Taking the pulse at half-time

SINGAPORE - While there has been progress on several policy fronts since the last General Election, panellists at a round-table discussion organised by The Straits Times this week were divided on what this signifies for the second half of this term of government.

Singaporeans' confidence and optimism that things would get better in the future is "encouraging" and reflected in the findings of a recent survey commissioned by the paper, said People's Action Party (PAP) MP Hri Kumar Nair.

But other speakers such as Nominated MP Eugene Tan said the Government has its work cut out for itself when Parliament reopens next month for its second - and likely shorter - half term.

"Certainly the Government would have been expecting a better report card from the survey respondents," he said. "Put bluntly, I think time is running out."

Mr Nair, however, pointed to a trend where respondents had confidence levels of above 50 per cent in Singapore's future across six out of seven policy areas. Their confidence was also higher than their assessment of whether the Government has improved its handling of these policies since 2011.

Even in transport, for which respondents gave some of the lowest scores in rating how the Government has done, 39 per cent feel the Government has done better or much better but 53 per cent are confident or very confident in the future of the system - a difference of more than 10 points.

"There is assessment of how their lives are being affected now, but there is also a realisation that not all problems can be solved straightaway and also an appreciation that things are being done that will lead to better outcomes," said Mr Nair, who is an MP for Bishan-Toa Payoh GRC.

Workers' Party chairman Sylvia Lim said she was not surprised that respondents generally feel the Government has improved its handling of issues such as health care and housing. Since the 2011 GE, the Government "has very visibly been paying attention to social issues and has been saying so", said the Aljunied GRC MP.

Housing, for instance, has seen tangible progress. Ms Lim and Mr Nair said they now see fewer cases of first-timers facing problems getting a flat - a result of the ramped-up supply of Build-To- Order flats and the delinking of BTO prices from the resale market.

The MPs disagreed, however, on the progress in housing for other groups. Mr Nair noted the Government's moves to allow singles to buy BTOs and help divorcees with housing, while Ms Lim highlighted the difficulty that remains for those who exceed the income criteria for rental flats but cannot afford to enter the open market.

Attention to these groups

However, the panellists singled out two groups that will need special attention: the swathe of respondents who stayed neutral on several questions, and the middle class, sandwiched generation.

The large neutral group suggests that Singaporeans are still not passing judgment yet, said Associate Professor Tan. "That could mean that the Government still has a lot to fight for."

Ms Lim said it was a very healthy development that the electorate "want to make their own assessment after the facts are fully known and the programme is fully implemented".

One area of uncertainty is in health-care costs, she said. Some 34 per cent of respondents did not commit on whether they feel confident of paying for health care in their old age, while about 30 per cent were neutral on whether they support MediShield Life and the Pioneer Generation Package. Both policies have not kicked in yet.

Hence, said Ms Lim, while the Government has announced these two major policies and said that it will look into taking on a bigger share of medical bills, "we're not too sure right now of what it actually means in dollars and cents".

People are also concerned about medical inflation, which might still result in them paying more even if their share of the bill becomes smaller, she said.

Sociologist Tan Ern Ser of the National University of Singapore also flagged the middle class, sandwiched generation as a group to watch. The ST survey found that those aged 35 to 44 tended to be most negative about issues like health care affordability.

But while this group will be helped by policies such as the Pioneer Generation Package, it will take time for the effect to reach them, said the Institute of Policy Studies' Dr Gillian Koh. She said the Government has to be clearer in signalling the policy intent and benefits that people stand to get.

Foreign workers and transport

On the other hand, the two areas that respondents were most dissatisfied with - foreign workers and transport - create anxiety across all age groups.

On foreign workers and immigrants, just 38 per cent had confidence in Singapore's future in this issue, while only 26 per cent felt the Government's handling of it had improved since 2011. Still, it was seen as less important to respondents than other policy areas such as the elderly and housing.

Dr Koh said the issue is not about foreigners per se but inflation and accessibility. For instance, whether locals feel housing prices are being driven up or whether they are being crowded out at polyclinics and hospitals.

It is thus a "cross-cutting issue" that threads through and interacts with many policy areas, "so managing those other areas would certainly take temperature off the foreigner question".

Prof Eugene Tan said many citizens' worries can be traced to immigration, "the mother of all issues in our political landscape".

He predicted that it would weigh heavily on the hearts and minds of voters and candidates, come the next GE.

Mr Nair sought to put the foreign worker influx in context.

During the global financial crisis of 2007 and 2008, people all over the world lost their jobs, homes and hope, he said. But the Government dipped into its reserves for the first time to fund schemes like the nearly $5 billion Jobs Credit Scheme, which saved Singaporeans' jobs and prevented property prices from crashing, said Mr Nair. Singapore was one of the first countries to emerge from the global recession.

