UNCLASSIFIED

Prime Minister Goh Chok Tong proposes a framework of wider cooperation,

including a long-term indefinite supply of water to Singapore, to bolster
reason to: (1) vary the Points of Agreement on Malayan Railway Land in
Singapore (POA) to meet Malaysia's requirements; and (2) to invest in the
Singapore sector of the infrastructure for the high speed train to help make
the train service financially viable.

In the next part, PM Goh outlines the vision of Singapore 21 and emphasized
the need for Singapore to move beyond material progress, to a society which
places people at its very centre. In future the competitive advantage of
nations will lie in their people - how a society is organised to maximise and
mobilise the potential of its people, and how it serves the material, spiritual,
intellectual, political, social and emotional needs of its citizenry. The ideas
put forward by PM Goh are aimed at developing a cohesive and resilient
nation, a people fully equipped to compete in the future and a people with
emotional stakes in Singapore.

SPEECH BY PRIME MINISTER GOH CHOK TONG IN PARLIAMENT

ON THURSDAY, 5 JUNE 1997

SINGAPORE 21 - A NEW VISION FOR A NEW ERA

Part 1

Points Of Agreement (POA)

And Framework Of Wider Cooperation

1. Mr Speaker, Sir, the Minister for Law has given us the background to the
POA, and explained the difficulties in working the agreement. These difficulties
are part of the reasons behind the current strain in Malaysia-Singapore relations.

2. Let me first bring you back to June 1990. I told the House then (I was
then Deputy Prime Minister) that I had asked Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew to
"settle old accounts as I prefer to open a new era unfettered by old thinking". By
that, I meant settling outstanding issues like the railway land. I wanted a clean
slate on which new relations free from historical and emotional baggage could
be written.

3. It was for this reason that Mr Lee wrapped up the negotiations on the
Malayan Railway land before he stepped down as Prime Minister. In fact, he
signed the "Points of Agreement on Malayan Railway Land in Singapore" with
the then Malaysian Finance Minister, Tun Daim Zainuddin, as his very last act
in office on the day he retired as Prime Minister, i.e. 27 November 1990. He did
so with my full support.
1
UNCLASSIFIED
 UNCLASSIFIED

4. The POA provided for Singapore and Malaysia to set up a joint venture
company, M-S Pte Ltd, to jointly develop three parcels of Malayan Railway land,
in Tanjong Pagar, Kranji and Woodlands. Malaysia would have a 60% share,
and Singapore 40%. We wanted Malaysia to have a significant long term stake
in Singapore as this would give both sides an abiding interest in good bilateral
relations, and in the prosperity and success of the other. The proposed high
quality property developments by M-S Pte Ltd would give Malaysia such a stake.

5. I subsequently learnt that Dr Mahathir was unhappy that the Malayan

Railway land at Bukit Timah had not been included for joint development in the
POA. But I could not simply set aside the POA. The POA was a formal
agreement between two countries that had been signed by Tun Daim and Mr Lee
Kuan Yew on behalf of both Governments.

Meeting on 28 Oct 91 in Harare

6. About a year after the signing of the POA, I met Dr Mahathir in Harare
in October 1991. That was when I had my first inkling of problems with the
POA. Dr Mahathir stated that he would like to develop commercially the MRA
land at Bukit Timah, something not provided for in the POA. His idea was to
use the station and the railway track to Jurong for a few years. After that when
the Bukit Timah railway station was no longer required, the station could be
shifted to Woodlands. I suggested that it was commercially more viable to shift
the railway station to Woodlands in one step instead of two steps. I added that
we had decided to extend our MRT to Woodlands and if the railway station were
to be built at Bukit Timah, it might have to re-locate to Woodlands in just a
matter of years.

Meeting on 6 Sep 94 in Langkawi

7. Three years later, in September 1994, I called on Dr Mahathir in

Langkawi. Again, he raised the commercial development of the Bukit Timah
site. I replied that I could not deviate from the terms spelt out in the POA, which
did not allow for the joint development of the Bukit Timah site. I said that it was
clear from the POA that other than the three specified parcels, the Bukit Timah
site and remaining Malayan Railway land would be returned to Singapore. I left
that meeting disturbed and worried that things were not going right on the issue
of Malayan Railway land. I gave considerable thought to ways to overcome the
problem.

