Skip to main content

Peak Oil, Peak PAP, Peak Singapore and the Golden Age



Peak oil is the point in time when the maximum rate of petroleum extraction is reached, after which the rate of production is expected to enter terminal decline.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peak_oil 

When we talk about the golden age of Singapore, we are also referring to a stage that we have reached the maximum of our growth and development.  If the present day Singapore is the golden era, then we will see the decline soon. But is it a Peak PAP or Peak Singapore or both?

So, using the Peak Oil concept, we may also extend the same logic to Peak PAP and Peak Singapore. Few will disagree that Peak PAP means the seats of PAP MPs in the Parliament will decline in future elections.  The only possibility to increase the number of PAP MPs in future is to increase the total number of members of Parliament in Singapore.  But in terms of percentage, the current 93% is the peak for the PAP and then it will decline to a lower percentage in future.

Whether we have reached the Peak Singapore or not, it is harder to say.  But if it is still the PAP ruled government, then perhaps we have reached the Peak Singapore as they have used up all their supported resources. (And the National Conversation is not inclusive enough to push us to a new high level).

PM Lee in his speech to Singapore International Energy Week 2010 pointed out the following interesting points:

<We consume energy in the course of almost all parts of our daily lives. It makes possible the way we live, work, play and travel. And ever since the Industrial Revolution and especially over the past century, mankind has relied on cheap supplies of fossil fuels to drive economic progress. But this dependence will be very difficult to be sustained. >http://www.news.gov.sg/public/sgpc/en/media_releases/agencies/mica/speech/S-20101101-1.html

Comparing the cheap fuels and the cheap labour including our very own Singaporeans, the future growth of Singapore is certainly cannot rely on this cheap labour supply anymore.  In fact, as the government has promised after GE2011, we have already reached the stage of Peak Foreign Labour.   Future increase of foreign labour will be moderate and controlled. Nevertheless, the population under the PAP has yet to reach its peak and maybe through some creative arrangements some increases in population can be re-channelled to the pool of labour force.  

So the golden age, the Peak PAP, we are talking about is the golden age of the PAP and its associates, including mainstream media which has lost its monopoly status, the ISA for the use to detain political oppositions, and perhaps the moral high ground of wealth creation, casino and civil servants, etc.

Peak Oil does not stop the progress of the world so does the Peak PAP. Singapore will continue to grow and develop after the Peak PAP. We will use less oil and of course, Singapore will use less cheap labour. The Singapore sustainable growth and development will have to shift from materials gains to a meaningful living – a situation quite different from Peak PAP.

In fact, take the example of the USA; they are now consuming less oil, water and many other natural resources with a bigger population as compared to 10, 20 years ago.   USA is still progressing even though at a slower rate.  Singapore, being a small country and a first world country, can no longer consume resources including our human resources like the past.  Even land use and population, many believe we have reached the level of Peak Land and Peak Population.  

In the same speech, PM Lee said:

<There are two sets of concerns. First, fossil fuel resources are finite and depleting. Easily tapped supplies will gradually diminish and then the next supplies will become more expensive; in more inaccessible areas, deeper under the ocean, with new complex technologies involved in extracting the fossil fuels. The concentration of oil and gas supplies in just a few countries also raises serious national security concerns. >


The future supply of foreign labour, like oil, will be more expensive and difficult to get by.  In fact, Chinese construction workers have found that the wages offered in Singapore are no more attractive and they can get the same compensation in big cities like Shanghai and Beijing. Also, will the concentration of labour supply in a few countries a national concern to us?

Energy generation can come from fossil fuel and other alternative resources, like winds, solar or even nuclear power (that the PAP is very interested in). Singapore, as a country, will continue relying on energy to boost our economy and support our daily life.  From this aspect, relying 100% on the PAP source of energy is a risky decision and is certainly a security threat and concern to the future of Singapore.  It is all because we have already seen the Peak PAP.

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 ...

Is Prism Project Another Central Planning of the PAP?

There are 3 scenarios under the Prism Project#1 of Institute of Public Policy.  However, it looks more like the central scenario planning of the People’s Action Party. From the instructional menu of Prism Project Primer #2, participants were guided to a situation in 2022 and they have to imagine, within the Primer framework, to come out with 3 possible scenarios in Jun-Aug 2012.  2022. What a coincidence! Not long ago, PM Lee declared that he would like to hold the prime minister post for another 10 years. The other coincidence is the similarity between the 3 scenarios and the candidates of PE2011. How competitive and sustainable are the 3 scenarios to the people of Singapore and to the PAP?   Will the scenarios produce competitive and sustainable Singapore, Singaporeans or the PAP?  Perhaps, as what the Chinese say: planning cannot always catch up with changes.   And planning sometimes turns out the wrong, bad and unexpected results, espec...

对话一定要有共识吗?还是求取多元性来丰富自我?

全国对话喊到现在还一直高喊全国要有共识,尤其是全国对话的结果就是要寻求新加坡人的共识。不然,行动党就会说,我国的政治将会出现分裂,新加坡就变成一个不团结的国家。 全国对话一定要取得共识吗?文明对话的目的难道就是为了取得全国共识吗?如果是共识,那就一定有取舍。是不是说强势的人就领头共识,而落势的就落得一无所有。这不又走回老路,一条行动党独大的旧政治框框吗?看来,行动党对于过去,仍然依依不舍,行动党的共识,就是国家的共识,新加坡人的共识。 对话是要加深双方的了解,尊敬并且互相学习,吸取对方的优点,填补自己的缺点。这就是多元性的好处。然而全国对话的结果,如果只是强求共识,而忽略多元性和不同的意见,甚至否定他人的意见,那么,这个共识,是否具建设性,破坏性,还是分裂性,那就很难说了。 行动党似乎忘记了多元性。文明的对话并不是要把自己的 意见,信仰和理念强加给对方。即使这些意见,信仰和理念都是好的,善的。但是,对方未必会欣赏,未必会接受。因此,对话的结果应该是吸取对方的意见,改进自己的治国方针,然后,交给人民去决定,而这个决定也不过是大多数人的共识,而不可能是全国人民百分百的共识。 (乐观的看,行动党的全国对话,也不过是改进自己的治国方针,通过自己的小圈圈,自我讨论,研究,更新和改良行动党的政治策略,然后,在下一次大选时,拿出来让选民决定。因此,所谓的共识,在全国人民还没有决定前,仍然不是全国大多数人的共识。很可惜,行动党原本应该通过全国对话这个平台,吸收更多对手的意见,不同的观点,将它们纳入自己的政治策略中,然后在大选中让选民选择这个纳入反对意见的新政纲。可惜的是,行动党没有这个雅量,也或许根本看不起反对的意见。因此,它只能企图通过全国对话,硬要说这是全国共识。所以,充其量这只能说是行动党小圈圈的改良版政治策略,绝对不能说是全国共识。) ‘己所不欲,忽施于人’我们不喜欢的,不要强加他人身上。同样的,我们喜欢的,也不可以强加于他人身上。例如,有些人不喜欢吃有些食物,我们却很喜欢吃这类食物,但是,我们要尊重个人的喜好,不要强迫他人接受我们的建议。了解了这点,下一回提供食物时,就会通过多些选择,而不是只提供自己喜欢的食物。这点一般新加坡人都有这个敏感度,我们会了解马来族的要求,尽量避免他们敏感的食物。 为何行动党过去能够了解国人...