风萧萧_Frank
以文会友
李显龙 2024年哈佛大学论坛演讲
李显龙总理出席2024年埃德温·L·戈德金讲座
李显龙总理 | 2024年11月13日
https://www.pmo.gov.sg/Newsroom/SM-Lee-Hsien-Loong-at-the-2024-Edwin-L-Godkin-Lecture
大家下午好。
肯尼迪学院院长杰里米·温斯坦教授；格雷厄姆·艾利森教授；各位教职员工和学生；尊敬的来宾、女士们、先生们
感谢你们邀请我发表今年的戈德金讲座。我很高兴再次来到哈佛大学肯尼迪学院，这让我回想起近半个世纪前，作为梅森研究员（1979-1980）的美好回忆。
我记得理查德·泽克豪瑟教授——我上过他的课。他曾经问我：“你觉得你的同学知道新加坡在哪里吗？”于是我大胆地回答说，我确信人们知道它是东南亚的一个小国。或许我当时说话过于自信了，因为当时邮件有时还会寄往“新加坡，中国”。但几十年过去了，亚洲繁荣昌盛，新加坡也发展成为国际金融和商业中心。所以今天我更有信心，大多数人应该都听说过新加坡。昨晚我们吃饭时，问服务员：“你知道新加坡在哪里吗？”她说：“非常非常远。” 所以我们取得了进步。或许人们不仅听说过我们，还听说过我们如何在短短一代人的时间里从第三世界一跃成为第一世界。
很多人问我们：你们是如何实现这一飞跃的？新加坡是如何建立国家领导力和机构、发展经济、增强社会和政治凝聚力，并在国际上站稳脚跟的？我会告诉他们，这是几代新加坡人共同努力的结果，自二战以来，也就是80年前。至关重要的是，从一开始，我们就走在正确的道路上。幸运的是，我们能够坚持下去，做一些对新加坡有益的事情，从而形成良性循环，并再次回到正轨。让我先从历史和背景开始，然后再解释我们在治理中运用的一些原则和实践，这些原则和实践帮助我们走到了今天。
我们的历程
今天的新加坡或许给人一种印象，那就是它一直井然有序、稳定有序。但事实远非如此。我们的开端充满动荡。像许多其他国家一样，我们与殖民统治者——在我们这里是英国——抗争，争取决定自身命运的权利。我们最终取得了成功，首先实现了自治，这是内部自治，然后是完全独立。一路走来，我们必须选择是建立一个左翼的亲共政府，还是一个民主的非共产主义政府。这是一场重大的政治斗争，尤其考虑到我们的人口大多数是华裔，并且与共产主义中国有着紧密的种族和家庭联系。抵御共产主义威胁是新加坡加入马来西亚联邦的原因之一。我们视其为独立的未来。然而，在联邦内，我们遭遇了另一场根本性的冲突——一方面是多元种族主义和种族平等，另一方面是种族政治和单一族群的主导地位。
悲剧的是，这引发了骚乱和流血事件。事实证明，这些分歧过于尖锐，难以调和，最终于1965年被逐出联邦。独立的新加坡就此诞生。这是一个复杂而非自然的诞生，伴随着巨大的政治动荡和冲突。斗争的结果可能注定是两败俱伤。但幸运的是，最终新加坡的命运走向了光明，这些环境也奠定了我们建国理念，至今仍是我们国家的基础——独立自主；非共产主义民主；多元种族、任人唯贤，不分种族、语言或宗教，人人享有平等的机会。
我们走到今天的道路——始于反对殖民主义、共产主义以及随后的社群主义的三次激烈斗争——是新加坡发展的关键因素。正因为这段经历，那一代领导人和公民清楚地知道利害攸关，并决心全力以赴，将愿景变为现实。正因如此，如果其他人试图复制我们的方案，或者即使我们自己再次踏上同样的旅程，并希望再次来到这里，我们最终也未必会回到原点。所以，我们学到的第一课是，我们依赖于路径，历史至关重要。
建设高质量的政府
第二课是我们高度重视建设高质量的政府和高质量的机构。我们建立了公共服务体系。我们保持政府职业的吸引力和薪酬的竞争力。我们设立奖学金，以吸引每届毕业生中最优秀、最聪明的人才。最重要的是，我们创造了强大的公共服务精神，在我们的官员中灌输了一种使命感：竭尽全力服务新加坡。
发挥他们的能力，使国家走向成功。
我们也组建了一支称职的政治领导团队。一些领导人擅长在独立斗争的激情和热情中激励和鼓舞群众。另一些领导人则更擅长组织政府，并在国家建设的艰苦过程中年复一年地激励人民。值得庆幸的是，我们的先驱领导人能够从一个角色转换到另一个角色，并且都取得了成功。
部长们确实需要连任。但在新加坡，如果他们取得成果，就有可能连任，他们知道责任最终落在他们身上。因此，他们有充分的动力不去拖延问题，而是认真处理棘手的问题。也正因如此，我们才能够实现政治和政策的正确结合——一个对新加坡行之有效的结合。