2
UNCLASSIFIED
 UNCLASSIFIED

Meeting on 2 Dec 95 in Singapore

8. The opportunity came when Dr Mahathir visited me in Singapore on 2

December 1995. He presented his vision of a fast inter-city electric train that
would run from Singapore to Kunming. He wanted to keep the railway station at
Tanjong Pagar.

9. I was supportive of his proposal for a city to city fast train link.
All great cities in Europe are linked up by fast trains. Travelling by train from
city to city is convenient and popular. A fast train link between Singapore and
Kuala Lumpur would be an attractive and viable alternative to air and road
travel.

10. I gave Dr Mahathir my full support for his proposed electric train project.
However, I explained that I had to act within the terms of the POA, which
governed all issues affecting KTM land in Singapore. (KTM is the new
corporate name for Malayan Railway.) I pointed out that the electric train
service would require a variation of the POA.

11. I further explained that I could overcome the political and legal
difficulties of varying the POA only within a framework of wider cooperation
between Singapore and Malaysia. I recalled his "prosper-thy-neighbour"
philosophy and said that the framework could include Malaysia selling
Singapore water for the long term, i.e. beyond 2061 when the second Water
Agreement with Johor expires. My idea was that with a new water agreement, I
would be able to overcome whatever difficulties posed by the POA for the
electric train. I felt confident that this would enable me to convince my Cabinet,
and later Parliament, to vary the terms of the POA to meet Malaysia's needs for
the electric train.

Meeting on 15 Dec 95 in Bangkok

12. Two weeks later, I met Dr Mahathir again on 15 December 1995 in

Bangkok at the ASEAN Summit. At our bilateral meeting, I informed him that
my Cabinet was supportive of the electric train proposal within a framework of
wider cooperation.

13. I proposed that this framework of wider cooperation could include a long
term indefinite supply of water to Singapore. Once this was agreed upon,
Malaysia could decide on the terminal point of the new railway in Singapore
within its railway lands. The terminal point could be at Tanjong Pagar, as Dr
Mahathir wanted. But should Malaysia decide to move the railway station from
Tanjong Pagar to Woodlands, the Singapore Government, notwithstanding the
terms of the POA, would agree to the joint development of KTM land in Bukit

3
UNCLASSIFIED
 UNCLASSIFIED

Timah, in addition to the agreed three parcels of land referred to in the POA. Dr
Mahathir replied that he would look at this matter very closely.

Meeting on 2 Mar 96 in Bangkok

14. Dr Mahathir and I next met in Bangkok on 2 March 1996.

The setting was the inaugural ASEM meeting. At our bilateral meeting, I
emphasised that our cooperation on the electric train project and the long term
supply of water would serve as two important symbols in bilateral relations. I
told him candidly that although water was not an immediate issue for Singapore,
an agreement by Malaysia to meet Singapore's long-term water needs beyond
the life of the present water agreements would remove the perception in
Singapore that water may be used as a leverage against Singapore. It would be a
powerful signal that our two countries are embarking on a new era of co-
operation. I explained that a new agreement on water would help me to
overcome the political objections and the legal restrictions posed by the POA.
However, I acknowledged that Malaysia had to ascertain first that it has enough
water to meet its own long term requirements.

15. I also used the opportunity to inform him that we could not allow the
building of gantries or catenaries for the electric train. The Singapore
Government had not allowed even its own MRT to build gantries above ground
because they would be an eyesore in a city state like Singapore.

PM's Letter to Dr Mahathir dated 18 Mar 96

16. Immediately after our meeting, Dr Mahathir spoke to the Singapore and
Malaysian press. He told them that Malaysia was ready to study how it could
supply water to Singapore if it had enough to meet its own long term
requirements. I wrote to Dr Mahathir on 18 March 1996 to follow up, and to
express my appreciation for what he had told the press.

Dr Mahathir's Reply to PM dated 1 Apr 96

17. In his reply of 1 April 1996, Dr Mahathir assured me that Malaysia was
prepared to supply Singapore with water if its water resources are in excess of
its growing needs. He also said that he had instructed KTM to minimise the use
of gantries and level crossings by using a third rail and either overhead or
underground crossings. He recognised that this could increase costs but aesthetic
considerations must be given every importance.

