To understand why even the whiff of scandal can create big waves in Singapore, it is helpful to consider economics — of six decades ago, not just the past six months.
For Lee Kuan Yew (李光耀), Singapore’s first prime minister, the young republic’s best hope of survival after divorce from Malaysia was to transform itself into a base camp for multinational corporations. It had to become a tiny country that functioned well in a volatile region. That meant infrastructure, an educated workforce, competitive taxes, law and order. Also desirable was crushing communists and refraining from crusades against the colonial past. A prominent statue of British official Stamford Raffles, who established a free port in the 1800s, was spared demolition.
Lastly, wooing capital required a clean government and disdain for corruption. Merely being ordinary would doom the island. Lee understood this could also reap electoral benefits. Candidates from the People’s Action Party (PAP), which Lee founded, donned white outfits to proclaim purity and subsequently swept to power in the late 1950s. PAP leaders, including Singaporean Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong (李顯龍), the son of Lee Kuan Yew, still campaign in the color.
Illustration: Kevin Sheu
The desire to be free of impropriety went hand in hand with efficiency, a muscular state and manicured avenues. They became trademarks. That explains why questions of conduct have made such a splash recently. There is no sign laundry aired in parliament — regarding an affair between ruling bloc MPs and the anti-corruption probe of a minister — has soured investors on Singapore. Nor are they expected to cost the PAP government at the next election. The opposition Workers’ Party has been rocked by shortcomings of its own, including a romantic entanglement between a lawmaker and a party official.
However, for Lee Hsien Loong, who has been prime minister since 2004, they still hurt. If one of the main principles of your country, let alone party, is zero tolerance of impropriety, then it is a major deal when you fall short. In an eagerly awaited statement to legislators last week, Lee Hsien Loong said he should have moved sooner to end the relationship between the parliament’s speaker, who is married, and a backbencher, both of whom have since resigned their positions.
“Why did I take so long, more than two years, to act? It is a fair question,” he said. “In retrospect and certainly now knowing how things eventually turned out, I agree. I should have forced the issue sooner.” Lee Hsien Loong added he hoped the pair had separated sooner, but he was keen to spare their families hurt and embarrassment.
Also gnawing at the Singaporean government is an investigation into Minister of Transport Subramaniam Iswaran by the anti-graft watchdog, about which little detail has been disclosed. Iswaran was arrested last month, released on bail and has taken a leave of absence. The Corrupt Practices Investigation Bureau has not specified what wrongdoing it is pursuing and no charges have been filed. Lee Hsien Loong and Singaporean Deputy Prime Minister Lawrence Wong (黃循財) said they are committed to process and if misdeeds by anyone are determined, they would suffer the consequences — regardless of the political hit.
By global benchmarks, these scandals are pretty low key. Former US president Donald Trump was indicted on Aug. 1 on charges over his efforts to overturn the 2020 election — the third criminal prosecution he is facing as he embarks on his latest run for the White House. Former British prime minister Boris Johnson is facing an official inquiry over his handling of COVID-19. Former Malaysian prime minister Najib Razak is in prison for his role in the 1MDB fiasco, where millions of dollars from a unit of the state investment fund were transferred to Najib’s personal bank account. Industrial-scale cronyism benighted Indonesia under the late president Suharto. Meanwhile, Thailand struggles to form a government, period.
Part of the attention lavished on Singaporean stumbles comes from their rarity. In 2022, Singapore was ranked the fifth-least corrupt country out of 180 nations. Its passport ranks as the most powerful in the world, beating Japan to the top spot in an index released last month. The travails have barely registered in markets; more important for investors are US interest rates and the fading recovery in China.
This has nonetheless become a staple for domestic media. The state is contrite, and that is reflected in what Singaporeans read and hear. The first four pages of last Thursday’s The Straits Times were devoted entirely to remarks on the scandal by Lee Hsien Loong, top ministers and the oppositional response. For the meantime, officials appear reconciled to at least some public airing, especially of the dalliances.
It is hard to isolate the controversies from the broader political and economic climate. They arrived at a sensitive moment for the Singaporean government. Lee Hsien Loong is preparing to hand over the leadership to the next generation of PAP cadres, with Wong, his deputy, being the likely successor. The delicate part is that the government has not given a firm timetable for the guard change. Singapore has had only three premiers in its 58 years as a republic. Transition is a much bigger matter than in many nations.
