SM Lee Hsien Loong's Dialogue at the HarmonyWorks! Conference 2024

Sarabjeet Singh, Chairman of the HarmonyWorks! Conference 2024 Organising Committee: Mr Lee, we will celebrate Singapore's 59th birthday next week. It is just shy of a week, in fact. Many of us would acknowledge we have come a long way in terms of our race relations in Singapore, but there are still some concerns about the incidents of casual racism that happen from time to time. Do you think things are going to improve on this front?

SM Lee Hsien Loong: I think it is something we have to pay attention to. We should see it in its context because the basic requirements for us to get on well together is to have harmonious racial and religious relations in Singapore at a national level and going back to very fundamental things — we are one people regardless of race, language, and religion. And therefore, the way we construct our society and the way we make sure that we have equality, we have meritocracy, we have fair treatment, that we respect each other, that we accommodate each other, we do all these things and in Singapore, you can expect to be respected as an individual, to be treated equally regardless of race, language, and religion. That is a starting point.

If you do not have that, then I can be very polite to you in-person, but you will feel it is a very unjust society. And it is like that; it can be like that in a lot of places. But I think generally we have got things right. But at the same time, at a personal level, we have to make sure that we interact with each other with respect, understanding the sensitivities, not rubbing against and causing offence to each other. And that is where the question of casual racism comes in. If you look at the incidents we have had over the last few years – people just scolding others on the basis of race or religion, or people sometimes having a conflict and they decide to post something intemperate and make everybody agitated. Or it could be a religious matter and in the process of talking about your own faith you denigrate some other faith.

When this happens, we have to express disapproval and if it is done with ill intent, we have to be quite firm to come down and put it down. We cannot accept that. It is not just one of those things and we just walk away. And we have done that. But at the same time, we have to respond in a measured way, and we have to see what the situation is. Because if it is in public and if it is with a big crowd, and you speak intemperately, you can cause offence to a lot of people. [It is a] great outrage. If you are amongst friends and you are comfortable with each other, you are chatting, you are joking, you may say things you did not intend to offend but it may cause offence and you may not be conscious of it. And how should the response be? Should I therefore go home and make a post and say so and so said this to me yesterday, we were in a group of three or four and I am outraged about it, and everybody then gets outraged about it to share your anger, or should you just stand up and say ‘Sorry, you may not intend it but I do not think that it is nice or fun or cool and please do not do that’.

And in that process, get to understand each other better. And therefore, avoid causing offence to one another. I think we need to be able to manage that, to calibrate that and a lot of it is not book knowledge but growing up together, interacting with one another talking about these subjects including in OnePeople.SG’s HarmonyWorks! dialogues, and therefore being sensitised and naturally knowing what to do.

But I would also say we should not become hypersensitive. Because if you look at what is happening in Western countries, there is a mood now where you are so careful about not doing anything which may cause offence to anybody. And sometimes they even say I am going to say something which you may be unhappy, so if you do not want to hear me, please leave the room before I say it. And then life becomes very tiring, and I think it is not an adult nor a mature and practical way to get on together with one another. With give and take with understanding, I am tolerant, but I am also respectful. And I am able to get on together because fundamentally, we believe that we are Singaporeans. I think we should take that kind of an approach. And will the problem go away? Probably never completely. But should we keep on working at it? Answer is yes, of course.

Moderator: Thank you, Mr Lee. Mr Lee, I am going to think about some of the issues or the points you raised in two ways. There is a pragmatic level to this. And there is also one that is an emotional level. And one could make an argument that truly racial and religious understanding, that connect has to happen at the emotional level. Is that an area you think in Singapore we may be lacking, that emotional connect?