To sustain the momentum, the Government created jobs and grew the economy. Foreign firms came, along with foreigners who filled positions that Singaporeans could not. "There was a huge credit side which no one wants to talk about," said Mr Nair.

But since Singaporeans did not feel the harshest effects of the recession and hence "no sense of loss and redemption", the credit just felt like business as usual, he said. The debit, however, could be felt in pressure points such as infrastructure strains and transport.

Mr Nair also gave handouts to members of the audience describing what the Government has been doing over the decade to help the low-income, long before the 2011 GE. It is also investing in infrastructure with measures such as increasing the bus supply and building up the rail network, though the latter will take longer.

Former Nominated MP Siew Kum Hong, who was in the audience, said transport - which 45 per cent said was the Government's worst failure since 2011 - is the "only area where we've not seen radical (and) fundamental changes in policy". He asked if certain "dogma" on the Government's part might have contributed to its poor performance.

Is progress enough?

However, Prof Eugene Tan noted that progress does not necessarily equate political success, a point that Ms Lim also raised.

"There is an implied assumption in this survey that perhaps the way voters view policy progress or lack of progress will determine how they vote," said Ms Lim. "While we do talk about all these policies and how they might affect the election, in the end how people really vote...could be affected by other things."

She cited three factors that can play a part: the national mood, the mass media's influence, and the fact that "people do change their minds during the election campaign, and sometimes even at the very last minute".

Prof Tan Ern Ser pointed to the disconnect between what citizens expect and what the Government can deliver.

His reading of the current situation: "A government out of its comfort zone and unable to quite meet the expectations of Singaporeans, and a citizenry demanding what the Government could not reasonably deliver, considering the trade-offs, while entrusting the Government with less power than it used to have."

At half time, the score card speaks of progress made and citizens' optimism for the future, but with a question mark over the effect this will have on the political fortunes of the PAP government.

Said Dr Koh: "I think the Government will need all the time to the end of the point in order to get the performance up for people to really feel that the changes have mattered, they have made a difference in their lives."

On the ST survey

The Straits Times commissioned a survey to get a sense of how Singaporeans view the policy changes that have taken place since the 2011 General Election.

The poll of some 500 citizens was done by market research firm Asia Insight over a week last month, after the Budget debate.

The respondents, who are broadly representative of the national age, gender and race profiles, were interviewed via street intercept across the island. Weights were added for education and income to better reflect the national profiles.

The survey posed questions on how important certain national issues are to the respondents today and in 2011; whether they feel the Government's handling of these issues has improved since 2011; and whether they feel confident in Singapore's future when it comes to these areas.

For these questions, ST homed in on seven policy areas: the elderly, the poor, housing, health care, transport, education, foreign workers and immigrants.

These were seen as issues top-most on people's minds and most commonly raised in public debate today and during the election campaign in 2011.

The respondents were also asked how satisfied they think Singaporeans are with government policies and the factors important to them in electing an MP.

Respondents were asked to name the Government's best accomplishment (26 per cent named housing) and worst failure (45 per cent named transport) since 2011.

The survey also homed in on four hot-button issues in particular: housing, health care, transport and education.

At a round-table organised by ST this week, two panellists - Dr Gillian Koh of the Institute of Policy Studies and Associate Professor Tan Ern Ser of the National University of Singapore - said the survey did not ask for respondents' views of employment, income security and how the Government is managing the economy.

Non-bread and butter issues like animal and human rights, which were not covered by the survey, might also be of greater importance to the young, said Dr Koh.

What it takes to keep the Govt on its toes

People have increasingly come to expect checks and balances in Parliament, believing that it can keep the Government on its toes, panellists at a Straits Times roundtable said.

But whether the checks necessarily have to come from an opposition party was a point of contention between Workers' Party chairman Sylvia Lim and People's Action Party MP Hri Kumar Nair during a spirited discussion last Wednesday to discuss findings of a Straits Times survey.

Ms Lim said an opposition party would be able to vote against the Government in the House, as the WP has. And since the 2011 General Election, people have become more convinced that this has led to "better service" from the Government.

But Mr Nair countered that Workers' Party MPs had not taken a stand on many national issues, nor provided alternative views, and were less effective at challenging the Government than PAP backbenchers.

In the ST survey, the need for checks and balances on the Government was ranked very important by 35 per cent of those asked to rate the importance of six factors in their choice of MPs.

In contrast, fewer than 30 per cent of respondents had listed the other factors, including policies, candidate and party attributes, as very important.

