Skip to main content

Long-term planning – I thought we always had it in Singapore!



Singapore is a planned country - from the day of our independence or even longer than that from the day Sir Raffles Stamford found it.  Sir Raffles wanted to make Singapore a trading hub in the Far East and skilfully and strategically planned a successfully ‘take over’ of Singapore.
So, planning is not a strange word for Singapore.  In our early history, we built our economy based on suggestions and planning from United Nations (Dr. Albert Winsemius). In 1960, Dr Winsemius led the United Nations team to examine Singapore’s potential in industrialization. …... He presented a 10-year development plan to transform Singapore from an entrepot trade port into a centre of manufacturing and industrialization. (wikipedia).

And now, suddenly we hear that we need to have a long-term planning for flood control. Don’t we ever have one? We have long-term plan for water requirements even long before our independence (the water contracts with Malaysia) and now PUB is telling us there is no long-term plan for flood control. Have we already forgotten the story of once in 50 years – the force of nature?

Long-term plan and nature

<Dr Balakrishan noted that Singapore is at a point where it needs to develop a long-term plan for flood control infrastructure.

But even as he outlined plans to review and improve the flood control system, he was quick to set expectations right.

"Nature is a very, very powerful force ... there will inevitably be some episodes of flash flooding, despite all our best efforts ... what we will commit to, is making sure that everything we can do to prevent it, to mitigate it, and to keep you informed, we will do so."> (Today, 16 Nov 2011)


Since there is no long-term planning for flood control, it can also mean there is no long-term planning for migration, MRT/Bus, foreign workers, housing, hospitals, doctors, education, etc. What a surprise!

When everything moves smoothly, there is a planning and when things are not OK, it can be the force of nature or there is no planning.

Only short-term businessmen or speculators will not have long-term planning. Our GIC and Temasek Holdings, when they made losses, they will tell you they are looking at the long-term and not short term.
Is this a long-term planning?  People are told we may need 10, 20 years to recover the losses and this is planning!


Wait a minute we have to admit the force of nature too as suggested by Dr Balakrishan. Not only for flooding, but also for all other social and economic areas, natural force or market force is very powerful.  We did not expect the population to be increased by so much, so the trains, buses, housing, hospitals and many infrastructures are facing pressure to meet the demands.

We have economic forecast every year.  We even are happy if we can achieve 3-5% annual growth in the coming 10 years. So, there must be a planning, especially water is money and flooding is causing money.

Are all these problems caused by nature or lack of planning?  Or our economic development and planning is so successful in the past 50 years that we overshoot our target and land us in a situation of planned development higher than planned infrastructure.

So, don’t blame the nature? The nature will grow on its own speed and human beings have to adjust the change of nature. Perhaps, we have moved so fast that the nature is not able to cope with it.  This is especially true for Singapore.  Limited by land and nature resources, even with reclaimed land, there is a limit and constraint for Singapore to grow.     

Of course, if you look at the money, the GDP, the profit, you will consider less of your physical constraint and look more on how to maximise profit. 

This perhaps is the result of using GDP as a measure of happiness.  

Lee Yuan Tseh, the first Taiwanese Nobel Prize (chemistry, 1986) laureate, in a recent interview (see below) pointed out that blindly emphasizing the growth of GDP is not equal to happiness. In the process towards globalization, we need to look at the relationship between human beings and land.  Only considering this, then the growth will be a healthy one.     

Man and land, development and nature, will PUB consider more human touches and nature elements in their long-term plan for flood in Singapore?


*

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Sub-standard PAP and the Singapore education system

I make a 'policy shift' when I hear the debate of right politics, constructive politics and sub-standard opposition. My original aim is to discuss about “Su Dongbo, Zhang Juzheng and Singapore education system”. The discussion will end with a sub-standard PAP, in particular from the assessment of the quality of PAP potential candidates. Another policy shift is to discuss it like a play, a drama and make it more entertainment rather than a sub-standard political discussion. Act 1 Gangster’s demand Imagine a sense in the Hong Kong's gangster movie (or a godfather movie), the gangsters' master is shouting at his poor opponent and demand him to give a price for his wrong act. The poor guy without any resources can only offer his body or his service to work for the master. Back in his own chamber, the master is still not satisfied and continues to shout 'don't play, play, you think you are hero, you think you are tiger, or superstar or acting

因为有比较, 才知道做得不够, 才明白什么叫做易通。

  因为有比较, 才知道做得不够, 才明白什么叫做易通。 如果只有一套解决方法,很难看出好坏,方便还是不方便,易通还是不容易通。用新方法代替旧的系统,人们当然会做比较,尤其是科技产品,使用的人很多,一用就马上看到结果。 这是一个竞争的世界,即使一党独大,也要考虑到便民。当人民觉得不方便,不好用,不易通,就会反映,发声,不满。为什么没有预先想到,最可怕的是测试时,已经接到反应,还是不加改善。或许,行动党还抱着“令伯”最大,用者自行解决问题。 易通公交收费系统的整合,似乎缺少一种人文,沟通,反而更加多表现出政府的独断独行。尤其重要的是,如果只有一套系统,我们是看不出问题,做不出好坏的评价。 这其实证明国会里不可以只有一把声音,没有比较,没有进步。

梁文辉可能有点傻, 但却是真的真情流露。