4
UNCLASSIFIED
 UNCLASSIFIED

Meeting on 24 Nov 96: A Fresh Approach

18. When I next met Dr Mahathir during the APEC Leaders Summit in
Manila on 24 November 1996, I reaffirmed that it was for him to decide if he
wanted the train station for the new electric railway to remain in Tanjong Pagar.
But I also suggested that Tanjong Pagar is not a suitable site for the fast electric
train. The station at Tanjong Pagar is scruffy, hemmed in by a flyover and the
container docks in front. There is limited room for expansion. More importantly,
the city centre had already moved away from Tanjong Pagar. I proposed a fresh
approach. I offered three alternative sites for the Tanjong Pagar train station and
a new train route. These sites are at Newton, Suntec City/Marina Centre and
Marina South. I felt that any of these three sites was superior to Tanjong Pagar.
Dr Mahathir agreed to consider these three alternatives. The new train route
would also free the 3 parcels of land under the POA plus the Bukit Timah land
for joint development.

PM's Letter to Dr Mahathir dated 21 Dec 96

19. I wrote to Dr Mahathir on 21 December 1996 elaborating on the idea of

alternative stations to Tanjong Pagar. I said that Singapore would contribute
significantly to the cost of building the new infrastructure - the new station, a
new train route - if it was better than the existing route - and the third rail in
place of catenaries. Singapore would invest in the infrastructure for the
Singapore sector to help make the fast train service financially viable.

20. A group of Malaysian officials came to Singapore in February 1997 to

view the three alternative sites.

Recap of why we could not agree to

Malaysia's proposed electric train project

21. Mr Speaker, Sir, to put things in perspective, let me explain why we

could not agree to Malaysia's electric train project on the terms originally
proposed:

a. First, under the POA, both sides had agreed that Malayan
Railway would vacate Tanjong Pagar. Therefore the proposal for the
new electric train service to the station at Tanjong Pagar was inconsistent
with the POA.

b. Second, because electrification of the existing railway would

mean extensive changes, the electric train service would amount to a
new railway. Under the Railways Act, Parliament's approval has to be
granted before the new train service can begin. Under Section 3 of the

5
UNCLASSIFIED
 UNCLASSIFIED

Railways Act, the Malaysians would first have to deposit their railway
scheme with the Secretary to the Cabinet. The President, on the advice of
the Cabinet, can then provisionally approve or reject the railway
proposal. If the President approved, details of the scheme must be
deposited with the Chief Surveyor for public inspection and objections
within 3 months. Next, the plans and the objections, if any, have to be
presented to Parliament and considered and approved or amended by
Parliament.

c. Third, the overhead catenary system proposed by the Malaysians

is unsuitable for a densely built up city like Singapore. It is against our
planning rules. The Singapore Government has spent millions of dollars
to bury all our telephone and power cables underground. It has not
allowed the Mass Rapid Transit and the Light Rail Transit to use
overhead cables for aesthetic and safety reasons. The catenary system
uses a very high voltage of 25,000 volts. This poses a safety risk and
causes extensive electromagnetic interference in the surrounding areas.
We had thus proposed the use of a third rail system which is visually less
intrusive and allows for a smooth ride given the operating speeds here. I
would like to add that for the same reasons, trains in Europe commonly
use the catenary system in the countryside and switch to the third rail
system in the city.

d. Fourth, the Malaysian proposal as conveyed in writing by

Malaysian officials actually described a commuter train from Tanjong
Pagar to Kulai, with intermediate stops in Singapore, and not a high
speed electric train from city centre in Singapore to city centre in Kuala
Lumpur as envisaged by Dr Mahathir.

Conclusion on POA

22. Mr Speaker, Sir, the framework of wider cooperation I proposed to Dr

Mahathir is designed to overcome the difficulties I had highlighted.
I want good relations with Malaysia. I wish to be helpful. But it is not possible
for me, or for any PM of Singapore, to simply set aside the POA which is an
international agreement solemnly entered into between two Governments. To do
so would undermine the sanctity of all the agreements and treaties Singapore has
concluded in the past or will sign in the future. However, provided there is a
framework of wider cooperation which includes long-term indefinite supply of
water to Singapore, I believe I will have a convincing reason to carry my
Cabinet colleagues, Parliament, and the people of Singapore, first, to vary the
POA to meet Malaysia's requirements, and second, to invest in the Singapore
sector of the infrastructure for the high speed train to help make the train service
financially viable.