Ms Lim, who is also WP chairman, was encouraged by the findings. They show that Singaporeans believe "institutions have to function with some sort of balance regardless of whether the policies are good or bad", she said. Some voters have told her that they see policy changes in recent years as the PAP-led Government's response to its showing at the last election, in which the party lost a group representative constituency for the first time.

But Mr Nair said this was a misconception. Citing the example of ComCare - a fund to pay for social assistance schemes - he said the Government set it up about 10 years ago when it realised that pressure on Singaporeans, especially the low-income, would increase with globalisation, and this was way before the 2011 election.

And while he did not disagree with the need for an opposing voice in Parliament, he suggested it did not have to come from an opposition party. Instead, checks and balances can also be provided by MPs of the same party.

Effective checking of the Government, said Mr Nair, is not about going against the Government for the sake of opposition, but about providing alternative ideas and proposals.

Over the years, PAP members of the House have been doing so through raising questions in Parliament and proposing private member's Bills to deal with issues not addressed by the Cabinet, he said.

WP MPs, on the other hand, did not provide a diversity of views as they always toed the party line and also voted accordingly.

He said: "How many times have you heard a WP MP give a different view from the WP? Zero.

" A WP MP has never, in the time I've been in Parliament from 2006, stood up to say 'I'm taking a different position from my party'. So if you think our Whip is thick, theirs is thicker and theirs is obviously more painful."

But Ms Lim said this was a result of the party having far fewer members in the House.

With only seven out of the total of 87 MPs, any contradiction between WP members could be taken as a sign of disunity and be used against the party, she said.

Besides, the WP had also voted as a party against government policies that it did not agree with, such as the White Paper on Population, Ms Lim noted.

PAP MPs, though, could not do the same even when they disagreed, she said, as they had to vote according to the party line. It is just that being the "juggernaut" in Parliament, the PAP could afford to let its members express alternative views and still push through its agenda, she added.

She said: "I don't think many people would be comfortable with the fact that you have a whole House full of MPs from one party no matter how much they talk... because in the end you know that the party Whip comes in and that's about it."

Nominated MP Eugene Tan, who was also on the panel, agreed. "I think there's a realisation that you can't have the party check itself, notwithstanding the various points that (Mr Nair) raised, he said.

National University of Singapore sociologist Tan Ern Ser said people's desire for checks and balances was motivated by their wanting to keep the Government on its toes, and not so much because of shortcomings in particular issues. "The man and woman in the street, they're not thinking of specific issues," he said.

Panellists' reactions to survey

The roundtable kicked off with the five panellists responding to the survey findings and giving their reading of the mood at half-time.

Different groups have different orientation

Let's start off by what matters to people when they go to the ballot box. This reinforces the IPS general election survey. Whatever you do, there is a proclivity among those in the higher socioeconomic class to value political pluralism. But when you look through the segments with age and all the other aspects, national policies come up best, come up most of the time. Next one would be candidates' attributes.

Policies and performance matter desperately. There is no running away from that. That's like base line. However, do all population segments want the same thing? And you always see the tensions.

In terms of age, what you find are those in the 45 to 54-year-old category are less approving of how the Government has handled all the issues across the board, except for education, when you ask them about today.

But when they are asked about their confidence, well, bounced back up. So it's only in the areas of the elderly and foreigners they're not too sure.

Now, look at another age category - the 35 to 44. They are sort of less approving than the average of how the Government is doing now in the areas of the elderly, the poor, health care and transport. But when you ask them about the future, they are less likely to express confidence than the other groups in the areas of the poor, health care, housing and transport as well as foreigners. So you see how different groups are different in their orientation.

We as a country want greater checks and balances, more alternative views, a higher level of political pluralism. But if we feel that the country is at an inflection point, we actually want to strengthen our social safety nets. We have a discussion coming up about MediShield Life. Then it's all the more so that we have political consensus around these things rather than polarisation.

So at a time when we want more pluralism, we're also at a time when we need policies with clear direction and a firm stance to be taken. If we have a national insurance health- care scheme, who's going to pay, how do we divvy up, who's going to benefit?

- Dr Gillian Koh, senior research fellow, Institute of Policy Studies

Optimism in the air

For the survey, there were actually two different sets of numbers. One set talked about whether things were better or much better or worse or much worse (since 2011). And that's where you have, I think, the low score, for example, for transport. But there's another set of numbers which talked about confidence levels.

By and large, in almost all categories except one, and I'll come to that, the respondents felt more confident in terms of what's going to happen in the future compared to the numbers assessing the current standards. So for example, 72 per cent felt that the Government was doing better or much better on elderly issues but 77 per cent were confident that it will get better in the future.