整个体系建立在任人唯贤的基础上，以最大限度地发挥我们的人才。我们强调法治，并建立了独立公正的司法体系。在切实可行的情况下，政策均已法律化，以确保政府各级运作透明、合理且可预测。我们积极维护体制廉洁，并实施规则，防止金钱介入政治，避免政党和领导人受制于政治捐款者和游说团体。
这些在国家建设初期的关键举措，使我们能够建立高效、高效的国家机构，提供高质量的公共服务，同时保持较低的税负。随着时间的推移，这些举措也在社会中根深蒂固，为政府及其领导人所维护。这使我们能够正确行事——在经济、社会凝聚力、国家建设和外交政策制定方面。我接下来要说的可能都出自教科书。但要真正落实教科书，我认为新加坡的经验和我们所走过的道路，或许比其他国家更容易做到。
制定正确的政策
让我来谈谈这些政策。我们高度重视经济增长和发展。没有增长，我们就没有资源去做所有我们渴望的美好事物。我们采取了当时较为激进的经济发展方式。在传统观念将跨国公司视为廉价劳动力的邪恶剥削者的时代，我们欢迎跨国公司，视其为一种良性力量，它们带来了技术，创造了良好的就业机会，并实现了我国经济的现代化。
当当时盛行的发展模式以进口替代和保护国内市场为基础时，我们推行出口导向型增长，最大限度地减少进口限制，并努力提高自身的国际竞争力。
我们践行自由市场原则，但并不追求纯粹主义或教条主义。我们相信，市场力量对于有效配置资源、激发发展和创造财富的动力至关重要。运作良好的市场也为我国人民提供了纪律和激励，使他们努力工作，追求卓越。但我们既不是完全的自由放任主义者，也不是自由市场原教旨主义者。
政府发挥了积极作用：我们营造了有利的、有利于企业的环境。我们确保贸易、资本和人才的自由流动。我们培养了具备市场需求技能的人才，使企业能够依赖熟练的劳动力。我们还建立了强大的劳工运动，与雇主和政府紧密合作，改善工人的生计和生活，实现双赢。我们也将经济原则应用于社会政策，例如控制交通拥堵、制定水电等必需品的定价、建设公共住房、设计福利计划，甚至控制赌场的准入。
当私营部门无法实现我们所需的成果时，政府随时准备直接干预。例如，为了开发工业用地，我们成立了一个法定机构——裕廊镇公司，负责开发工业用地和基础设施。为了促进外国直接投资——我们并不认为他们会主动上门——我们创建了一个一站式中心——经济发展局，这成为了其他国家的典范。我们甚至创办了一些公司，一些国有企业，在没有补贴的情况下高效运营，并且盈利——这本身就自相矛盾——但它们在新加坡确实存在：新加坡航空、星展银行、新加坡电信等等。
除了经济之外，我们还致力于建设一个有凝聚力的社会和一个强大的国家，因为我们不仅仅是一个经济体，我们是一个民族国家。虽然我们规模不大，但我们必须建设一个社会，一个国家。因此，随着经济的增长，我们投入了大量的社会投资来改善新加坡人的生活。我们建立了良好的教育、医疗保健和住房体系。如今，我们90%的年轻人都能完成高等教育。
资格。新加坡人离开学校后，就准备好接受优质、高薪的工作，这些工作唾手可得。我们的青年失业率非常低。我们享有良好的健康状况，同时医疗成本低于大多数发达国家。90% 的新加坡人拥有自己的房屋，其中大多数人居住在高质量的公共住房中。
我们还在定居新加坡的多语种移民社区中塑造了国家认同。我们以英语作为我们的通用工作语言。我们保留马来语（东南亚的通用语）作为我们的国语，并将华语和泰米尔语作为另外两种官方语言。
我们还引入了国民服役制度。所有身体健康的男性在 18 岁时都要在军队、警察或民防部队服役，这向公民灌输了保卫国家的责任感。我们开展了大量的社会工程，影响人们的习惯，以培养适合新加坡的价值观和规范。例如，我们在公共组屋区设定了种族配额，以保持公共组屋区的种族融合，并在种族聚居区达到临界点并失控之前，阻止其形成。所有这些都强化了我们共同的身份认同——我们都是新加坡人，彼此之间的共同点比我们与世界其他地方的马来族、华族或印度族的共同点更多。
最后，即使在保障自身安全和防务的同时，我们也推行了积极的外交政策。小国无法左右世界局势的走向，但我们绝不能认为自己没有自主权。我们尽可能地与世界各国交朋友，包括与大国。我们与志同道合的国家携手合作。我们通过成为可靠、值得信赖的合作伙伴并履行承诺来建立我们的信誉和价值。
我们积极参与联合国和世贸组织等多边机构。例如，我们最近成功领导了一项关于国家管辖范围以外区域生物多样性保护和可持续利用的国际协定的谈判。我们也积极参与气候变化讨论，这对于一个地势低洼的热带岛屿来说事关生死。
