The Reform Party refers to the ST interview dated 10th February 2010 with MIT Professor Huang Yasheng who was in Singapore to deliver a lecture to the Civil Service College:

http://www.straitstimes.com/PrimeNews/Story/STIStory_488609.html?sunwMethod=GET

The following is taken directly from the article:

"To the Beijing-born Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) professor, who was in town recently to address the Civil Service College, state-linked enterprise models are a sure-fire way to stifle the economy in the long run.

Known for his critical view of China's bias towards state-linked enterprises at the expense of its home-grown businesses, he expressed the same scepticism about how far state intervention can help private enterprise here.

Singapore should 'rethink' the 'Temasek model', he says, referring to the state investment company Temasek Holdings, which has major stakes in large local corporations such as telecommunications player SingTel and developer CapitaLand.
'The private sector is the best way to grow the economy. It has the most productive, most innovative and entrepreneurial culture. The state-owned enterprise system doesn't give you that.'He acknowledges that Singapore has 'the most streamlined state management model' worldwide among the countries which adopt this method, but it has milked this system for all it is worth.
'You are already hitting the wall,' he warns. Retaining this strategy could mean sacrificing future growth that is possible only through a bigger, more dynamic private sector."

The Reform Party is glad that the professor shares our views that the present economic model has outlived its usefulness. We have called for the privatization of Temasek and possibly GIC and distribution of shares or quasi-equity to Singaporean citizens who have lived here for a minimum qualifying period. The Reform Party has also called for the dismantling of the GLC structure which has outlived its economic usefulness and which undoubtedly serves to stifle the development of an entrepreneurial class and new growth industries. To quote the professor once again:

"You can increase scale economy with government funding. But when it comes to new products, processes and technologies, it's very different. It's not just about money, it's culture.'
But growing up in the big shadow of state intervention has dwarfed the entrepreneurial culture here, he says. The 'orderly' environment here dulls the incentive to think out of the box. 'Everything is very well organized. Entrepreneurship typically happens in a more chaotic environment,' he observes.
Even Singapore's 'top-down' education system gets in the way.
'While producing excellent maths scores, it is not producing diversity in ideas and unconventional ways of solving problems,' he notes."

and again:

'Civil service culture is about discipline. It's about execution. It's about efficiency. Entrepreneurial culture is about challenging the authorities, questioning the existing ways of doing businesses, moving away from the routines and norms. It's about the unconventional, rebellious and diverse. These values are almost polar opposites.'
Anybody who attended our education seminar on 23rd January 2010 will know these were the areas that Reform Party was determined to change. We are committed to reforming the education system. We want to broaden its focus, encourage creativity and knowledge-based learning as well as reduce the high proportion of our students who end up being neglected because of our over-rigid system of streaming from too young an age. The Reform Party also wants to reform the PSC system towards helping those who come from underprivileged backgrounds but show high academic or creative potential rather than channeling resources towards those who may have superior test scores but would anyway be able to afford the best education. The focus should be on nurturing future entrepreneurs and new businesses rather than providing secure very highly paid employment in the public sector."

The Reform Party also called in our draft manifesto released at our dinner on 25th September 2009 and at our seminar on the Economy and Minimum Wage for the reform of CPF with much greater freedom for the individual over how much he wishes to save after paying for medical insurance and a basic old age pension. As an example we said that individuals should be able to withdraw funds from CPF (with the loss of tax immunity though this could be offset by tax breaks on investment) if for instance they wanted to start a business. It is gratifying to find our views being echoed yet again by Professor Huang:

"To help smaller players flourish, he believes local entrepreneurs should have easier access to private funds. The Central Provident Fund system, he points out, is worth a relook. While it builds up retirement nest eggs by enforcing savings that can run up to about 40 per cent of an employee's total wage, it also channels away a sizeable sum from the hands of potential entrepreneurs to government investments.
Putting some of these funds back in the hands of more nimble local entrepreneurs could be Singapore's best bet to stay ahead in this fast moving global economy. Failing to exploit the potential of its private sector could mean the country, once labeled an 'Asian Tiger' for its sparkling growth rates, might go down in history as an economic has-been, he says."

Following on from the government’s U-turn on the foreign labour policy and new –found emphasis on productivity growth, both called for by the Reform Party since at least the middle of next year, we wonder whether this will be the next area in which the government will abruptly change course and adopt the Reform Party’s policy proposals. In the interests of “cheaper, better, faster”, we repeat our suggestion that the government outsource economic policy-making to the Reform Party.

