Lee Hsien Loong is
currently hailing ALL Singaporeans to envision our country for the next 20
years. However, before we embark on crafting a future blue print for even one
more year ahead, we should also pause and reflect
upon our housing, transport and
healthcare, the basic goods which impact on our standards of living. Goh
Chok Tong’s “The Next Lap”, initiated in 1991, was too, a forward-looking plan for
Singapore
stretching as far as 20 to 30 years ahead. Between 1991 and now, have our lives
improved or deteriorated in the last two decades?
A vision without
actualization is empty and meaningless.
Strip off the number
of hubs, rankings or international awards that Singapore has clinched throughout
the years and get down to the core, ie, the quality of living. The best
international airline award may polish our vanity and pride, but is of no relevance
to the quality of our housing, (daily) transport and healthcare.
(1) The
rosy GDP figures and the population expansion addiction
Economic
perspective first, since that has always been the benchmark for measuring the success
of the governance of Singapore.
GDP figures have
always been the big and only picture
of Singapore’s
success story.
 |
| GDP (US$) between 1991 to 2011 |
Looking at Singapore’s
progress through the lens of GDP, the big picture is rosy-looking, with GDP growth
on the upward trend throughout the last two decades. There are occasional dips
of recession but the period of upward growth surpasses the dips.
Our GDP per capita
attainment was listed as the world’s most affluent country in 2010 by the World
Report 2012. In fact, according to Goh Chok Tong, we have already attained
the 1984 Swiss standard of living as early as 1994 in terms of GDP per capita in
purchasing power parity. That was unmistakably Goh’s pride during his reign.
 |
| GDP (US$) per capita |
It is also
interesting to note that the pace of GDP growth is more pronounced after 2005
where it overtook the peak
of GDP in the 90s. What
attributes to such substantial growth of GDP in the mid 2000s?
Compare the GDP
chart with our population chart which may hold the answer. Coincidentally, the
growth trend is very similar.
 |
| Population 1991 - 2011 |
Undeniably, our
GDP per capita figures cannot achieve the same stunning figures independent of the
population boost. There is a
co-relation between the two.
Another thing to
note on our population growth is that it is growing at an accelerated rate
after 2003. It took 13 years in the 90s to grow one whole million people (it
reached 4.1 million in 2001 but hovered at this figure till 2003). After 2003,
the population expanded by 1 million by 2011, within 9 years. Today, it stands
at 5.3 million and certainly will be gushing through the 6 million mark, judging
at all the hints that the Cabinet dropped all over the place on the need to
grow population. By the way, LHL succeeded GCT in 2004. Lee’s GDP figures are also
noticeably unmatchable by GCT’s, and likewise on his population growth rate. His
addiction on the population size is apparent.
Using population
size as the single means to boost GDP begets the question of sustainability. Once
the population expansion steroids are removed from the economy, what other miracles
can LHL perform apart from importing another
5 million newcomers to elevate the GDP
amount to 100 billion US dollars. Even if that 5 million more comes in, but the
million dollar question is, what comes after? Another 6 million or so?
(2) Housing
Contrasting the
limelight which our GDP figures has drawn, our housing concerns attract equal
attention, albeit negatively.
HDB size has
shrunk in absolute size across all flat-types. 3- to 4-room flats shrunk by 5
sqm,whilst 5-room and executive flats shrunk by 15 sqm. To rub
chilli into wounds, HDB price rose stubbornly throughout the last two decades
and coupled with shrinking flat size, implying an even higher in terms of psf.
Housing is the
single most expensive purchase in our lifetime. Contrary to what Tharman
suggested that inflation of HDB flats will not affect current flat owners. That
is based on the assumption that all flat owners do not have any offsprings, or
that couples stay married for the rest of their lives or there is never a
compelling need to downgrade one’s current flat.
Under current
housing regulations, divorcees have to dispose of their flats. If for some
reasons, they could not live with their parents under the same roof, they will
have to turn to resale market for an abode of their own. Prices of new HDB
flats affect the resale market directly and vice versa too. And it is not
rocket science to see future generations facing future HDB flats that are priced
out of proportion of their incomes. In the event of such, current HDB owners may
have to dip into their retirement funds to supplement their children’s housing
purchases. Parents may choose to sell down. But with the unrelenting increase
of HDB prices, selling down also means incurring higher purchasing price of a smaller
and older resale flat, resulting in a fall in the quality of living.