SM Lee: Well, I think the emotional connect has to come from personal relations. It is not an abstract thing. I respect you, I read about you, I understand your history, your culture, your religion, and therefore I have respect for you. That is one level, but that is intellectual. But what it means, what you have to have is: I have friends who are of different faiths, different races, I know their families, I interact with them, I celebrate their festivals, they come for my festivals, I have meals with them, we know their parents and we grew up together. We serve in NS together. And I think it is these kinds of emotional linkages, which make us different as Singaporeans and which helped us to overcome what would otherwise be very difficult relations between the different racial groups in Singapore.

You grew up in HDB estates, all integrated, multi-racial. You go to school, most likely integrated, multi-racial, too. Because the estates are integrated. And we are living all in mixed communities. You work, it is like that, you go on holiday, it is like that, and I think that is why Singaporeans have become different. And that is why we are different from new arrivals, from immigrants, from people who may be the same race as us but live in other countries.

I once met a foreign leader and I was trying to explain to him that we are Singaporeans, we are multi-racial, and we have become Singaporean. And I said we have Singaporean Chinese, and we are different from Chinese Chinese. And we have Singaporean Malays, and we are different from Malaysian Malays or Indian Indians versus Singaporean Indians. He could not understand what I was talking about. He turned to his interpreter and says, Chinese Chinese, what is that? Singaporean Chinese, he could understand, but Chinese Chinese, what is that? But Singaporeans understand that and that is what makes us one nation. And that is also why when immigrants come in, they have to make an effort, and we have to make an effort in order to bridge that gap and make them adapt to Singapore society. But we are talking about immigration later on. Now we talk about race and religion.

Moderator: So I believe we do have questions already. Go ahead. Just please do introduce yourself as well.

Brent: Good afternoon, everyone. My name is Brent. I am from ITE College East. First of all, Senior Minister, I would like to welcome you to our beautiful campus today. And I also want to touch more about integration. I am sorry if I am going towards the topic too fast, but I was originally from the Philippines. I immigrated here when I was six months old. And I just wanted to ask, what is your advice to immigrants who are fresh here in Singapore? What is your advice to them to integrate into the Singapore society? My next question is how do we as a Singaporean community welcome these immigrants who have worked hard in order to come here to Singapore?

SM Lee: Can I come back to this subject later on? So that we can focus on racism and race relations. But I will come back and address this later. It is a good question.

Moderator: It is a promise Brent, we will definitely take that. Go ahead.

Ashie: Hi, my name is Ashie and I am from the School of the Arts. On the topic of race, my question is, do you think that it is important to maintain the racial percentage in Singapore and why?

SM Lee: I think in broad terms, yes, to the extent that we are able to influence it by immigration. We try not to upset the racial balance because I think there is a certain comfort level which we have achieved with the way our society is. It is majority Chinese, but it is not dominant Chinese. The Malays have about 15% of the population, the Indians have about 9% of the population – if we are talking about the citizen population. If we look at residents with PRs, that makes it slightly different, but broadly the same picture, and everybody is comfortable with that. I think if you change it drastically – the only way it can change drastically is through immigration – if you do that, I think there will be a very, very strong sense of unease and pushback from the group which feels suddenly, I am fewer, or suddenly, why are there so many of some other groups who are here. It can cause a lot of tensions. Therefore, as a matter of policy, to the extent that we can, we would like to keep this broad mix – maybe go up a bit or down a bit, but we do not consciously try to change it and we do want to try and maintain it roughly like this.

Ashie: Thank you so much.

SM Lee: Thank you.

Moderator: Mr Lee, can I just have a quick follow up on that. Could you at the same time then comment about, with greater intermixing between the various groups, how does that come into bear when it comes to trying to maintain this comfort level?

SM Lee: I think that helps to blur the distinctions between the three or four major ethnic groups and that is helpful. But I think in terms of numbers, to say is that going to change the balance of CMIO? I do not think so. The inter-racial marriages are still a minority, the numbers are growing. I think they are now about 20% of marriages. Something like that. So over time, the blurring will be stronger, but I do not expect that it will strongly change the balance.