We say to the people of Singapore that you could have no clearer demonstration of the fact that this is a government that has run out of ideas. Without the Reform Party, these heretofore heretical views would probably not have been heard let alone adopted by the government. No better demonstration could be provided of the virtues of competition in politics just as in economic life. However, while we may be winning the war of ideas, and seeing an enormous upsurge of interest among the public in joining or helping the Reform Party we still face a vastly unequal struggle at the next election.  So, yet again we repeat our call to the people of Singapore to come out and support us so that we can start to make a difference.

The Reform Party on record

2nd February 2010.
The Reform Party Responds to the Economic Strategies Committee Report

“The Reform Party would go much further though in dismantling or privatizing the whole GLC structure starting with the privatization of GIC and Temasek and giving Singaporean citizens a direct stake, whether through shares, deferred shares or quasi-equity, in their assets. We would seek to sell off or break-up most of the GLCs which control such a substantial portion of economic activity (up to 60% according to some estimates) which has in our view a detrimental effect on the growth of a vibrant private sector in Singapore.
http://www.thereformparty.net/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=66%3Athe-reform-party-responds-to-the-economic-strategies-committee-report&catid=11%3Aperspectives&Itemid=44&lang=en

5th December 2009.
Reform Party Economic Seminar,

“Privatization of SWFs

• Increased disclosure and transparency of the accounts of GIC and Temasek.

• The Reform Party would set up a committee to examine possible privatisation of GIC and Temasek with distribution of shares to Singapore citizens as one option. Alternatively direct linkage between returns on investments and CPF returns.

• No convincing economic reason for government to continue to hold controlling stakes in most of the major Singaporean companies as these are now largely mature and slow-growing.

• The Reform Party would reduce the size of the state sector by selling off or privatizing the GLCs and focus on the private sector as the engine of growth and wealth creation

• This can be coupled with the retention of a “golden share” in government hands if necessary to prevent foreign takeovers that are deemed not to be in the national interest.”
http://www.thereformparty.net/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=60%3Athe-reform-party-economic-policy-proposals&catid=15%3Apress-releases&Itemid=36&lang=en

28th November 2009:
Address to the Jurong Rotary Club

Privatization of the State Sector
The Reform Party believes that no vital national or strategic interest is served by the government continuing to hold majority stakes in most of the top Singapore companies. Most of these companies are mature and can stand on their own two feet. It would seek to sell them off directly and to privatize Temasek, and possibly GIC, by listing its shares on the stock market and distributing the shares free to Singaporeans.
By Kenneth Jeyaretnam

http://www.thereformparty.net/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=58%3Ajurong-rotary-club-address&catid=11%3Aperspectives&Itemid=44&lang=en

9th August 2009
Reform Party’s National Day 2009 Speech

The Reform Party has viable, intelligent and achievable alternative policies that will enable our citizens to finally achieve the promises in our nation’s pledge. These policies include…..
• Link the value of the assets in the SWFs to the incomes and retirement savings of ordinary Singaporeans, preferably through privatization and distribution of shares to Singapore citizens
• Reduce government involvement in the economy by selling off stakes owned by Temasek in the GLCs

By Kenneth Jeyaretnam

http://www.thereformparty.net/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=33%3Awe-have-built-the-house-but-not-the-home&catid=11%3Aperspectives&Itemid=44&lang=en

Released by Kenneth Jeyaretnam on behalf of the Reform Party, February 10th 2010

 

Following on from the government’s U-turn on the foreign labour policy and new –found emphasis on productivity growth, both called for by the Reform Party since at least the middle of next year, we wonder whether this will be the next area in which the government will abruptly change course and adopt the Reform Party’s policy proposals. In the interests of “cheaper, better, faster”, we repeat our suggestion that the government outsource economic policy-making to the Reform Party.

We say to the people of Singapore that you could have no clearer demonstration of the fact that this is a government that has run out of ideas. Without the Reform Party, these heretofore heretical views would probably not have been heard let alone adopted by the government. No better demonstration could be provided of the virtues of competition in politics just as in economic life. However, while we may be winning the war of ideas, and seeing an enormous upsurge of interest among the public in joining or helping the Reform Party we still face a vastly unequal struggle at the next election.  So, yet again we repeat our call to the people of Singapore to come out and support us so that we can start to make a difference"