This is the main topic for discussion in today’s ST with several big names being mentioned. Kishore Mahbubani was quoted to be concerned that ‘online discourse might be eroding trust in public institutions’. There are real and imaginary perceptions of things, of trust or distrust in public institutions. The very fact that this issue of trust is being discussed at that level is a manifestation that trust is eroding and has become a serious issue in governance. It is just like the COE system and HDB policies when there have been repeated outcries that they are inequitable and the system and policies could be made fairer and more equitable short of telling the two institutions off directly that they are not trustworthy.
No institution can lose the trust of the people if they are
upright, correct and fair in their dealings with the people and on issues
affecting people and policies. A little bit of criticism and cynicism by the
social media, no need to worry about the main media, will not harm them or the
trust of the people. Only the institution can create distrust by the people by
their own policies and wrongdoings.
The situation today is that the people are much better
educated, informed and conversant with what they see and hear and are current
with the happenings and policies. And the availability of social media on top
of the main media, I like this expression, means that the people have a more
balanced view of things. Unlike the past when the people are only fed by the official
media that was sitting on everyone, feeding them what they wanted the people to
see or hear, social media has given awareness a new dimension, and positive in
many senses. Can’t imagine how long the people will remain ignorant and
blinkered without access to social media. Social media is a tool of
enlightenment, and much to the dismay of those who want to control information
and the thinking of a people that could be made daft by biased, limited or misinformation.
We used to take pride in our public institutions, and had
very little bad things to say about them. There was almost complete trust in
them. And rightly so as anyone who crossed the line of legitimacy will be
harshly dealt with by the system. Just read this comment by Professor Neo Boon
Siong of Nanyang Business School, ‘We are all in a flux, and this gives people
the feeling of uneasiness and uncertainty, that this competent Govt we are used
to…is not so ready to come up with solutions immediately, or cannot deliver
results as fast as we want.’ He was talking about a competent Govt we are used
to. Is this a reasonable perception of the Govt today and the past?
There is a major contributor to the distrust in public
institutions due to a philosophical change in political thinking and corporate governance.
In the past, the govt demanded and coerced public officials to be clean, honest
and incorrupt. And many instruments of the system were there to maintain a
clean and honest govt. The whole paradigm shifted when the govt came out with
the complacent assumption that people are corrupt by nature and to keep them
from being corrupt, just pay them well, or 'corrupt' them legitimately and hoping
that they will not be 'corrupt' illegitimately. (I want to qualify here that this term 'corrupt legitimately' is just a common expression used figuratively in informal discussion and is not corruption per se). This policy shift says that it is
alright to have 'corrupt' people in the system as long as their pockets are well
lined with big fat salary and they will behave themselves. Thus, instead of
ridding the system of corrupt individuals, it is acceptable to live with the
devils as long as they keep their masks on, and try to be clean or looked
clean. In a way the system works as there have been no big cases of corruption or very few and in between.
The other big factor that led to the erosion of public
institutions is the cavalier attitude that politicising public institutions to
serve the interest of political parties is normal, nothing wrong, and
legitimate. Institutionalising them is the way to go. When public institutions
are politicised, when appointment holders are politicised, appointed for
political reasons and to serve political interest, how much trust will be
eroded in the process? Take the Town Council, a political creation, would the
management of Town Councils handle a party supporter differently from an
opposition supporter? And if it does, how is trust going to be affected?
When public institutions are designed with imbedded flawed
assumptions and worst, being politicised, the institutions and office holders
will no longer function impartially and objectively for the common good,
regardless of affiliation. How would this affect trust in the institutions?
30 comments:
HOW TO TRUST THE PUBLIC INSTITUTIONS
WHEN IT IS HARD TO TRUST
THE PEOPLE RUNNING THEM.
IT IS A WONDER FOR SINKIES
TO HAVE FAITH IN THE LEADERSHIP.
Well, who is running the public institutions...
When there is lack of integrity as exemplified by one's actions, no point talking about trust. Get the fundamentals right.
Imagine all six Board of Management members of The Referees' Association coming from Man U...
"I have to defend certain policy i myself don't believe in..." This was a comment of one prominent politician.
As we go along, this will lead to eroding trust in public institutions...At the end, someone ought to pay for it.
It is foolish to trust leaders that talk big
BUT
NEVER DELIVER.
If ones' words were not accepted as truth and or a misinformation such as Singapore has no beggar. It is stupid for the Man to speak more as the more he says, the more disbelieves and mistrusts are created. Why would an educated man wants to be treated like a liar or worse, a cheat? Cheating the World of a truth.
========= PART 1/2 =========
redbean:
>> Kishore Mahbubani was quoted to be concerned that ‘online discourse might be eroding trust in public institutions’
For an academic, sometimes I think this joker is either playing the fool, or not understanding the world.
He obviously doesn't understand (or willfully neglects) the idea of emergence or as Friedrich Hayek put it spontaneous order arising from chaotic systems. Millions of people on line given the ability to express themselves, with no one in charge and only a few rules, loosely agreed on is a chaotic system.