有效的外交政策必须建立在国内实力之上。一个国家只有内部团结一致，其领导人和外交官也同样团结一致，才能在国际上受到重视。它必须能够保卫自己，维护自身利益。除了技艺精湛的外交官外，它还必须拥有愿意为保卫国家而战斗至死的士兵。正如我之前所解释的那样，我们一直在稳步投资于国防安全，建立了一支规模适中但值得信赖的武装部队，并以国民服役为基础。
但当今的战略环境更具挑战性。与彼此并非友好国家维持友谊并非易事。每个人都宣称不会强迫你选边站队，事实远非如此。但每个人都希望你站在他们一边，而不是对方一边。我们竭尽全力，根据自身的长期国家利益，采取始终如一、原则性的立场。当我们不得不与其他国家意见相左时，我们会坦诚相待，这样他们才能继续信任我们，理解我们这样做是出于新加坡自身的考量，而非为了他人的利益。
一个适合新加坡的体制
从建国初期到如今的现代新加坡——由于人民行动党在新加坡独立前就已执政，至今已超过60年——历届人民行动党政府都表现出色，兑现了我们的承诺。正因如此，新加坡人民对我们充满信心，一届又一届，迄今为止已连续15届。
这种信心和信任拓宽了政府的政治和政策空间，使我们能够进行长远思考，并让我们能够采取政治上困难但至关重要的举措。例如，提高消费税以满足老龄化人口日益增长的医疗保健需求，以及在新冠疫情结束后采取这些措施。但我们始终谨慎，绝不将人民的支持视为理所当然。如果我们辜负了新加坡人民的信任，让他们失望，或者未能保持他们对我们的高标准期望，新加坡人民可以毫不犹豫地投票选出执政党。
新加坡的政治与许多其他国家的政治截然不同。当我解释新加坡的政治运作方式时，他们看着我，仿佛我来自另一个世界。但我们已经发展并调整了我们的民主政治制度和规范，以适应我们的国情，而且这对新加坡来说很有效。这个国家是成功的——人们对政府和社会高度信任，我们的收入和生活水平不断提高，我们拥有高质量的公共服务、稳定的政治、良好的国际声誉，以及团结、坚定、共同面对困难的人民。这些资产是长期积累下来的，尤其是在危机时期。
正是这些努力证明了它们的价值。
例如，在新冠疫情期间，我们能够采取正确的措施——执行安全距离规定、救治新冠患者、为所有人接种疫苗、保障就业、维护信心。我们之所以能够做到这一点，是因为人们信任政府——包括公共服务部门和政治领导人。此外，人们相互信任，社会团结一致。因此，我们安然度过了新冠疫情，伤亡相对较轻，生计得以维持，我们的社会资本、公众信心和信任也得到了增强。为此，我们将永远心存感激。
未来几年的机遇与不确定性
但新冠疫情不会是我们面临的最后一个挑战。现有的问题永远不会完全消失，它们会以不同的形式不断重现。这就是政府的本质。你不可能写完论文、毕业，然后又转向下一个研究课题。问题会以不同的形式再次出现，但问题又来了：你如何生存？如何谋生？如何提升标准？如何满足期望？如何突破限制，超越看似可以想象的范围？
新的挑战也随之而来。在外部，大国竞争和多边主义的崩溃无疑意味着增长机会的减少，以及紧张局势和冲突风险的增加。在国内，诸如老龄化、社会流动性、收入不平等、移民和外籍工人等问题都无法轻易回避，尤其是在一个增长缓慢、成熟的经济体中。在政治上，政府与民众之间的契约必须一代一代地更新，以便拥有新理念的新团队能够应对新的挑战。
值得庆幸的是，新加坡与其他国家一样，拥有应对这些不可避免的现实的良好条件。国家各级领导人都感到有责任确保我们的体制尽可能长久地运转，即使在我们任期结束后也依然如此。作为国家的管家，他们发掘并引进新的人才来更新领导团队，以便将这一责任像传家宝一样代代相传。
迄今为止，我们已经成功完成了三次高层领导换届。今年，一位新总理接替了我，我很高兴向黄循财总理的交接工作进展顺利。我希望新加坡在未来的许多年里能够继续焕发新生，振兴我们的国家事业。
非常感谢。
SM Lee Hsien Loong at the 2024 Edwin L. Godkin Lecture
Thank you for inviting me to deliver this year’s Godkin Lecture. I am delighted to be back here at Harvard Kennedy School, and it brings back to me warm memories of my year as a Mason Fellow (1979-1980), nearly half a century ago.