Moderator: Another question from that side? Go for it.

Adlina: Hi, good morning, my name is Adlina and I am from Lasalle. Earlier, Senior Minister you mentioned that when we are talking about race relations, this can be quite sensitive issues but we also do not want to become hypersensitive and that life will become tiring if we become hypersensitive. But at the same time, to have these conversations, it does require a lot of emotional labour or sometimes just effort. For example, all of us have made the effort to come here, take the time out and perhaps present some vulnerabilities when we talk about our experiences with race. My first question would be, would you agree that it is necessary to do things that are tiring in order to resolve race relations? A follow-up to that would be how would you motivate people to get over this, perhaps obstacle, with regards to things that might be tiring for them to engage with? Thank you.

SM Lee: I think tiring is not quite the right word. It takes effort, it takes courage, it takes a certain comfort level and willingness to open up and talk candidly, and to listen with an open mind. Unless we can do that, it is very difficult to discuss these subjects and make any progress. We will all fall back on saying standard things and it sounds as if we are all very happy, but actually, we all have various qualms and have not been able to share them.

I think that what you need to do with this sort of thing is, firstly, there has to be a general level where people get along and are familiar with one another. Because if I have never met you before, or we have never met each other's communities before and are interacting for the first time, I may have the best intentions in mind, but we are not going to finish up after two hours and suddenly become best friends forever. On the cartoons or movies it is sometimes like that, but in real life, it takes time. You need a basic level which the society can work at and achieve, and that is why we have HDB estates which are integrated. That is why our schools are integrated. Then you must also have opportunities where people interact more intensively, and not necessarily discussing these kinds of subjects, but interacting with each other and becoming comfortable knowing each other's temperaments, personalities, values, perspectives, and therefore, after that I can come and talk about more difficult subjects.

For example, we aim to make all our kids go to Outward Bound School. I think at Secondary Three they are supposed to go. I do not think everybody goes yet but we aim to make everybody go. I went to Outward Bound School when I was in Secondary Four. In those days, only a few people went because the capacity was very limited, but it was a very intense experience. You cannot become best friends forever after two hours. But if you spent two weeks together and you have to learn to light a fire and cook rice, or set up a tent and sleep in the open, or get lost, then you do make personal friendships which mean something. After that, I can talk about things which previously I could not discuss. I think we need these opportunities. We need people, then we need to create the occasion, and that is why you are here at HarmonyWorks! this morning.

Moderator: Thanks, Adlina. I hope you have made friendships and coming back for the conference next year will not be tiring. It will be fun and exciting. Mr Lee, is it okay if we take two questions at a time?

SM Lee: Yes, you have a question in front too.

Moderator: Please go ahead.

Alister: Hi, I am Alister. Thank you so much for sharing. The question I have is, we have already done well in HDBs and schools – those are the physical spaces. But now among youths, we see there are increasing incidents in the digital and cyberspace as well. What potential challenges do you foresee and how can we overcome those challenges?

SM Lee: Well, we are going to talk about that subject next, but I would say, in some ways, it makes things easier because there is a shared interest. You have an interest group which cuts across people living all over Singapore and different ethnic groups and different backgrounds. It is easier for you to form a community and talk together. But at the same time, it is also easier to form an echo chamber, and you may end up with friends who are only your own narrow interest group. Maybe you are the same race or same religion, and you hear nobody else and your feed becomes nothing else. That becomes a difficulty and you really need to get out from that. Actually, the most direct answer is, do not spend all your time in cyberspace. Please spend some of your time in real life. We are not just avatars; we are real people. You want somebody whom you can touch and feel and go out and be touched and be felt by others too.

Moderator: Mr Lee, we will take two more questions on this topic. Is that okay? Then I will invite the rest to also hold your questions for the remaining topics. We have two other sub-topics to get to as well. Go ahead.