Also he fails to ask "why"? Perhaps Singapore's public institutions need to be ERODED, because they are ....perhaps, fucked up and people are pissed off? Hmmm...maybe, maybe it is OBVIOUS, but hell no... not for an academic. Academics love to ignore THE OBVIOUS and come out with FANCY THEORIES to appear "more intelligent" than the average online citizen, who at the end of the day is only concerned with his security and the security of his family.
Oh my my, we can't have that....it is too selfish. We must FORCE people to adopt our way of the world, for we are The Government, and we will decide what-the-fuck for you and your family. Now BOW TO THE EMPEROR, you sub human minion!!
And so the people say Fuck you!, and that pisses off the government.
>> Professor Neo Boon Siong of Nanyang Business School [...blah blah blah] He was talking about a competent Govt we are used to. Is this a reasonable perception of the Govt today and the past?
I'll offer a simpler non-fancy-non-academic explanation: People are sick and tired -- to the point of frustration -- of the PAP's ARROGANCE and the way they treat the people who pay their salaries, fat motherfucking salaries at that, for decades already.
How long do you think you can tekan people and expect them to take it? Singaporeans are docile and passive, as a sweeping generalization. But even the most docile person if pushed, will hit a limit of his tolerance.
Again, an government academic/ public intellectual with the so-called "smarts" who cannot see the wood for the trees.
========= PART 2/2 =========
Singapore's public institutions are being politicised...this is the DEATH KNELL of trust, transparency and accountability; and perhaps also of INCLUSION -- i.e. if you have different opinions, then you are n outcast and have no say." Fuck off, you are not elite like us" type of attitude.
In my response to patriot I suggested ways to reduce the amount of corruption which has many causes, politicisation being one of them.
Imagine yourself out with a small group of friends. Some of the friends have brought their partners whom you meet for the first time. You do your social activities -- go to movie, dinner, dance club, cafe to chit chat...WHERE'S THE POLITICS? None. Zero. Try to politicise the small group and you'll be roundly chastised and immediately resisted.
Politics only works if there are LARGE groups -- with a hierarchical structure of power and authority -- which is why you'll find politics in offices of the larger enterprises like corporations, but rarely in small mom-and-pop type operations.
Politics is an emergent property of human beings in large groups where there is opportunity to create hierarchical structures of power and authority, which is (depending on the context) necessary for the management of those groups and their activities.
However, the SMALLER the group, the easier it is to hold those at the top accountable. There is also more transparency, and those at the top are essentially "forced" to conduct themselves with integrity and character, i.e. to moderate their natural human tendency for corruption.
To reduce politicisation and corruption:
1. Keep groups small (distribute the power and authority to the point where over arching power and authority is no longer possible)
2. Have many such groups
3. Have freedom of every individual to change groups, or to join multiple groups (freedom of association)
4. Have individual freedom to express -- even incorrectly, non-factual...whatever
5. Have no "supreme authority" which manages all the groups. i.e. the small groups are autonomous, and that's that. There's nothing "higher".
Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? or "Who watches the watchmen?" comes into play because each group, and individuals in that group watch each other. Since they have the freedom to express, they will "call out" any untoward behaviour.
This will REDUCE the amount of corruption. Getting rid of corruption ENTIRELY is impossible. However if the groups are small and people are free to express, there is very little chance of "getting away" with corruption. Sure some people will try, but chances are they will be caught, exposed and suffer the consequences.
When I read about the 29 year old graduate from SIM working as an intern for a sofeware firm without pay, benefits and CPF for 3 years and getting abused all the time, I lost trust and faith in the government,MOM,NTUC and SIM. How could this sort of thing went on for 3 long years without any public instituion detecting it and come to the aid of this poor bloke.
Listen, yes you, the ministers. When are you going to say thank you to us for paying you so big fat salaries?
Say thank you quick, and be nice to us. Or when 2016 comes, we are not going to pay you anymore.
I think worldwide the word trust is no longer relevant.
Who can we really trust? Not politicians, not bankers, not insurers, not lawyers, and not even religious leaders.
Right from the top, which is the government, the word trust has been eroded to become just a senseless pronouncement.
And if the top is deemed to be crooked, the bottom cannot be straight, so goes the Chinese saying.
Over the decades, PAP Regime has morphed from improving Singaporeans life to a souless, heartless, trustless, non transparent governance, opaque accountability, ruthless, crooked machines conning Singaporeans to ripe their own $$$$m salaries as evidenced by so many incidents like AIM Saga, Population White Paper, Singaporea conversation,
Luckily in the current world of social media, any lies, half truths, misinformation, twisted logics are easily exposed and rebutted. This beam of light will destroy such current evil regime and give a new ray of hope. It is time! It is time....VTO 2016.
If our Pubic (I mean public) Institutions are doing their job;
i.e. serving the citizens and the public interest.
Then why is Kishore so concerned?