I remember Professor Richard Zeckhauser – I attended his course. He once asked me: Do you think your classmates know where Singapore is? So I boldly replied that I was sure people knew it was a small country in Southeast Asia. Perhaps I spoke too confidently at a time when mails were sometimes still being addressed to “Singapore, China”. But in the decades since then, Asia has prospered, and Singapore has developed into an international financial and business hub. So today I am a bit more confident that most people would have heard of Singapore. Last night, we had dinner and we asked the waitress, “Do you know where Singapore is?”, and she said, “It is a very, very long way away.” So we made progress. And perhaps people have not only heard of us, but also have heard of how we have gone from Third World to First in just one generation.
Many people ask us: How did you manage this leap? How did Singapore build its national leadership and institutions, develop the economy, strengthen social and political cohesion, and secure itself internationally? I would tell them, it has been the work of several generations of Singaporeans, ever since the second world war, 80 years ago. Crucially, right from the beginning, we set off down the right path. Fortunately, we were then able to stay on track, to do things which worked for Singapore, and therefore create a virtuous cycle and stay on track again. Let me start with this history and context, before explaining some of the principles and practices that we have applied in governance, and that have helped us to journey here.
Our journey here
Today’s Singapore may give the impression that the country has always been orderly and stable. But this was far from so. Our beginnings were turbulent. Like many other countries, we fought against our colonial masters – in our case, Britain – for the right to determine our own destiny. We eventually succeeded and achieved first self-government, which is internal, and then full independence. Along the way, we had to choose whether to have a left-wing and pro-communist government, or a democratic and non-communist government. It was a big political battle, especially as our population was majority ethnic Chinese, with strong ethnic and family ties to Communist China. Fending off the communist threat was one of the reasons why Singapore merged into a new Federation of Malaysia. We saw that as our independent future. But in the Federation, we encountered another fundamental conflict of priorities – between multiracialism and racial equality on the one hand, and race-based politics and the dominance of one ethnic group on the other hand.
Tragically, this led to riots and bloodshed. The differences proved too stark to be reconciled and in 1965, Singapore was expelled from the Federation. So independent Singapore was born. It was a complicated, unnatural birth, amid great political upheaval and strife. The battles could easily have gone either way. But fortunately, in the end things turned out well for Singapore, and these circumstances established the founding ideals that continue to underpin our nationhood – to be independent and sovereign; to be non-communist and democratic; to be multiracial and meritocratic, with equal opportunities for all regardless of race, language, or religion.
This path that we took to get here – that started with these three fierce struggles against colonialism, communism, and then communalism – was a crucial factor in Singapore’s development. Because of this experience, that generation of leaders and citizens knew exactly what was at stake, and they were determined to knuckle down and turn vision into reality. That is why, if others try to replicate our recipe, or even if we ourselves were to traverse all over again the same journey and hope to come here again, we may not end up in the same spot. So first lesson is, we are path-dependent, the history matters.
Building a high-quality government
The second lesson is we paid close attention to building a high-quality government and high-quality institutions. We built up the public service. We kept government careers attractive and salaries competitive. We awarded scholarships to attract the best and the brightest in each cohort of graduating students. Most critically, we created a strong public service ethos, instilling in our officers a sense of mission: To serve Singapore to the best of their ability, and to make the country succeed.