Levana, Anne: Good afternoon Mr Lee and valuable guests. I am Levana from Dunman High, and I am Anne from St Francis Methodist School. The both of us have two questions. Mr Lee, you mentioned that we have to let people know that casual racism is bad but we cannot be hypersensitive. Where do we draw the line? Because there is a grey area and a really fine line to draw between racism and casual racism. And what can us as youths do about it? Thank you.

SM Lee: Well, sometimes it is quite clear – if somebody scolds you racial epithets, and he is angry with you, that is clearly offensive. He is intending to be offensive. He knows it, you know it, and you are entitled to be angry with him. He has no business doing it and if it is going to be done in a very public way, that is a big problem and something will have to be done about it. Sometimes it is not so clear. You may be with friends; you may be joking with each other. We are each proud of our own communities and we are not trying to become totally race-blind in Singapore. So if you are a Chinese Singaporean, you do have the Chinese culture, heritage, language, history. If you are Indian, similarly, and from many different variants of that depending on where in India you come from. Likewise, if you are Malay. And so when you are different, there is always a tendency. I am proud of myself is fine; I am not so proud of you, is not so good. And I look down on you, that is worse. And it happens.

Even amongst the Chinese – maybe less now – but in an earlier generation between the different Chinese dialect groups, there used to be very strong sense of dialect pride, dialect rivalry and dialect conflict. In the 19th century, about 150 years ago, there were riots in Singapore between the Hokkiens and Teochews, for example. People died. Within the same race, you can have this. Between races, it can also happen. We have to be proud of ourselves, but we must not therefore, look down on others, or worse, denigrate or put down others.

I think if it is ill-intentioned, it is quite clear; if it is not ill-intentioned, should I take offence or not? Those social norms change. For example, in Singapore, you have ethnic festivals. If it is Deepavali, quite often, Chinese guests will turn up wearing saris or some Indian costume. If it is Hari Raya, non-Malay guests will turn up wearing Malay baju sometimes. I am friends with you, I am dressing up, I am doing you honour. But in America, for example, there is a strand of thought – you are not one of me, you are putting on my dress, you are not entitled to do that. That is cultural appropriation. Basically, I am proud of myself, you are not entitled to be proud of me on my behalf. People get very angsty about these things. I think that makes life very tiring. I do not think we should go in that direction. It is a balance and it is a balance which the younger people have to set. I have a certain view, but it is because I grew up in a certain age and that is the way I am. Young people grow up in a different age and you have to find your own norms and find your own way forward. And I hope we will find one which is practical, which is robust, and which enables us to get on together and go out into the world. And when we go into another society where people are not so nice and sensitive and used to dealing with you, you will not suddenly faint from shock. Because there is a whole wide world out there and it is very different from what Singapore is in many places.

There is an article in today's Straits Times by the deputy opinion editor. He is an Indian journalist; I think his name is Bhavan Jaipragas. He spent some time overseas in several cities, he came back and he writes about how having seen and lived in these other societies – and they are developed societies, prosperous, successful places – he comes back and says he appreciates what is in Singapore. How we have improved since last he was living here six, seven years ago. Improved in terms of the courtesies, improved in terms of the considerateness to each other, how we are much, much better than others in terms of our multi-racial harmony and acceptance of one another. Not that there is nothing to improve further, but that in fact, compared to other societies, we are not bad at all. I think we should know that, at the same time as we keep on trying to make ourselves better. So that is what your teachers always tell you – very good, work even harder.

Moderator: Mr Lee, I am going to push that point a little further, there is of course one dimension of micro-aggression and casual racism that we encounter at the individual level, but sometimes there is hurt caused and offence taken by bigger communities. And one of the approaches by our government has been to have close relationships with the community leaders that represent those communities. Has that approach always worked, because one could also make the case that there will still be groups within a community who are hurt or offended and reconciliation at least with the community leaders may not have been sufficient for them.

