My Blog

President’s Address
Mr Speaker, Sir, I support the motion standing in the name of the
Member for Jurong GRC, Mdm Halimah Yacob to thank the President for his
Address.

The President spoke about Singapore to become the best place in Asia
to live, work and play.  I fully support that vision, and see it
relevant not only to Singaporeans, but also Singaporeans-to-be, foreign
talent, transient residents, visitors and tourists.

However, Singapore needs to be more than just the best upgraded HDB
estate, more than the most luxurious hotel, more than the state-of-the
art research centre, intelligent office tower and the most productive
factory, more than the biggest theme park and the latest night-spot.

Having lived in London for seven years, London is more than the Big
Ben, the West End, the Chinatown and fish & chips to me.  According
to London’s official website, “London is the place where the historic
past and the vibrant present come alive. A blend of history,
ground-breaking architecture and culture has created an amazing and
constantly evolving city.”  The British have used the tagline “Totally
London”, and we have come up with “Uniquely Singapore”.

What is Singapore unique for?  What does it mean to be a
Singaporean?  In the past, the government has had various initiatives
to develop and market the Singapore identity.  There was the creation
of the Merlion, the orchid motif Singapore Dress, we even came out with
the National Ideology, with a set of shared values and Singapore 21.

The government can set a vision, but I think the national identity is best forged from the ground up.

Our local Chinese pop culture is a good example of Singapore culture
that has found a life on its own, without much governmental support or
intervention.

Our Chinese pop artistes have done well.  At the recent Global
Chinese Music Awards held in Singapore, Stephanie Sun won five awards,
including most Popular Female Artiste and Best Album.  Tanya Chua was
the best female vocalist at the prestigious Taiwan Golden Melody Award.

Besides singers, our composers like twin brothers Li Weisong and
Sisong, Liang Wenfu, lyricist Xiao Han and music producer Billy Koh
have groomed and worked with some of the top singers in Chinese pop.

I must say twenty years ago, as a young boy infatuated with Chinese
pop, I never dreamed that Singaporean singers or songs would ever make
it this big.  Pop songs do play a big part in our growing-up
experience, be it Beatles, Abba, Canto pop, J-pop or K-pop.  For me, it
was xinyao, literally translated as Singapore Songs.  They were simple
and amateurish, but it had a huge following in the eighties, and in my
opinion, that was the foundation of the Chinese pop success we are
seeing today.

We should embrace Singapore pop culture more.  Singapore Tourism
Board has appointed pop singer JJ Lin Junjie as its ambassador for the
Chinese market.  This is a good illustration that pop culture can also
help with tourism receipts and economic returns, like what we have seen
in Hollywood for the US, Bollywood for India and Hallyu for Korea.
There is a lot more potential we can explore.

Another unique part of the Singapore identity is our language.
While Singlish is not, and should not be our official language, it is
one of the most accurate tell-tale signs that help us identify fellow
Singaporeans in a foreign city.  Singlish gave us the word ‘kiasuism’,
which is technically not a ‘Uniquely Singapore’ trait or behaviour, but
a universal one.  In fact, I think Mr Bean is someone who has presented
the true flavour of ‘kiasuism’.  While Rowan Atkinson illustrates it
best in his actions and facial expression, it is here in Singapore,
where we have found the very word to describe it!

Having said that, I fully applaud the Huayu Cool and Speak Good
English campaigns, as with globalisation, besides understanding fellow
countrymen, we need to communicate, and communicate well with people
around the globe.  I used to travel to the Netherlands, and learned
that the Dutch is one of the most linguistically talented people as
most of them speak at least three languages.  As a predominantly
Chinese population, Singapore has access to two of the most widely
spoken languages in the world.

Some people will remind me that it may not be a good comparison as
there are similarities within the Indo-European family of languages,
but English and Mandarin are fundamentally different and will be
difficult languages to be mastered at the same time.  However, I am
happy to observe that we do have increasing numbers of bilingual
talents in Singapore.  A senior radio manager recently shared with me
that it is now easier to find good bilingual deejays.  I also see many
TV reporters now filing news with equal competence and eloquence on
both Channel News Asia and Channel 8 News.

I was watching Forbidden City two months ago, and like many in the
audience, I was impressed by Kit Chan’s powerful vocals.  It suddenly
dawned upon me that, perhaps only in Singapore, can we find a talent
who is equally at ease on the stage of Forbidden City and the Chinese
musical Snow Wolf Lake.