We assembled a competent political leadership too. Some leaders excel at galvanising and rousing the masses in the excitement and fervour of the independence struggle. Others are better at organising the government and motivating the people year after year, in the patient toil of nation building. Thankfully and exceptionally, our pioneer leaders were able to transition from one role to the other, and succeeded in both.
Ministers do have to get re-elected. But because in Singapore they are likely to get re-elected if they deliver results, they know the buck stops with them. Hence they have every incentive not to kick the can down the road, but to deal seriously with difficult problems. Hence also, we were able to get the right combination of politics and policy – a combination that worked for Singapore.
The whole system was organised on the basis of meritocracy, to maximise the talent that we had. We emphasised the rule of law, and built up an independent and impartial judiciary. Policies were encoded in law where practicable, so that the Government could function transparently, rationally, and predictably at all levels. We zealously kept the system corruption-free, and implemented rules to keep money out of politics, and avoided political parties and leaders becoming beholden to political donors and lobbyists.
These key moves early on in our nation-building journey enabled us to build effective and efficient state institutions and agencies that delivered high-quality public services, while keeping the tax burden low. Over time, they also entrenched norms of behaviour and expectations in our society, for the Government and its leaders to uphold. And it enabled us to do the things right – on the economy, on social cohesion, on nation-building, on setting foreign policy. The rest of what I have to say could be from a textbook. But to be able to implement the textbook, I think it is Singapore’s experience, the path we travelled, which made it perhaps easier for us to do than for other countries.
Getting policies right
Let me talk about these policies. We put high priority on economic growth and development. Without growth, we would not have had the resources to do all the good things that we aspired to. We adopted what was then a radical approach towards economic development. In an era when the conventional wisdom saw MNCs as evil exploiters of cheap labour, we welcomed MNCs as a power for good, which brought technology, created good jobs and modernised our economy.
When prevailing development models were based on import substitution and protection of domestic markets, we pursued export-led growth, minimised import restrictions, and forced ourselves to become internationally competitive.
We practised free market principles, without becoming purist or dogmatic. We believed that market forces were essential to allocate resources efficiently, and generate the impetus for development and wealth creation. Well-functioning markets also provided the discipline and the incentive for our people to work hard and to do well. But we were neither completely laissez-faire nor free market fundamentalists.
The government played an active role: We developed a conducive, pro-enterprise environment. We ensured free flows of trade, capital and talent. We educated our people with marketable skills, so that businesses could count on a skilled workforce. And we built up a strong labour movement that worked closely with employers and the government to improve the livelihoods and lives of workers, and achieve win-win outcomes. We applied economic principles to social policies too, for example controlling traffic congestion, pricing essentials like electricity and water, building public housing, designing welfare schemes, and even controlling access to casinos.
Where the private sector could not deliver the outcomes we needed, the government was quite prepared to intervene directly. For example, to develop industrial land, we set up a statutory board, Jurong Town Corporation, and it developed industrial land and infrastructure. To promote foreign direct investments – we did not believe they would just come to us themselves – we created a one-stop centre, the Economic Development Board, which became a model for other countries. We even started companies, state-owned companies operating efficiently without subsidies, and profitable – a multiple contradiction in terms – but they exist in Singapore: SIA, DBS, Singapore Telecoms and several others.
Beyond the economy, we also went into building a cohesive society and a strong nation, because we are not just an economy, we are a nation state. A small one no doubt, but we have to build ourselves up as a society and as a country. So as the economy grew, we made heavy social investments to improve Singaporeans’ lives. We built good education, healthcare, housing systems. 90% of our youths today leave school with post-secondary education qualifications. Singaporeans leave school ready to take up good, well-paying jobs, which are there and available for them. Our youth unemployment rate is very low. We enjoy good health outcomes, while keeping healthcare costs lower than most developed countries. 90% of Singaporeans own our own homes, mostly living in high-quality public housing.
We also forged a national identity out of the polyglot immigrant communities that had made their home in Singapore. We made English our common working language. We kept Malay (which is the lingua franca of Southeast Asia) as our national language, and we kept Chinese and Tamil as two other official languages.
We also introduced national service. All medically fit males serve either in the armed forces, the police or the civil defence at the age of 18, instilling in citizens a sense of duty to defend the nation. We engaged in considerable social engineering, influencing people’s habits to foster values and norms that would work for Singapore. For example, we set ethnic quotas in public housing estates, to keep our public housing estates ethnically integrated and to pre-empt the formation of ethnic enclaves before it reached the tipping point and cascaded out of control. All these strengthened our shared sense of identity – that we are all Singaporeans together, having more in common with one another than with ethnic Malays, or ethnic Chinese, or ethnic Indians elsewhere in the world.