SM Lee: Well, it may not be sufficient, but it can be important. No society is without problems. Even in Singapore from time to time, incidents happen between people of different races. It may have a racial colour to it, or it could have a racial colour which could develop from it. You have a quarrel between two kids of different races. It is very easy for the family to be involved to pile on and then the two families get involved and it may become an incident between two racial groups. And the police watch this kind of thing very carefully, and they have to respond and try and tamp things down.

And sometimes when a problem threatens to be a very major one, we have to talk to the community leaders or the religious leaders and try to get them to understand and try to help them to calm the flock down. Because if they may not be able to calm the flock down, but they may well be able to work their flock up. And if they are very angry with you, you have a very big problem. So you must have them understand what it is about. And then is it okay, I know this, I will try my best. And there have been times when I have had to speak to religious leaders myself when something has come up to make sure that they understand that we are trying our best to control the situation and that if something wrong was done, we will try and put that right. And that this is not somebody trying to put pressure on your religious group.

And they are very sensitive things. And even in handling that, in the process of handling that, it is still not so straightforward because as you say there are many actors. So when an incident happens it is not just two people fighting but many other participants and even as you are trying to calm things down, more things can happen. And then you got to calm that down too. So managing multi-racial harmony is tiring work but it is something we have to do. And it is very important in Singapore.

Moderator: I am going to take a last round of questions on this sub-topic of casual racism.

Chloe: Hi, I am Chloe. I am also from School of the Arts. And my final question is, because a lot of things that you mentioned, a lot of ethnic and racial policies in Singapore is very top-down. So how do we ensure that as a nation, Singapore is not reliant on such top-down policies to maintain this social fabric, contextualising things like COVID and the recent Israel-Gaza incident how do we ensure that we remain cohesive, despite all these global measures?

SM Lee: I think leadership is always important. You can call it top-down but it basically means a leader must have a view and he has to have influence and it must carry weight. A leader may be just one person, may be the PM but actually, it is more than just the PM – it is the community leaders, religious leaders, the MPs, it is the people whom you look up to in society, and they set the tone for the society. And I think it is important that you have leaders who understand what this is about and will set the right tone.

But at the same time, you would like to have people at all levels understand what is happening and taking an active part in it, coming forward, expressing their views and contributing to the national discussion. And I think we have that. We welcome people to participate, to speak up to share their views, to discuss respectfully, rationally, calmly, and we hope constructively, and make progress on it. And we make a lot of opportunities for this. But it requires effort for people to come forward, to think through what they want to say and how they feel and to express it. And we hope that you will make the most of these opportunities, like you have done.

Chloe: May I ask a quick follow-up. With all these in mind, do you think Singapore has reached a point where we can be without so much on-the-nose racial policies?

SM Lee: I think we are doing with less control and guidance. But I do not think we will reach a point where we can just say hands off, this is driver-free steering. I think that will take a very long time.

Moderator: Thanks for the questions so far. We are going to move to the next sub-topic now. And actually, Alistair had gotten the ball rolling on that. Mr Lee, on balance, the online space has it been positive or negative? And you know, we would also like to hear your thoughts on how this space may evolve. And do you think that we will be able to leverage these online tools to foster better community relations, including addressing difficult issues, or is it even possible to have constructive positive dialogue, exchange on the online space?

SM Lee: I think the online space has had a massive impact on society. On the good side, it enables people to get together, it enables voices to be expressed, enables us – meaning Ministers, leaders – to reach out to groups whom you would otherwise not be able to engage intensively, people who would not listen to your speech for two hours may be prepared to look at your post for 30 seconds. Well, at least I get 30 seconds of his attention, and I get some little bit of a message across and maybe cumulatively will count. And amongst the community too, it is a way for you to keep in touch with your friends, with people with the same interest and to build a Singapore community because you are sharing touch points, going to the same website, or looking at things, similar issues and subjects.