Lee Hsien Loong demurs when asked if it would happen before the next general election, due by 2025. He has said he wants to make sure the country is “in good working order” before he moves on. The risk for Lee Hsien Loong is that, the longer he defers, the more he boxes himself in. The opposition numbers in parliament are small, but it did pick up seats in the last election. The PAP’s share of the popular vote fell to 61 percent from around 70 percent in 2015.
Future ballots would only become more competitive, Wong has warned.
The administration is also suffering from a bout of midterm blues. After roaring back from COVID-19, Singapore’s economic expansion has faltered this year. The country narrowly avoided a recession in the second quarter. Inflation, as is the case in most nations, has been big news. Monetary policy has been tightened and the central bank has signaled that it is too early to relax. Residents grouse about escalating home prices and dramatic increases in rents. The government, which attributes the problem of delays in construction stemming from the pandemic, is emphasizing the number of new projects approved or nearing completion. With most of the population living in public-built housing, this is a contentious issue.
In his twilight years, Lee Kuan Yew said he was unsure if Singapore would be around in 100 years. He lamented that the electorate was dominated by voters born after independence; a two-party system would be a disaster, he said. The PAP’s struggle to build a viable state from a city — the discipline, vigilance essential to that project — was receding as a rally cry. In his memoir, From Third World to First: The Singapore Story 1965-2000, Lee Kuan Yew depicted wrongdoing big and small that had to be tackled in the early years. Among them was customs staff taking bribes to speed up the checking of vehicles involved in smuggling and school teachers receiving kickbacks from stationary providers.
No system is perfect. When you pride yourself on cleanliness, you need to deal with the blowback when stains appear. “In any system, however comprehensive the safeguards, sometimes something could still go wrong occasionally,” Lee Hsien Loong said to parliament on Wednesday.
Singapore has set very high standards for itself and these damaging revelations hurt. After all, this is no ordinary place — by design.
Daniel Moss is a Bloomberg Opinion columnist covering Asian economies. Previously, he was executive editor of Bloomberg News for economics. This column does not necessarily reflect the opinion of the editorial board or Bloomberg LP and its owners.
Minister of Labor Hung Sun-han (洪申翰) on April 9 said that the first group of Indian workers could arrive as early as this year as part of a memorandum of understanding (MOU) between the Taipei Economic and Cultural Center in India and the India Taipei Association. Signed in February 2024, the MOU stipulates that Taipei would decide the number of migrant workers and which industries would employ them, while New Delhi would manage recruitment and training. Employment would be governed by the laws of both countries. Months after its signing, the two sides agreed that 1,000 migrant workers from India would
In recent weeks, Taiwan has witnessed a surge of public anxiety over the possible introduction of Indian migrant workers. What began as a policy signal from the Ministry of Labor quickly escalated into a broader controversy. Petitions gathered thousands of signatures within days, political figures issued strong warnings, and social media became saturated with concerns about public safety and social stability. At first glance, this appears to be a straightforward policy question: Should Taiwan introduce Indian migrant workers or not? However, this framing is misleading. The current debate is not fundamentally about India. It is about Taiwan’s labor system, its
Japan’s imminent easing of arms export rules has sparked strong interest from Warsaw to Manila, Reuters reporting found, as US President Donald Trump wavers on security commitments to allies, and the wars in Iran and Ukraine strain US weapons supplies. Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi’s ruling party approved the changes this week as she tries to invigorate the pacifist country’s military industrial base. Her government would formally adopt the new rules as soon as this month, three Japanese government officials told Reuters. Despite largely isolating itself from global arms markets since World War II, Japan spends enough on its own
On March 31, the South Korean Ministry of Foreign Affairs released declassified diplomatic records from 1995 that drew wide domestic media attention. One revelation stood out: North Korea had once raised the possibility of diplomatic relations with Taiwan. In a meeting with visiting Chinese officials in May 1995, as then-Chinese president Jiang Zemin (江澤民) prepared for a visit to South Korea, North Korean officials objected to Beijing’s growing ties with Seoul and raised Taiwan directly. According to the newly released records, North Korean officials asked why Pyongyang should refrain from developing relations with Taiwan while China and South Korea were expanding high-level
RSS