Finally, we pursued an active foreign policy, even as we provided for our security and defence. Small nations cannot determine the course of the world events, but we must not think that we have no agency. We make friends wherever we can, including with the major powers. We make common cause with like-minded countries. We build up our credibility and value by being a reliable, trustworthy partner that delivers on our commitments.
We participate actively at multilateral institutions like the UN and the WTO. For example, we led the recent successful negotiations for an international agreement on the conservation and sustainable use of Biodiversity in Areas Beyond National Jurisdiction. We are also active in climate change discussions, which is an existential issue for a low-lying tropical island.
An effective foreign policy must be based on strengths at home. A nation will only be taken seriously internationally if it is cohesive and united internally, and its leaders and diplomats too. It must be able to defend and stand up for itself. Besides skilful diplomats, it must have soldiers who are willing to fight and die to defend the country. We have invested steadily in our security and defence, building up a modest but credible armed force based on national service, as I explained earlier.
But today’s strategic environment is much more challenging. It is tricky to maintain friendships with countries that are not friends with each other. Everybody declares that they will not force you to choose sides, far from it. But everybody wants you to be on their side and not the other’s. We do our best to take a consistent, principled position in line with our own long-term national interests. When we have to disagree with other countries, we will be open and honest about it, so that they can still trust us, and they can understand that we are doing this because of Singapore’s calculations, and not on behalf of somebody else.
A system that works for Singapore
From our early years of nation building to modern Singapore today – for more than 60 years now, because the PAP took power before we became independent – successive PAP governments have performed well and delivered on our promises. That is why Singaporeans have put their confidence in us, term after term, 15 times in a row so far.
This reservoir of confidence and trust widens the government’s political and policy space, enables us to think long-term and lets us make politically difficult but essential moves. For example, to raise consumption taxes to pay for the growing healthcare needs of an ageing population, and to do so coming out from COVID-19. But we are careful never to take the people’s support for granted. Nothing prevents Singaporeans from voting the ruling party out if we breached their trust, let them down, or fail to maintain the high standards that they have come to expect from us.
Singaporean politics feels quite different from politics in many other countries. When I explain how it works in Singapore, they look at me as if I come from another world. But we have evolved and adapted our democratic political system and norms to suit our circumstances, and it has worked for Singapore. The country is successful – there is high trust in government and society, we have rising incomes and standards of living, we have high-quality public services, stable politics, a strong international reputation, and a united, resolute people who stand together against the odds. These assets have been built up over the long term, and during crises they prove their worth.
For example, during the COVID-19 pandemic. We were able to do the right things – enforcing safe distancing, treating COVID-19 patients, vaccinating everyone, protecting jobs, maintaining confidence. We could only do so because people trusted the government – both the public service, and the political leaders. Also, people trusted one another and our society was united. Hence we came through COVID-19 with relatively light casualties, livelihoods intact, and our social capital, public confidence, and trust all strengthened. And for that, we will long be thankful.
Opportunities and uncertainties in the years ahead
But COVID-19 will not be our last challenge. Existing problems never completely disappear and will keep coming back in different forms. That is the nature of government. You do not write a thesis, graduate, and then move on to the next research problem. The problem comes back in a morphed form, but again, how do you survive? How do you earn a living? How do you upgrade standards? How do you meet expectations? How do you try to break the constraints and go beyond what seems to be imaginable?
New challenges will arise too. Externally, great power rivalry and the breakdown of multilateralism will certainly mean fewer opportunities for growth, and greater dangers of tension and conflict. Domestic issues like ageing, social mobility, income inequality, immigrants and foreign workers – none can simply be waved away, especially in a slower-growing, mature economy. Politically, the compact between the government and the population must be renewed in each generation, so that fresh teams with fresh ideas can deal with fresh challenges.
Thankfully, Singapore is in as good a position as any country, to deal with these inescapable realities. The country’s leaders, at all levels, feel a responsibility to keep our system working for as long as we can and beyond our own terms in office. As stewards, they seek out and induct new talent to renew their leadership ranks, in order to have this responsibility handed on like an heirloom from generation to generation.
So far, we have made three top leadership transitions successfully. This year a new Prime Minister took over from me, and I am very happy that the transition to Prime Minister Lawrence Wong has gone well, and I hope Singapore will continue renewing itself, and rejuvenating our national project, for many years to come.
Thank you very much.