But on the other hand, it creates problems also. It creates problems because you can have echo chambers. We may not all end up on the same websites. In the old days, you all read Straits Times or Zaobao, or Berita Harian, or Tamil Murasu and today we do not all go to the Straits Times, Berita Harian or Tamil Murasu websites. Reading newspapers, also not so many as before. So, the teacher assigns the newspapers to you to read, or at least I think they encourage you to read the newspapers, and you do, but you have so many other things going on that you are spending less time on these shared spaces. And I think that is an issue.

Also, the speed with which things circulate is an issue. You do not have time to sit back, you do not have time to pause to think, is this real, is this is not real? Is this wise or not, do we want to do this or not? Something gets posted, everybody gets very angry, overnight half the country is in uproar. Why? Because one person got up on the wrong side of the bed, made one foolish post, we all got so angry. Life is short, calm down. Sometimes you have to get angry, sometimes you take a deep breath and say “ah, this silly fellow, just ignore them”. And it is not so easy to do on the internet. And when things like that happen, they can go viral very quickly, even if it is not fake news, you know? And it is just something which is not important, but somehow caught the wind and then we all got swept away. So that is a problem.

Then you have a problem of fake news, which in itself is troublesome but if it becomes viral becomes even worse. Recently, two days ago, there was an incident in England, in Liverpool, where a young man stabbed little kids, a dance class of kids doing Taylor Swift dances, and three kids died. And they caught the attacker, he was underage so the police did not say anything about the attacker. And so stories circulated; this is Islamist extremist, illegal immigrant. As a result of which there were riots in Liverpool, in this neighbourhood, and other cities in England; turned out to be fake news. This young man was not a Muslim, was not an illegal immigrant, but the fake news has done harm, has already circulated on the internet, on social media, on WhatsApp, WeChat or whatever. So that is a big problem.

It is a problem for us too because you get caught up. You see a picture right, Gaza, bad things are happening. Picture comes to you, horrible, may have come from this round of fighting in the Middle East, it may be from somewhere else altogether or some other period altogether. And you do not know. So you say be careful, check, yes, I promise to be careful. But how can I know? And with AI, [it is] even worse. So it is a big problem. Part of it is education. First, you must be educated to be sceptical. When you see it, ask yourself, is it true or not? Secondly, you must be educated to be a bit detached. If you are very tempted to send it to your 100 best friends, please calm down, count to 100, go take a drink, come back, think again, maybe 50 best friends is more than enough. Better still, think about it, sleep, tomorrow wake up and see whether you still feel this way or not. Maybe by then a lot more news would have come out and you found out that it is rubbish.

And so, part of this is education and getting the population to understand how to survive in this environment. But part of it is also to have the right rule so that we can control the medium, control the way that the medium develops, that is why we have POFMA. You put up a falsehood, I have a way in which you have to put up a correction. And if you do not agree with the correction, you go to court, the court will decide whether the correction is correct, or whether your original post is correct. Anyway, you must put there, everybody must know this one the government considers to be fake news. That is one thing.

Secondly, I think you have to hold the platforms responsible if you put out things which are harmful, which can encourage criminal behaviour, I can order you to take down.

Thirdly, actually, you should really go further and say, if you put up something and because of what you put up, harm was done. Maybe people got cheated. Maybe they got scammed with a Bitcoin scam. You may say you are only the platform, but the law is you have responsibility. And in some countries, they are doing that. So these are things which we have to do to control the medium to make it safe and fit for purpose and something which will be good for us rather than harmful to us.

Moderator: Thank you, Mr Lee.

Ryan: Good morning, Mr Lee. I am Ryan and I am from YIJC. My question for you is that given the increasing diversity in our communities due to new immigration patterns, what strategies are being implemented to ensure that racial harmony is maintained and that new migrants are effectively integrated while addressing some emerging challenges such as xenophobia, casual racism, as well as the spread of derogatory remarks via social media? Thank you.