Having said that, there is more that can be done to leverage on the
population profile of Singapore and make us a truly bilingual, if not
trilingual or even multi-lingual society.  To master a language, one
needs an environment to listen, speak, read and write.  The government
can take the lead to provide this environment.

The term “East meets West” is often coined on Singapore, but I think
Singapore is equally, if not more a “East meets East” society.  Our
forefathers brought with them their long history, culture and
traditions from China and India, and with the indigenous Malay
heritage, today we enjoy the diversity and richness of different races,
religions and languages.  I have to admit that I used to be a skeptical
young Singaporean who sees the faces of different races on official
materials as totally deliberate and artificial.  However, in July this
year, I was treated to a spectacle of colours and vibrancy of our
varied cultures when I watched Soundwaves by the People’s Association.
As someone familiar with stage productions, I gave it top marks in its
tastefully integrated performance representing our cultural mix.  This
is true creativity and artistic vision at work. 

Besides the creative director Dick Lee who is no stranger to
intercultural experiments with his Fried Rice Paradise and Mad
Chinaman, there are also other such examples.  The Singapore Chinese
Orchestra has shown its versatility with Malay melodies, and theatre
director Ong Keng Sen is well known in the international arts scene for
his intercultural Shakespeare-inspired trilogy which beautifully fuses
various Asian performing art forms. Recently I watched a local Hokkien
opera based on the Indian epic Mahabharata scripted and produced by the
Chinese Opera Institute.

We should encourage this special blend of cultures.  A tourist would
be more interested in our local performances which truly reflect our
delicious “rojak” heritage.  Having said that, a blend of cultures will
only be meaningful and successful if there is first a strong foundation
in the respective cultures, whether traditional or contemporary.  It is
the artistic stroke of creativity that will conjure the magic.  We must
remind ourselves that we should not be looking for overnight or even
near-term success.  It took xinyao some twenty years to evolve into the
Singapore Chinese pop today.

I am glad to note that besides investing in physical arts and
cultural infrastructure, the government will be encouraging a greater
diversity of involvement in our arts and cultural sectors.  I would
like to point out that good quality works is one key prerequisite to
draw the audiences.  We must not neglect the investment in capabilities
to create more original and interesting artistic and creative works.

I often lament that in land-scarce Singapore, much of our physical
heritage has to make way for new developments.  Most of my student days
can only be relived in my memory, with teachers, ex-classmates and
through old photographs, as many of my school buildings are no longer
standing.  Some have even ceased to exist in name.

This is where arts and culture can play a significant role.  I am
not a nostalgic person, but we can use arts and culture to inform the
young generation of the past, sometimes not too distant past, and not
to take things for granted.

As I read the grand plans under Intelligent Nation 2015, I cannot
help but remember the days when mobile communications is not so
prevalent.  In a play I produced in 1991, a doting mother bought a
mobile phone for her daughter who was moving to the university hostel
so that she could call her every night.  That scene was greeted with a
round of ‘wows’ in the audience, but 15 years later today, even a
primary school kid carries a mobile phone!

Movies can also serve as historical documents.  I remember vividly
the images of our humble provision shops in Eric Khoo’s film Be With
Me.  As the movie travels in the international film festival circuit,
audiences around the world discover another face of Singapore that may
not be spanking clean and modern, but a very real and authentic facet
of our society which is fast disappearing.  This is more engaging than
a picture in the archives or museum.

Now, I would like to move on to the subject of new media, another
means of self and cultural expression.  New media’s impact on the
young, to say the least, has been massive.

Compared to traditional media, new media is much less structured; it
is more informal and also more difficult to control.  It is a virtual
world with its own parameters, rules and regulations.  Its estate or
space is both private and public.  It has both advantages and
disadvantages.  It presents new opportunities and solutions as well as
new problems.  It is a force to be reckoned with and most people in the
developed world cannot envision a future without it.  We are beginning
to see its social, political and economic powers.

It was reported recently that Google UK is poised to overtake UK’s
main TV channels in advertising revenue within the year.  It is
therefore a wise choice that the government has identified interactive
& digital media as a new sector to grow.  We should harness the
power of both new and old media, for instance, in using them for cross
communications and marketing to different audiences.  The popularity of
Singapore Idol and the Idol format around the world was largely due to
its ability to leverage on both the traditional TV media and the new
mobile media.  It manages to engage the audience and turn them into
fans who like the power to be able to pick their winner.

