MTI Dialogue Session (all posts)

Question: The government needs to support startups, by providing lnks and support and by faciliating efforts to tap regional markets. Local SMEs can be supported and turned into a pillar of the economy to create jobs for locals.

Answer: In the first ten years the government [can support startups? my notes weren't clear], in the next ten years the private sector.

"The business of government is not about being in business"

The government should only intervene if there's market failure. The government should not get too involved since it will complicate life.

In the area of facilitation he agreed. Startups have special needs - seed money, hooking up with VCs and acquiring A*Star technology for use. SMEs meanwhile need financing and expansion into other markets, which is where IE Singapore comes into the picture.

Manpower is a common problem. Most people want to work for big companies, since smaller companies have no capacity to pay, and they stand the chance of ruin, and people are risk averse.

The only relationship big companies have with the government is lobbying: "I've yet to meet a businessman who is satisfied, so I guess we're doing the right thing."

Question: To what extent is government support a liability? It identifies engineering and bio-science and people rush into those fields and there's a brain drain from others. Now, it's targeting tourism and high end properties (the IRs). If it works, everyone will go into these fields, and there's a cottage industry of polytechnic courses. It's only a matter of time before NUS comes up with a tourism degree. If it doesn't work, it's even worse - Macau has >12 casinos.

Answer: Macau has a different product and appeals to a different sector of the market. People only go there to gamble. Gambling revenue in Macau exceeds Las Vegas. When people go to Las Vegas they want to see a show or visit the Grand Canyon, but for Macau they fly there on a low cost carrier on Friday night, gamble, then go to sleep. The next they gamble the whole day and go to sleep again, and they fly home on Sunday night. Our objective is to offer all-round entertainment and recreation. Sentosa is for families and Sands for business travellers, meetings and conventions. Singapore is to be a "World Class Premier Destination", a city with many things to do.

Brain drain is not a problem because people move to where opportunities are. There are few vocations where you start and finish in the same career. Medicine is one. Law is another but it's changing. In other areas there're big variations, so what's important is getting good training. SMU offers one management track with international trading.

Question: In Singapore there's governmental initiation of opportunity, but in Hong Kong banking and finance are strong because they take a hands-off approach, and we're second to Hong Kong in financial freedom. We point to growth sectors when we should deregulate and let people go in.

Answer: Pointing to an area is not the same as regulating, but rather creating the environment.

The IRs can be a flop, but the government got private investors to come and there was strong interest from credible international investors. Some people say Hong Kong is governed by a small group of businessmen.

Hong Kong's advantage is its hinterland. If you put us near China we can compete, and our regulatory framework for financial services is comparable. Shanghai is fighting with Hong Kong and the centre of gravity may shift.

Instead of being a centre for China like HK and Shanghai we're aiming to be a centre for Asia. If you want to reach India you can use an Indian city but Singapore's the only choice for the whole of Asia. This is because we speak good English - we're the only feasible city in Asia with English as a working language (Sydney's too far south and Manilla is not a business hub).