Even if Kishore is correct;
What's the solution?
Improve our Public Institutions or shut down online discussions?
Our govt needs not be transparent and needs not tell a lot of things. Just trust them. They are doing everything for the good of locals and foreigners.
The most important trust is to trust that voters will give the incumbent majority seats every election to continue as govt.
I repeat, majority seats, not majority votes.
Just look at the opposition in Malaysia. Won majority votes got use or not?
Didn't know our public institutions are so puny.
Only background noise in social media.
And trust get eroded already.
If I say "Huk Pui" !
That means public institution have to close down meh?
So fragile one ah?
Seriously?
You trying to justify another salary increment right?
I have had repeated feedback to government agencies being ignored and not replied to. The same old issues and problems I highlighted remains till today.
So please don't settle for just breaking through glass ceilings in a broken corporate system or in a broken political system, where so many leaders are so disconnected from their own wisdom that we are careening from one self-inflicted crisis to another. Change much more than the M to a W at the top of the corporate flow chart. Change it by going to the root of what's wrong and redefining what we value and what we consider success.
Corruption and fraud are human misdeeds of the sly and talented to prey, cheat and exploit their lesser fellow beings. The less endowed get bully by conscienceless through all kinds of schemes. However, in corruption, the bribe offeror and the receiver are not victims, both are culprits against the Law, regulation and probity. Others could be their victims if briber and taker cause them injustice through their collusion.
In human society, the denser the population, the more misdeeds are committed due to the high volume of activities, transactions, frictions and needs. On the other hand, resources, jobs and wants are hard to get.
The Question of who watch the watchman are frequently asked by thinking folks. This Question is not as complex as egg first or chicken first. The Government is premised to be the Perfect Watchman, one flawless and perfect body to be the Perfect Role Model as well as arbiter and enforcer of JUSTICE. BUT, sad to say throughout history, few regimes are benign and far from benevolent.
The people collectively are also supposed to be good watchmen themselves and many do fulfill the duty. A citizen's role does include ridding the society of pests and the evils. However, it takes a lot of righteousness, chilvary and courage which few are wholesomely endowed. And sadly many are born wicked, evil and sly.
The New Media has given modern man a better tool/weapon to facilitate better vigilance against miscreants and injustices. It also facilitates faster and better communications to act collectively and therefore strengthen the effort.
Combine the people's power and it will be a force for the evil and sick(conscience wise) to reckon with. Blogoland is not short of calibre people, the sad thing about them is that they are not able to combine their efforts. Most are individualistic, some are loners not wanting to affect others. Some are too caring and afraid of getting others involved, implicated or even affecting their family and private life.
Until and unless netizens are able to pool and act together for common good. The Lot of netizens will be no different to the Alternative Political Parties. There are many of them but, all working for their own selfish gain and glory.
Someone got to organize the people to make a good watchman for our country.
patriot
To regain trust in the gov is to kick out the pap, kick out the fake foreign talents, kick out those tax fugitives, kick out those elites exploiting people monies.
Who is this Kishore? PAP new propaganda manager? Is his degree fake? Did he research properly before he opened his smelly curry mouth? Where is his proof? Is he trying to screw our minds and thinking or trying to distract? People must learn that any stuff reported in ST is for propaganda purpose.
'competent gov we are used to'
- when and what was pap competent? competent in isa? competent in propaganda? competent in enslaving people into some form of cpf, coe, cov, erp, gst, moh, moe scheme while making themselves extremely rich? competent in allowing fake foreign talents to exploit locals?
People must learn to kick out papaya.
Very difficult to vote PAP out lah.
Why?
1. Unlike Anwar, best opposition WP is not even ready to be govt.
2. PAP, through gerrymandering, can even win majority seats with only 50% votes. And they got 60% votes in GE 2011, despite being a bad govt as described by those bloggers and netizens.
3. With majority seats, they don't even need to get opposition to be part of coalition govt, based on the British electoral system. Just look at Matland, which also follows the British system.
4. And PAP still got 43% support even in a by election. If they are that bad, PAP would have lost their deposit in a by election, tio bo?
So how to vote PAP out, you tell me lah?
And one more thing, PAP can even make lots of foreign talents into new citizens, and they will most likely vote PAP.
Daft Sinkies, why do you think Sinkieland needs 6.9 million population?
Not only for economic and GDP growth, but also lots of new citizens who will sure vote PAP one.
Now you know PAP is very smart, tio bo?
The government is on the defensive because they know that they have lost their monopoly on information.
They can no more stop social media than King Canute could stop the tides.
PAP is of course very smart. That's why popular bloggers and netizens, no fight one lah.
That's why smart Sinkies also don't even want to be opposition, so WP end up become the best opposition lah. How to fight?
Inside polling station is not within 200M sure inspire a lot of trust. How about AIM?
These are 3 very different things;
a public institution,
a pubic institution,
a crony institution.
RB forgot to mention incestuous relationship.
Post a Comment