Paying more for
smaller flats, median wage increase fails to catch up with the rate of housing price
increase, extending the period of paying off housing debt and eroding both the
retirement funds of both existing and future HDB owners. All these combined
factors indicate a fall in overall living standard in the last two decades and
outstrips any improved quality of new HDB flats there may be. To compensate better
quality HDB flats with an additional 10-year loan is unreasonable.
(3) Transport
Contrary to what
awards or accolades SMRT may choose to highlight in attempts to convince
commuters of its service quality, as a MRT commuter since the 90s, the travelling
experience for me has definitely fallen in comfort and reliability, both which constitute
good travelling experience. Ironically, only the fare went up whilst comfort
and reliability fell.
Awards
or rankings
hold little meaning if actual train travelling on the ground fails to
yield improved
satisfaction despite persistent fare hike in the last two decades. Newer
models
of trains with greater seat spacing or improved comfort are completely
written off by excessive overcrowdedness and longer waits to board a less sardine-packed trains during peak
hours. How would newer model of trains improves commuting experience if commuters
were compelled to wait for a few rounds of trains during peak hours before they
can squeeze on board? Longer waits translate into longer commuting time between
home and workplace, leaving home earlier and returning home even later.
Commuters expect crowds
during peak hours but public transport operators are being unreasonable to pack
commuters to the extreme of a can of sardines. To be perspiring in the supposedly
air-conditioned train carriage, not forgetting to mention that the increased
number of bodies packed in a constraint cabin will inevitably and
understandably intensify the body odours after a day’s work, it is also inevitably uncomfortable. The
insufficient air-conditioning in the cabin is an indication of overloading.
And comparing to the
crowds at peak hours in Tokyo
does not even make me feel any
slighter comfortable on my train trips. Instead, such comparison attempts to
belittle my genuine travelling discomfort irks me to the extreme. By the way, I
hate London tube and still that does not eradicate
the fact of SMRT’s deteriorated quality since the 90s.
Unreliability due
to train stalls or signaling problems or what-so-ever has become part and
parcel of our SMRT travelling experience. Just the other day, on the 29th
October, around 7pm, commuters were disposed at Toa Payoh because of door
faults. The faulty train then pulled out of the station with no further
instructions whether stranded commuters should find alternative travelling mode
or to wait for subsequent trains. So much for improved communications after the
massive break-down last year.
(4) Healthcare
Although the data
for the number of hospital beds per 1000 people is incomplete throughout the
last two decades (world bank date), one could still see that there were more
hospital beds between 1991 to 1994 as compared to the period between 2005 and 2008.
It is a consequence of unprepared population expansion, leading to longer wait
for outpatient healthcare.
 |
| No. of hospital beds per 1000 people |
That is a fall in
quality of healthcare.
On the other hand,
whilst ministers are urging for wage increase in tantrum with increased
productivity, yet our expenditure on healthcare does not increase in tantrum
with the GDP growth.
 |
| Public and Private health expenditure (% of GDP) |
Proportion of public
expenditure on health care is comparatively stable compared to private
expenditure. With rate of inflation, this is hardly good news as public
expenditure is actually decreasing in real terms.
Its size of
spending that caters to the majority of the citizens surprisingly lags behind
private spending, and bearing in mind too that our public spending is even
below that of developing countries, an evident indication of a strong reluctance
to distribute GDP yields to the majority of the citizens.
And with our accelerated
population expansion rate since 2005, public health expenditure fails to rise
in tantrum too.
Swiss standard of GDP but declining quality life
A glance through
the reality of our housing, transport and healthcare, has GCT’s 1991-vision
improved our lives? If the answer is not affirmative, it is already a proven
record that Singapore’s
politicians-in-power have failed to
effect genuine and beneficial progress for the bulk of our citizens despite
their vision, planning and promise. Therefore the attempt to think beyond
tomorrow with the same political party of unchanged ethos, values and mindset
is futile, save the envisioning. We did surpass the Swiss standard of GDP ultimately,
yet our quality of lives for the majority of our citizens is worse off than the
90s. And that is the proven record of
PAP’s failure.
