Learning from Singapore

Lee Kuan Yew`s autobiography, From Third World to First, consists of an account of the Singapore story from 1965 to 2000. The former Prime Minister of Singapore describes what he learned from Malta when he visited the island in 1967:

"I was astounded. The Suez Canal had been closed as a result of the Arab-Israeli Six-Day War three months earlier, in June. Ships were no longer going through the Canal, hence the dockyard in Malta was closed, but dockworkers on full pay were playing waterpolo in the drydock which they had filled with water! I was shaken by their aid dependency, banking on continuing charity from the British. The British had given fairly generous redundancy payments, including five weeks` salary for each year of service, and had also covered the cost of three months` retraining in Maltese government institutions. This nurtured a sense of dependency, not a spirit of self-reliance."

Lee left Malta convinced that Singapore must take a different road if it were to develop and improve the quality of life of its citizens. Typically ... the local apocryphal version of Lee`s visit has been that he came to Malta to learn from us and that Singapore`s success can be attributed to imitating Malta! Lee Kuan Yew makes it very clear that his visit to Malta provided him with a negative model to be avoided at all costs.

He writes: "I was convinced our people must never have an aid-dependent mentality. If we were to succeed we had to depend on ourselves." He warned the people of Singapore: "The world does not owe us a living. We cannot live by the begging bowl."

No soft way out

On his return to Singapore from Malta he said in a broadcast: "A soft people will vote for those who promised a soft way out, when in truth there is none. There is nothing Singapore gets for free, even our water we pay for... There will be a throbbing and humming industrial, commercial and communication centre long after the British have gone."

He adds: "I felt strongly that the people`s morale and confidence would be decisive in the coming battle for Singapore`s survival."

The worst disservice the Nationalist Party has done Malta and the European Union is to project membership as a free and permanent banquet with hundreds of millions of liri raining down on us from the blue starry skies of Brussels. The PN`s version of membership is a continuation and reinforcement of the aid-dependency mentality and the world owes us a living mind-set that we must overcome if our country is to survive and thrive in the 21st century.

There is no sign that the PN is willing to learn from Singapore, even though the last 35 years have shown clearly how the different roads taken by the two countries have led to very different results. Compare Malta`s Freeport to the port of Singapore.

The port of Singapore is the second busiest in the world, with its 37 berths, with 250 shipping lines connecting to 600 ports around the world in 123 countries. The port of Singapore is facing increasing competition from the newly set up nearby port of Tanjung Pelepas in Malaysia. In the last two years Tanjung Pelapas has managed to lure away from Singapore two of the biggest shipping lines in the world, Maersk and Evergreen. Evergreen reported that the move from Singapore to Malaysia brought it savings of around 30 per cent.

Questions about future growth

To remain competitive Singapore has just decided to set aside $44 million to reduce costs for shipping lines and improve skills at the port. Singapore is working hard to maintain its competitive edge by improving its technical efficiency which has been its greatest strength relative to all its competitors around the world.

This year Malta`s Freeport lost one of its biggest clients, the Grand Alliance, to its nearby competitor in Italy at Gioia Tauro. Economic Services Minister Josef Bonnci refused to answer a number of questions (PQ 33,298) on how Malta`s Freeport was reacting to the departure of Grand Alliance. Has there been a serious analysis of why this shipping line left and what steps are being taken to safeguard the Freeport`s future?

Instead of grasping this opportunity to tell Parliament and the country what the Freeport is doing to keep its clients and attract new ones, Minister Bonnici ran away from PQ 33,298 by saying that divulging the requested information would be to the detriment of the commercial interests of Malta`s Freeport!

Economists of integrity, who have not traded their souls for government consultancy fees, are very sad and concerned about the gravity of the current and future situation. Deep down they are afraid that we are not going to make it; that Malta will continue to slide, year after year, into economic final collapse; that the wealth of many workers will be wiped out and that many people will end up in virtual economic poverty.

Economists of integrity are asking these disturbing questions: Where is future economic growth going to come from: fast economic growth that allows the transfer of government workers to the private sector, that reduces the ratio of government debt to GDP, and that allows for higher standard of living for the Maltese workers?

With the current wages, prices and economic structure, can Malta really attract serious foreign investment? What is the competitive advantage of Malta, an island on the periphery of Europe, in tourism, manufacturing and services?

Government can run and hide for some time from these questions, but ultimately our children`s future depends on the way we answer these questions and on our ability to create the necessary conditions to enable this country to survive and thrive in the years ahead.