The global media scene will continue to evolve.  From the ancient
days of using smoke signals, pigeons, to print, radio, television, fax,
telephony, mobile and now the internet, it does not mean the emergence
of one new media will always replace another.  The radio continued to
survive in the advent of the TV.  In fact, it became more accessible
with the emergence of the portable radio, then the car radio, followed
by the mobile phone radio.

It is a media ecosystem when many can co-exist and will co-evolve.
Even The Straits Times has launched STOMP and vodcasts, and Channel
News Asia has its BlogTV.sg.  One thing is certain, with technology
advancement, the speed of evolution will be faster and people’s
lifestyles and expectations will also change at a quicker pace.

The convergence of media can pose problems for the conscientious
censor.  On the other hand, the good citizens of the world can now also
play a bigger role in helping to police our virtual space.  For
example, the Wikipedia is a self-regulating resource.  As reported in
The Chronicle of Higher Education in Oct 2006, Alexander M.C. Halavais,
an Assistant Professor with the State University of New York at
Buffalo, slipped in 13 errors in Wikipedia.  In less than three hours,
all of his false facts had been deleted, thanks to the vigilance of
Wikipedia editors who regularly check recently updated entries. On Dr
Halawi’s “user talk” page, one Wikipedian pleaded with him to “refrain
from writing nonsense articles and falsifying information.”

The differences between new media and traditional media call for
different treatments from the authorities.  We can allow different
platforms for responsible and less responsible expression of views, eg
全民乱讲 is for all citizens to talk nonsense, 全民开讲 allows all citizens to
speak their minds，and 全民好好讲 calls for all citizens to have a good
discussion.  I believe people will know which programme is meant to
serve what target audience.  What the government should ensure is that
there is no masquerading.

The government should not and cannot hold itself responsible for
what the people see or read.  Otherwise, Singaporeans risk losing the
ability to think, evaluate and judge for themselves.   The Mr Brown
incident illustrates too clearly how new and old media could have
engaged each other better.  Having driven negative comments or untrue
information about the government underground, into the labyrinth of
virtual space, the government loses an opportunity to engage the
propagators and dispel the erroneous statements.

As I read comments in the newspapers and compare them with those in
blogs and online forums, I sometimes wonder if they are from two
different populations talking about two different countries.   I do not
think that the reality is mostly positive like in the traditional media
or like what the new media is portraying, mostly negative and
critical.  I believe the real world is somewhere in between.

We have to accept that it will be very difficult, in fact,
impossible to monitor and rebut all negative online comments against
the government.  We should also consider relaxing regulations on
traditional media to allow people to vent grouses and frustrations,
without always demanding for constructive suggestions.  Singaporeans
can then engage openly in meaningful, level-headed discussions without
fear of prosecution.  Erroneous assumptions, wrong ideas, narrow
mindsets, prejudices and biases, loyalties, tolerance and wisdom can
all be brought to the light of day and seen clearly for what they are.
I believe in the Singaporean’s ability to discern wisely.  Even if we
may not be able to do so accurately, that is our judgment and that
judgment should be given the opportunity to be sharpened.

A few months ago, Lianhe Zaobao and My Paper featured articles about
the “strawberry generation”, a description of “soft”, young people with
little determination, weak wills and dependent mindsets who are unable
to take the slightest of hardship.  They are adults but they still turn
to their parents for pocket money.  They have difficulties holding down
a job.  I wonder if this reflects, on a micro level, a side effect of
our government’s parental style towards its citizens.  If our
government trusts the general public’s ability to refrain from
uncontrolled gambling by allowing casinos, she should also trust its
ability to tell right from wrong, black from white, or even grey, on
other issues.  Thus, I urge the government to consider amendments to
our media legislation so as to promote greater media freedom.

This, I believe, would encourage greater creativity in this sector,
leading to spill-over effect in other sectors and professions in
Singapore.  Creativity exists in all sectors and industries.  As we
nurture creativity in every aspect of our lives, it would become part
of ourselves, our DNA, our lifestyles, our identity.  Creativity is
doing things in a different way which adds value and benefits, which no
one else has done before.  Creativity is working smart.  Creativity is
the new cutting edge.  Creativity is that which will provide us with
the lead over our competitors. 

I look forward to the day when creativity is synonymous with the
Singapore national identity, the Singapore brand.  When that day comes,
we can be assured that our survival as a nation is secure and the
future, ever the brighter.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I support the Motion of Thanks.