So transport, only 39 per cent said better or much better but 53 per cent said (they are) confident or more confident that it will get better in the future. There is a realisation that not all problems can be solved straightaway, and also an appreciation that things are being done that will lead to better outcomes.

Optimism is very important. You should never underrate it.

So for almost every category, confidence was higher, except one, and that was on foreign workers. That's the only category which fell below 50 per cent - 38 per cent felt they were confident or more confident that things would get better.

But the numbers who felt it will get worse or pessimistic in the future, it was 22 per cent. So far more, almost double the numbers, felt that it will get better in the future on foreign workers.

- People's Action Party MP Hri Kumar Nair (Bishan-Toa Payoh GRC)

Costs still very much on people's minds

To be fair, I think on the policy front - since the GE anyway - the Government has very visibly been paying attention to social issues and has been saying so.

As far as housing is concerned, it is true that probably for the first-timers who are applying for Build-To- Order flats, it is easier for them now on two fronts. One is that the supply has been ramped up; second, I think there has been some attempt to moderate the price rises of the BTO flats by delinking them from the resale prices.

But at the same time I noticed that the caseload at my Meet-the-People Session... still consists of quite a lot of housing cases... About maybe 40 per cent of the caseload I see is on housing and these are categories of people who are largely not what we call first-timers. So, for instance, they may be divorcees who had bought a flat before, they could be Singaporeans married to foreigners, or PRs who have Singaporean children. You'll find that there is a certain percentage of homelessness there and issues with getting accommodation.

Moving on to health care, I think we are all aware that because of the overpopulation ... and undercapacity, we are facing issues in the hospitals when it comes to beds.

Costs are still very much on people's minds. The Government has said that they would look into how it could bear a bigger share of health-care bills of Singaporeans. At the same time, we're not too sure right now what it actually means in dollars and cents because as we all know, the MediShield Life review is still ongoing. We don't really know what the coverage will be, how much will be the co-payment premiums.

So there's still some uncertainty there which you can see in the survey findings. At the same time, also, I think people are not sure even if the Government were to bear a larger share of the medical bill, in dollar terms does it mean that I will pay less or more because medical inflation is still there.

- Workers' Party chairman and MP Sylvia Lim (Aljunied GRC)

Mother of all issues

I had some issues with how immigration came out in the survey, that the issue was ranked rather low in terms of the different concerns.

I look at immigration as certainly the mother of all issues in our political landscape. You can trace all the different complaints about transport, housing, cost of living, and national identity very much to immigration.

So I think like in 2011 GE, immigration is a dog that didn't bark in the survey. It will be very much in the hearts and minds of voters and candidates in the next GE.

I do think that it will feature prominently. The only question is whether it will manifest as an issue in and of itself or whether it will be fingered in a whole variety of other hot button issues, but certainly it will materially affect how Singaporeans assess the Government.

And immigration is complex and it may not feature so prominently because no political party or candidate wants to be labelled as xenophobic or anti-foreigner; neither would any one party want to come across as a staunch supporter of more immigration. So you'll see the parties continue to gingerly tread around this particular issue.

- Nominated MP Eugene Tan, a law don at Singapore Management University

Mismatch of expectations

I think Singaporeans are still harking back to a golden age where growth is double digit and where the buzzword is upgrading. And so long as this is their mindset, they still expect the Government to be paternalistic in terms of material provision and security, but not so much in terms of how it runs the country.

In the past, there was a good match between state paternalism and the aspiration of Singaporeans. But nowadays the world has become much more difficult and risky and Singapore, too, has its own difficult issues like low fertility and ageing population. This makes it difficult for the PAP to be that paternalistic, able-to-deliver government it used to be.

At the same time, Singaporeans now expect a more competitive political system. They want to play the role of critical citizens, they expect more checks and balances.

So the current situation looks something like this to me: A government out of its comfort zone and unable to quite meet the expectations of Singaporeans and a citizenry demanding what the Government could not reasonably deliver, considering the trade-offs, while entrusting the Government with less power than it used to have.

The way forward, in my view, is for citizens to learn to make informed choices, to be aware of the trade-offs, to keep the Government accountable without hindering its capacity to do what is good for Singapore.

The Government will need to know it can't be paternalistic, just as it can't take all the credit or all the blame, but it still needs to provide the leadership and forge a new basis of trust with citizens. It will need to live with a more contentious political environment and perhaps no longer expect a wide winning margin.

- Associate Professor Tan Ern Ser, from the National University of Singapore's sociology department

This article was published on April 26 in The Straits Times.

Get a copy of The Straits Times or go to straitstimes.com for more stories.