6
UNCLASSIFIED
 UNCLASSIFIED

23. I believe both countries have much to gain by working together for
mutual benefit. I firmly believe that neighbours must live together in harmony
and help each other to do better and improve the standard of living of their
people. If Singapore and Malaysia can embark on a new era of cooperation, we
will signal to the present and future generations that we have discarded the old
historical and emotional baggage in favour of fruitful, mutually beneficial
cooperation. Mr Chiam See Tong's proposal of an economic union with
Malaysia is not as ridiculous as it sounds. He got his economic history of our
Malaysia days wrong, and he has ignored important non-economic factors, but
the economic logic of his proposal is correct.

24. However, cooperation takes two willing parties. I do not think this is the
right time to talk about an economic union when bilateral relations are strained
and we are still having difficulties implementing specific items of cooperation.

25. Mr Speaker, Sir, Singapore and Malaysia share a symbiotic relationship.

I fully subscribe to Dr Mahathir's philosophy of "prosper-thy-neighbour". It is an
important way to strengthen our two countries' symbiotic relationship and help
each other to become developed. The electric train, when it comes about, will be
more than a physical connection; it will be a powerful symbol of the two
countries' inter-connectedness on the fast track to success.

26. I have another reason for telling the House the details of my discussion
with Dr Mahathir on the POA and electric train. Whatever the present strains in
our relationship, I support Dr Mahathir's vision of a fast train network
connecting Singapore to Kuala Lumpur, and all the way to Kunming. I hope that
the fast train service will succeed. But I need Malaysia's help to vary the terms
of the POA so that the fast train can operate in Singapore. I have suggested how
this can be done through a new framework of wider cooperation.

27. I do not know at this stage when the new era of cooperation will come,
or whether it will come. I hope it will come. I shall work for it.
If it materialises, I will have to come to Parliament to vary the terms of the POA,
and seek your approval for the new electric railway line. I will also ask the
House to support our investing in the Singapore sector of the infrastructure for
the fast train service.

Part II

Singapore 21 - A Vision for a New Era

28. Now, let me turn to Singapore 21 - our Vision for a new era.

7
UNCLASSIFIED
 UNCLASSIFIED

29. 2 In January 1992, during the debate on the President's Address, I asked
the House,

30. "To judge my Government not by what I say or can accomplish straight-
away, but by what my Government will achieve at the end of its term of office.
Edusave, independent schools, Medifund, home improvements - they need four
to five years to show everyone what there is in it for them. If we go for short
term, small benefits, and miss the long term, big benefits, we will lose our
strategic way. This will spell ruin for Singapore."

31. We went the full term. We delivered on our promises. The people gave
their verdict. They liked our programme. That was the main reason for our
success in the General Election, not the corny excuses given by Mr Jeyaretnam
for his defeat.

32. Today, I am again asking this House to take a long view, to look soberly
into the future, weigh the strategic choices and make the right strategic decision.
This House will lead Singapore into the next millennium. It has been self-
renewed. It should be a future-oriented House, one with ideas, one which will
deliver.

33. We know one thing about the future.

34. Globalisation will mean more intense competition. Many MPs have
emphasised the need to sharpen our competitiveness to stay ahead. The
Information Technology revolution will speed up the process of change itself.
We must keep on learning and be quick to adapt to changes.

35. But there are many things in the future we do not know, and cannot
possibly foresee. Twenty years ago, as a young MP, I had no idea that
Information Technology would so change the way we live, or that Communism
would collapse in the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe so abruptly and benignly.
Given that changes will be even more rapid and drastic in the future, what kind
of a world will we live in in 20 years' time?

36. How do we prepare Singaporeans for this unknown future?

37. First, we need to understand, as far as we can, the nature of the game
unfolding. Second, Singaporeans must have a goal to chase and a vision to carry
this country forward.

8
UNCLASSIFIED
 UNCLASSIFIED

Challenges

38. Let me talk first about the basic challenges facing every country,
developed and developing, and then the challenges facing Singapore in
particular.

39. All countries face a dual challenge. First is the economic challenge to
maintain growth, create good jobs, and attract investments. All countries have to
cope with an increasingly integrated and competitive world. To do well, their
societies must motivate and reward risk-takers and entrepreneurs, the highly
skilled and the more able.

