DISCUSSIONS on the drain of young talent from Singapore often focus on the motivations and reasons for the exit. For a more productive discourse there ought to be a candid debate on what more could be done to make Singapore so alluring a place few would think of leaving for good, whether for work, a lifestyle change or to escape what some speak of as Singapore's stifling conformism. Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong had his focus on political renewal when he broached the subject of talent loss. His worry was specific: the trend of bright students who obtained their first degrees abroad making their careers in their chosen countries, never to return. It need not be so. If they retained their citizenships, it is not a loss. Older Singaporeans who have worked abroad for long periods in business, the professions and the artistic field should be added to the corps of talent. A plausible answer to the conundrum would then suggest itself. Talent scouts of the People's Action Party would be casting their net far and wide abroad, if the party thinks there must be some among the Singaporean diaspora who are fit and willing to run for office. The Singapore International Foundation and overseas business and social networks have kept them plugged in.

It is undoubtedly cliched, but Singapore has to make itself the equal - or better, if it can - of favoured foreign destinations in liveability and the liberalising of its political and social climate to be a net gainer in the international distribution of capable people. On liveability the Government has shown itself prepared to break old moulds to keep up with the competition. The strides made have been impressive enough to vault a modern city-state with no scenic beauty, natural recreations and historical grandeur high into various quality-of-life league tables. If the willingness to adapt could be extended progressively in the social and political realm, the results could be as spectacular.

But whether the talent outflow is a recurrent cycle of manageable proportions or the draining will get worse in years to come, there is no formulaic way of dealing with the issue. Unlike the reverse flow of PhD students and top-notch careerists from China, India and South Korea who are returning home from the West for the comparable opportunities and to participate in their native countries' rise, it is questionable whether many Singaporeans who have been away for any length of time would resume residence here, just because the economy is dandy. The call of home must be deeply felt, almost visceral. But those who do return add value with their experience and international outlooks, so it is not all loss in the dynamic whirl of talent.