't have to come to office. You can work from community. We don't even work from home. But I think it it is a discipline and it is something that's passed down to every new batch of MPs so that they know coming in the into parliament under this government you have to do a lot of ground work. Yeah. Even so uh sometimes we can have blind spots. So is it's never enough uh how much how much you walk the ground is never enough. But we spend whatever time we have and that's how we stay I think grounded as to being self-aware to being humble. This is also intrinsic quality of people we have to choose uh select people uh that that have the heart to serve um to prepare to learn and once you are prepared to learn you're always humble. Humble people are the ones who always want to learn. The arrogant people think they have nothing to learn. Yeah. It's always select people. They are curious. They want to learn from from not just from your bosses, from your peers, from your residents, from everybody. Um I tell you I learned something very profound from a resident during COVID 19. It was a wake. I might have told this story before. Attended a wake at that time. We can still attend wake. Um when I attended the relative told me you guys are very good with all this contact tracing uh all these quarantine rules uh to contain the virus but Singapore cannot go on like that. you at some point must open up Singapore because you know how do I earn a living otherwise you know but it's so it's a very grounded view but on the other hand it it is very piercing it tells you no matter how good you are in controlling the covid the virus and the spread of the virus at some point you must find a way to open up yeah so the these uh some of the encounters I I came across during co that actually has a deep impact on what we do later. >> Hi Minister, I'm Ryan from Singapore Refles Music College. So not from OCBC. >> Okay. Um so you mentioned that you need an enterprising spirit to reform and reduce regulation for various industries. Can you also help to explain how would the government actually approach this um deregulation um to actually spark u further enterprise and entrepreneurship within the Singaporean e economy and also to manage the current profound changes in terms of the the um government uh the the tariffs as well as um changes that AI will bring to the economy. Thank you. Sorry your your last sentence. Repeat that again. >> Um because the changes uh you mentioned that the fragmented world plus of course the changes brought about by technological advancements in like AI to the economy. >> Okay. Okay. And the question therefore is >> uh how would you how would the government actually approach the deregulation with the industries in mind in to actually spark and uh encourage further entrepreneurship and enterprising spirit uh among the god entrepreneurs of Singapore. >> Hi Minister, my name is Shia. Uh I'm a mother not from OCBC. So this is not going to be OCB question. Uh I just like to understand why is it that our boys after they serve the HO and M O when they return to the national service you know they have to take like a pay cut you know I was told that it's kind of an allowance but until today I don't fully understand the rationale because they are still being responsible as a full-fledged doctor. So perhaps I can try to understand um why you know they are taking that um part in the monthly take home because they still have to you know pay the bills etc. Thank you. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Thank you minister for indulging in all this extra questions. Um I'm very hardened to hear that minister is aiming to close the gap between lifespan and health span. So I like to ask um how confident and when are you confident that we can achieve that from bringing 11 current 11 years to 8 years that's one and then related to that what are the measures and initiatives we can expect to see um to in order to achieve this. Obviously, there's must be
Some, whether it's uh encouragement on the health side or whatever. And then finally, just as an observation, I know Singaporeans love our food, especially hawker food, but I mean, I've just recently retired, so I noticed a lot of people from the kids to company executives are using. Maybe it's a cost, maybe it's a convenience, but you know, we are we continue to build more hawker centers, but the food there are absolutely honestly not healthy. And so to me is a bit oxymoronic. Here we are building more hospitals and then talking about prevention and preventive thing. And then we are also building more hawker centers. Thank you, Minister.
>> Okay. Thank you. Uh maybe I touch on the more specific ones, HO and M O. I need to find out more because Yeah, I I I do need to find out more. But I suspect is because after they graduate, they become junior of uh junior doctors in the hospitals. Mo pay them like staff, but once they are trained, they go back to SAF. They actually are serving their NS and when they serve their NS they get a cut into NS pay. Yeah. But that that is my poss this is a possible interpretation but I I will find out more on the arrangement.
Um second is building more hawker centers. Um I think in the name of health we deprive Singaporeans of hawker food the health strategy will fail. [Applause] Because people love their food so much and it's so much of our part of our culture. I do think hawker food can be healthier without losing the taste. The truth is for hawker food it is unhealthy mostly because of salt and fat, sodium and fat. Sugar I think we have a handle on it. Singaporeans now actually consume much less sugar because they don't like C and D's. No, C and D's. These are all PSLE train. C and D very bad. We go for A and B. Yeah. We go for A and B. So it actually have an impact. But for sodium and fat, I think it's still too much. Yeah. And there are actually many Singaporeans that find hawker food has too much sodium and too salty. Yeah. So I'm hoping we can correct it at some point. We succeeded for sugar. In the next year or two, there will be programs rolled out to try to rein the consumption of fats.
>> Yeah. Um thirdly is the gap between uh lifespan and health span. I I throw out eight years, nine years uh just as an illustration. We have not set any target. In fact, there are many doctors who feel that lifespan and health span will grow in tandem and is very difficult to close the gap. Yeah. And in fact, at 11 years, we already have this one of the smallest gap amongst the developed world. But I don't think we should rest on our laurels. We should try our best to narrow that gap. Um if we succeed I think the data can only come out in 10 years or so because this is very long term. We have to start by working on diet, on health screening, on good habits, uh on using technology to spot diseases and problems way beforehand and take action early to develop uh health-seeking habits so that you go to one doctor for example that will have an impact and so do that and I believe in five years in 10 years I hope we can see some impact that is the holy grail of healthcare to close the gap between health span and lifespan.
And finally, how to approach the regulation together with industry. Indeed, uh you are right that it has to be done in conjunction with the uh with industry. You see, in order to promote innovation and entrepreneurship because regulation and rules took so many years to accumulate. If you want to simplify them and streamline them, you don't even know where to start. So actually a good place to start is to work with companies, work with industry, work with live cases that I'm trying to do this but the rules say I can't or the rules say I can but it will take five years and must jump through 10 hoops. Then we have to think about and usually I gone through this many times and when you look at the rules you know that they were there for a reason but given today's circumstances can we adjust when you adjust you know you are taking some risk can we bear with the risk can society take those risk and understand that we may need to take a bit more risk in order to encourage more innovation so do this is not different from you have a ticket of bushes you want to cut it down. You cut branch by branch. Yeah, it's very hard to burn it all down and you don't want to burn it all down. So, you need to trim it and I think we have to do it together with industry.
Okay. >> Thank you. Thank you minister for spending time with us and uh and also to make this forum a truly bilingual forum. Uh yes, let's give the minister another round of applause.