40. Second is the social challenge to maintain social cohesion and to manage
growing income differences between the highly educated and skilled and those
who are less skilled and less mobile. The fast pace of technological change,
coupled with the mobility of investments across international borders will mean
constant change in a country's socio-economic structure. Industries will boom
and bust. Companies will migrate or down-size. This will cause insecurity and
social turbulence. Governments will come under pressure. Thus France has
lurched from Left to Right and Right to Left, all within five years.

41. All countries will have to balance these two imperatives: economic
competitiveness and social cohesion. Many developed countries are finding this
balancing act very difficult. While the OECD countries are leaders in the
knowledge-intensive industries, many are also experiencing uneven or declining
education standards, high unemployment and social tension, especially in
Europe. Growing juvenile crime, racial tensions, structural unemployment, job
insecurity, an unsustainable state welfare burden, and loss of confidence in the
future are straining their social fabric.

42. The experience of the developed countries holds lessons for us. They
suggest the kinds of problems we may face in the future. Social divisions are not
a major problem for Singapore today. But divisions may grow as our society
matures and income gaps widen. We need to nip these issues in the bud.

43. The most pressing challenge facing Singapore today is to retain our
competitive edge. Keen regional competitors are breathing down our neck. Our
neighbours are aggressively upgrading their infrastructure. They are directly
competing with our traditional economic strongholds, our port and airport. They
are also seeking niches in the new knowledge-based industries, like Information
Technology.

44. Our neighbours have the advantages of cheaper land and abundant
labour, and the pull of larger domestic markets. They can copy successful

9
UNCLASSIFIED
 UNCLASSIFIED

strategies and acquire the latest technologies. But we still have the competitive
edge of a better trained and disciplined workforce, higher productivity, and a
more conducive total business environment.

45. We can meet the regional competition. But merely outperforming our
neighbours is not good enough, nor is it our goal. There is a bigger arena and a
bigger game in play.
46. Winning the Malaysia Cup or even the SEA Games championship may
make us the best in the region, but we are still nobody in the world. Increasingly,
Singapore will have to compete with both developed and developing countries
for talent and investment. We are not only competing with Kuala Lumpur,
Bangkok, Hong Kong, Shanghai or Taiwan for investments but also Seattle,
Atlanta, Dublin and Sydney. Unless we can develop into a world-class city, with
capabilities equal to the best anywhere, we are just a tiny speck on the world
map. We have to make it to the World Cup finals.

47. Besides economic competition, Singapore faces a far more fundamental

challenge: rooting our best and brightest in this country. A recent survey by
MasterCard found that 1 in 5 Singaporeans wishes to emigrate, despite
Singapore's economic success. I am not sure how much to believe this survey,
but there is enough anecdotal evidence to suggest a potential problem. Choo
Wee Khiang tells me that a friend of his was dismayed and shocked that his 15-
year old daughter had talked to him about emigrating. So our key challenge is to
build ties among the people and emotional bonds to this country. Deepening our
sense of belonging will be a priority in this term of my Government.

Response

48. How should we respond?

49. We can continue as we are, pursuing our current strategies, perhaps with
some minor course corrections, hoping that National Education will grow a
stronger sense of national identity. If we do this, it is quite likely that we will
enjoy several more good years.

50. But what if we should suffer an external shock and run into economic
difficulties? Who would have anticipated the current strain in relations with
Malaysia, a year or even six months ago? What will hold Singaporeans here?
Affluence and prosperity cannot be the only glue holding us together. If
Singaporeans are just economic animals, materialistic with no sense of
belonging, they will be like migratory birds, seeking their fortunes in other lands
when the season changes. They will have no cause to fight for, no community to
live for, no country to defend and die for, only the pragmatic desire to get on and
get rich. If it ever comes to this, Singapore will not survive as a sovereign nation.

10
UNCLASSIFIED
 UNCLASSIFIED

51. To meet this problem, and other challenges now unknown, it will not do
just to make minor course corrections, small improvements to a generally
working model. We need a new vision for Singapore, an ideal, a fresh mindset.
We need to move beyond material progress, to a society which places people at
its very centre. Singapore 21 is my team's vision for the future of Singapore, a
Singapore where people make the difference, where each citizen is valued, a
Singapore which is Our Best Home, an ideal home which we will all help to
build.

