Search results

A statutory board is one of the three forms of public enterprise in Singapore which are involved directly or indirectly in economic development. Tan Chwee Huat has defined a statutory board as “an autonomous government agency set up by special legislation to perform specific functions (Tan, 1974, p. 102).” Similarly, Lee Boon Hiok has referred to statutory boards as “a catchall phrase for the statutory bodies which have been established by an Act of Parliament,” which specifies their rationale as well as their rights and powers (Lee, 1975, pp. 38–39).

Public enterprises have contributed significantly to Singapore′s economic success but in recent years they have been criticised for playing a dominant role that overshadows the private sector. The Government has decided to embark on a ten‐year privatisation process. However, public enterprises will continue to participate in business where private entrepreneurs are reluctant to venture into.

Several public enterprises in Singapore have been privatised after being criticised for their dominance in the economy. Others continue their pioneering role in expanding international operations especially in telecommunications and information technology. International diversification, visibility and technological advancement will ensure that their share will be well subscribed by both domestic and foreign investors in due course.

The Singapore Public Sector Divestment Committee has recommended privatization of public enterprises, including profit‐making monopolies such as Telecom, airport, port authority and broadcasting. Reviews preparation to privatize Singapore Telecom. Examines Telecom′s diversification strategy to enhance its visibility and international competitiveness. By maintaining its impressive profitability record, Telecom can be assured of a favourable reception by domestic and foreign investors when its shares are floated in 1993. Being the first statutory board to be privatized, its transformation is closely observed by others in the pipeline.

The outstanding economic growth of several East Asian countries has attracted world attention. Many observers have attributed the success of these Confucian countries to their common cultural values, such as respect for authority, loyalty to good leaders, preference for order, hard work, thrift and emphasis on education. The above factors seem to have worked in Singapore, although some researchers have observed that economic success and rapid changes have eroded these traditional values. In Singapore, the political leaders have now cautioned Singaporeans against assimilating alien values and becoming a pseudo‐Western society. They have called for a set of national principles based on Asian values to guide Singaporeans into the next century.

Examines four recent employee relations issues in Singapore. These include dependency on foreign workers, an ageing workforce, impact of companies relocating their labour‐intensive industries to other countries, and problems related to privatization of government‐linked companies. The employment of foreign workers is constrained by an imposed levy and quota. Extending the retirement age provides jobs for older workers. However, employers perceive them as less productive and more expensive unless the wage system can be modified. Workers made redundant by company relocation are the less skilled. Proposes that the solution lies in retraining and upgrading the skills of workers.

My interest in public administration as a discipline was sparked by Dr Joseph P.L. Jiang, who was a student of the late Professor Fred W. Riggs at Indiana University, in 1968 when I took his course in public administration during my final year at the Department of Political Science, University of Singapore. I also remember fondly my first meeting with Professor Riggs during the same year when he gave a guest lecture in Dr Jiang's course (Quah, 2008d). I met Fred again many years later at various international conferences but I remember fondly our meetings in Chiangmai in June 1993 and in Honolulu in June 1996. I have also remained in touch with Dr Jiang after his return to Taipei.