MTI Dialogue Session (all posts)

Question: With the drive to life sciences, there are more people coming into the industry. The quota for doctors has been increased also. Do we need so many doctors in Singapore? More doctors will lower healthcare costs [Ed: Isn't that a good thing?]. For every doctor who goes into research, there'll be 4 GPs, and there're so many GPs in Singapore. Many of my peers have no interest in research since there's no money in it and they have no interest in academia.

What is your vision for the life science industry?

Answer: In terms of doctors per population we are far behind developed countries. The increase shouldn't be in GPs. Our medical professionals are organised the wrong way - in 1 and 2 man clinics. This is a traditional and old fashioned style. They need to go into group practice and reap economies of scale, with clinics in several locations, and add more value. Australia and the US have few 1 and 2 man clinics.

Geriatric medicine is a growing market in Singapore with an aging population but few specialise in it. People travel here for medical services. They don't travel to India even though dental filling is 95% cheaper there than in the US.

In Singapore, cataract surgery costs $3,000. In Bolehland it costs $1,500 - $2,000. In India it costs $400-500 and in Bangkok it's a similar price. People remove cataracts, go for a holiday and then return home.

So doctors should go for specialization, but Singapore is very restricted - very few are allowed to specialize. Specialization allows differentiation.

Our vision? Vision's an elusive word, but we want to generate buzz, a hive of activity. eg Clinical trials and the discovery of new therapies. Phase I testing is for toxicity and involves 50-100 people. Phase II is for efficiency and Phase III involves thousands of people. We're in a good position for Phases I and II. Asia has 3 billion people and genetic diversity so carrying out Phase III testing there is a good idea.

(My) Question: Much foreign talent uses Singapore as a stepping stone to move onto other countries, and after using us they screw us. In NUS, their depressing of the bell curve causes resentment in Science, Engineering and Computing.

Answer: In the university context, are opportunities curtailed? If you're a local student who meets the cutoff, you can go to university. If you have financial restrictions, we can help. Is the University better or worse off with diversity? I studied in Harvard and learned more since in a class of 40 people there were people from 30 different countries.

Interjection: Diversity is good, but people say 25% of engineering is composed of PRCs. In a class of 40 people we may have people from 3 countries - Singapore, China and Vietnam.

Answer: Vibrance and diversity is brought in by foreign talent, and the context that people from other countries bring is good. Today they depress the bell curve but tomorrow they can be useful contacts.

You can't be naive in university grading. When we compete it's global competition, especially if you join a global company. [Ed: It is a false dichotomy between sponsoring PRCs for 25% of engineering and having no competition. Oddly too, this is at odds with the stated philosophy of streaming.] You need a sense of realism. If a company wants to employ foreign talent when setting up in Singapore but we say they must only hire locals, they may not invest here. The challenge is to find balance.

I've heard feedback before that PRCs are not interested in the others. The point is cross-fertilisation. It's less of a problem if there's interaction.

Private banking likes to come to Singapore not only because we speak English, are numerate and learn well, but because we can deal with different cultures easily. Singaporeans have multicultural instincts, as opposed to Shanghai which is monocultural.

Question: To give Singaporeans exposure, why not just send more overseas on scholarships. eg A*Star gives them only to the top few people and the Chairman, before his depature, wanted to attract PRCs. Why not give Singaporeans the opportunities to go overseas?

Answer: If you have the ability, nothing is holding you back.

Interjection: My first choice was medicine and I was offered a place at Johns Hopkins, but NUS medicine rejected me twice.

Answer: A*Star aims to groom a pool of PhD level people to develop a research ecosystem. "Like everything in Singapore we're trying to do it fast, but PhDs take 6 years to cook" They must be Singaporean because of the investment of public funds, so we make them commit.

There's a limit to what government can do because it uses public funds and there're competing uses for the money.

Local tertiary institutions are now increasing overseas experience (SEP, NOC) and this is good. The private sector has to pick up.