52. Singapore 21 is about what the people of Singapore want to make of this
country. More than a house, Singapore must be a home. The Government can
provide the conditions for security and economic growth. But in the end, it is
people who give feeling, the human touch, the sense of pride and achievement,
the warmth. So beyond developing physical infrastructure and hardware, we
need to develop our social infrastructure and software. In Sony corporation, they
call this "heartware". We need to go beyond economic and material needs, and
reorient society to meet the intellectual, emotional, spiritual, cultural and social
needs of our people.

53. Our concept of competitiveness must therefore recognise that the robust
and successful societies of the future will be those which place people at the
centre. Countries and societies which can develop and mobilise their people, and
serve the human needs, goals and aspirations of their citizens will have a lasting
edge. Singapore must be such a society.

Towards Singapore 21

54. There are several elements that I believe we need to adopt to achieve this.

Beyond Top Talent - Value and Develop People at all Levels

55. In a global, knowledge-based economy, countries which attract and

mobilise human talent will thrive. We have to continue to draw in talent, but we
must also continue to invest heavily in the education and training of our own
people. We aim to maximise the talents and abilities of all Singaporeans, not just
the best and brightest, but every individual.

56. Not everyone is equally talented. But every person has some useful
ability. Our education system must therefore not only groom our top talent, but
also recognise and develop a range of skills and abilities at every level. We have
begun to move in this direction.

11
UNCLASSIFIED
 UNCLASSIFIED

57. Not everyone can perform equally well. But every person who tries his
best should have his contribution recognised. Our attitude should not be that
only a few people at the top add value, while the rest only run the machinery.
Every Singaporean has a contribution to make to his job, his company, his
community and his country. But equally, he has a responsibility to keep himself
employable and productive through continuous learning, and to play his part to
the best of his ability.

58. This does not mean moving away from meritocracy. We must always
give the ablest and most committed the scope and the support to develop to their
full potential, so that they can contribute their maximum to society. But we must
also develop all Singaporeans to their full potential. Countries with a larger
population can afford to use their human resources less efficiently. But
Singapore's talent pool is so small that we cannot afford any human wastage.
Our system must not focus primarily on developing our top talent, but must
value and develop people at all levels.

Beyond the Drive to Succeed - Passion for What We Do

59. Singapore was built by hard-working people who had the drive and
determination to succeed. We must not let this work ethic weaken. But beyond
the drive to get ahead, we must cultivate a sense of pride in our work and a
passion for what we do. Many Americans have this quality. They have an
intense interest and passion for whatever field they are in, which drives them to
develop true expertise and to push the frontiers of their field. This quality has
made them world leaders in many new technologies and disciplines. This is
what R&D and innovation are about - people who pursue their interests and
ideas with a passion, people prepared to be different from others - because they
are thinking of new things. We must foster this sense of passion, this pride in
work, both in the schools and in the workplace. So beyond the drive to succeed,
we must have passion for what we do.

Beyond Success - A Sense of Service

60. The Government has shared the fruits of growth with all Singaporeans,
and will continue to do so. But beyond our efforts to improve the lives of all
Singaporeans, my hope is that Singapore will become a society where every
citizen not only strives to get ahead, but also feels a responsibility to share
success. Many of our founding fathers, like Tan Tock Seng, Lee Kong Chian,
Govindasamy Pillai (a founder member of the Ramakrishnan Mission), and Haji
Ambo Sooloh (a Bugis merchant and philanthropist), used their wealth to benefit
others, not to flaunt their success or for personal glory, but out of a deep sense of
responsibility to their community. They built schools and hospitals, and helped
the needy and the weak.

12
UNCLASSIFIED
 UNCLASSIFIED

61. We must keep this noble tradition alive. Beyond donating to charity,
every Singaporean, no matter what his station in life, can do something to help
others and his community, whether through voluntary welfare organisations, or
simply by getting involved in community work in his neighbourhood.

62. Not all well-off Singaporeans contribute to charities. Some feel that by
paying taxes, they are already subsidising the poor and needy. But paying tax is
the legal obligation of every citizen. It is not philanthropy. It offers nothing extra
for the community. We need to change the mindset of such people, to get them
to feel that they owe a social responsibility to others for their success and
affluence.

Beyond Tolerance - Respect and Gain Strength from Diversity

63. In many societies, race, language or religion will take on increasing

importance either as a rallying cry or as an anchor in an uncertain and fast
changing world. Look at the divisions Pauline Hanson has generated in Australia.
But Singapore is a multi-cultural, multi-religious society. So we must
distinguish ourselves as a society where the different races respect and accept
one another, and the majority makes room for the minority to succeed. Everyone,
Singaporeans and visitors alike, regardless of their cultural or religious
background, should feel comfortable in Singapore.

64. But while recognising and celebrating the importance of each

community's heritage, our shared national identity must come before our
cultures of origin. As our pledge reminds us, first and foremost we must be
Singaporeans, one united people regardless of race, language or religion. And
we must guard against individuals or institutions which would stir up religious
or racial divisions in society.

65. As a society we must be willing to respect and accept a greater diversity

in ideas. Why do some societies, like the US, produce more ideas and innovation
than others? Education systems have something to do with it. But the broader
social environment is critical in supporting creativity and innovation, whether in
the arts, sciences, research, industry or politics.

66. We have to move beyond tolerance, to respect the different cultures in

our midst, and to gain strength from diverse ideas. But there must be individual
responsibility and a sense of accountability to the broader community. Rights
and duties are inseparable, two sides of the same coin. This is the way to
become a cosmopolitan, creative and cultivated society, which attracts top talent
from all over the world.

13
UNCLASSIFIED
 UNCLASSIFIED

Beyond Leadership - Civil Participation

67. Outstanding leadership and sound government will always be crucial.

The government has to provide the best conditions for security and economic
growth. Yet leadership and government will not be enough. We need a civil
society to mobilise our people's energies and talents, and to create a cohesive
and resilient nation. When people participate actively and become involved in
community and national issues, they build ties among themselves and bond to
the country.

68. We must change the mindset that only a few leaders at the top of the
system need to think and take responsibility for social and national issues, while
the rest of society can simply mind their own business and go about their daily
lives. All Singaporeans must feel a responsibility for solving local issues and
shaping their own communities. They should not wait for the Government to
solve every problem. The Government itself must be prepared to take a step
back and perhaps even a back seat, especially on local community issues, and
allow some free play to develop.

69. One good way to do this is for concerned citizens to get involved in
voluntary work or in the running of their own local communities, through the
Town Councils, CDCs or RCs. Singapore's political life must evolve in the
direction of greater participation by the people, more willingness to shoulder
responsibilities, and more giving to the country than taking.

Conclusion

70. In future the competitive advantage of nations will lie in their people -
how a society is organised to maximise and mobilise the potential of its people,
and how it serves the material, spiritual, intellectual, political, social and
emotional needs of its citizenry. The ideas I have put forward are to develop a
cohesive and resilient nation, a people fully equipped to compete in the future
and a people with emotional stakes in Singapore.

71. Singapore 21 will help us to pre-empt the problems faced by many

developed countries today as they try and maintain economic dynamism while
managing growing social divisions. We should focus on building capabilities,
resilience, and "heartware" for the future, rather than just going for growth and
trying to reach developed country status.

72. To work through these ideas will require fundamental changes in our
approach. We need time to build a consensus about the need for such a change
of course, and to work out what exactly the new course should be. We are
already taking major initiatives in education. The public sector is actively

14
UNCLASSIFIED
 UNCLASSIFIED

thinking for the future, preparing for scenarios which we hope to avoid but
which we must be ready to cope with.

73. But this is only half the story. The other half depends on Singaporeans
feeling a responsibility to contribute their ideas, and committing themselves to
participate actively in their communities and in national life to make our vision
of a best home a reality.

74. Singapore is about people. It is only in Singapore that we, as

Singaporeans, have the freedom to build the kind of environment we want to
live in, work and bring up our children. That is what being an independent,
sovereign nation means. In no other country will we have the same opportunity
to shape a country we can be proud of. I hope that Singaporeans from all walks
of life will rise to the challenge and make the difference, for Singapore and for
your children.

75. Singapore 21 is about a Home for a People, not a hotel. A Home where
we feel comfortable with ourselves, where we look after one another, where
everyone makes the country succeed. Our vision for Singapore is not houses of
bricks and mortar, but homes with hearts and dreams. People who feel confident
and secure. People who believe in Singapore and its future. Let's work together
to make Ours the Best Home, for ourselves and our children.

15
UNCLASSIFIED