Moderator: Ryan, what we will do is we will take the latter half of that question. So xenophobia and discrimination of sorts against groups? It takes on a particular life on social media. Mr Lee, you recently articulated that the principle by which we are trying to manage this is just to have people accountable. Do you think that it is possible for a more intrinsic dimension to this where people genuinely feel that before I put something out there, I am going to have a care I am not going to do it without being mindless and not thinking?

SM Lee: I think it is important that people do have those instincts. But that medium is intrinsically problematic. Because there is a certain way human beings have evolved to live and work with one another. We have social networks, we talk to each other, we discuss things. You may talk to your family you trust, your parents or your spouse, or maybe your grown-up kids. You talk to your colleagues; you talk to your friends. You listen to leaders, you do not take everything they say to be correct, but you listen to them. They are your leaders. You have to pay attention; you should pay attention. Then you decide whether you agree or not. And over time, from all these interactions and discussions, slowly a consensus evolves and slowly it is important to them. Because human beings need time to think through and for the ideas go into their minds and to settle on a view, which is wise, which is sound and which we all have a consensus, and we are quite sure that we want to do it. We will not decide tomorrow – what a ghastly mistake! How did I come to that point of view? And you cannot just put on fast forward and do all that within 30 minutes instead of 20 days.

And when you have social media and we are all talking to each other, I say it is a good idea, You say it is a good idea, the third person before thinking, because they saw two of us agreeing decides to say ‘yeah, I think so too’. And we may be wrong. And I think you need some way to slow down the process to be at a human speed where we can pause, take a time out, think about it. And then we come back and if I am still of this mind, after some time, after deliberation, well then, we commit, we proceed. And that is something which is very difficult to do on social media. What it means is every time you press refresh on social media, you should wait. Instead of refreshing immediately, we should slow you down and it should be at least 30 seconds before you get a new image. But if I did that people would complain my internet is not working.

Moderator: Mr Lee, with your permission we are going to take two questions at a time, I see a good number of people. Guys, can I invite two questions each time. One question per person.

Haris: Hi, my name is Haris. I am from SOTA as well. My question to you would be as we have recently seen, racism is a big topic as of late. Why is MOE seemingly avoiding touching on such topics and has the scrutiny since the Hamas-Gaza lesson changed the way MOE approaches race-sensitive topics?

Moderator: So just to be clear, the lesson package went out and then you are asking if the approach has changed to discussing sensitive topics?

Haris: Yes.

Moderator: Thanks. We will take the question from the friend behind you. Go ahead.

Participant: I wonder if this is a question pertinent to the current discussion topic. So if you wish to defer it, you may. Sometime back, Deputy Prime Minister Heng Swee Keat – I believe it was him – said that Singapore is not ready for a non-Chinese Prime Minister, given that the majority Chinese population would be somewhat uncomfortable, or it would shake up the stability in this country. Following Tharman’s victory last year, would you still say that this statement still hold and what is your view on this majority population’s discomfort? Is it necessarily a good thing, is it necessarily something that we should tolerate?

Moderator: Got the question. So Mr Lee, we are of course talking about social media or the online space dimension to race relations. So I will invite you to answer that question, if you wish, or we could take it later.

SM Lee: I think we will take this one later.

Moderator: Then could I get one more question? Go ahead.

Rui Min: Hello, Senior Minister Lee Hsien Loong. I am Rui Min, I am from Hwa Chong Institution. So as you know right now, we have OB markers to determine what issues we can talk about online and everywhere else. So in order to ensure that these discussions about race and religion are happening online, while preventing such negative stereotypes from happening, how wide do you think these OB markers should be for safe discussions for race and religion? Thank you.

SM Lee: Well, the two questions complement each other. First was on MOE, why are we not talking about race and religion in schools? And the second question is how much should we talk about it online, and where should the limits be?

And I think that it is two aspects of the same question, which is that how do we discuss a subject which is inherently sensitive? You need to talk about it and yet you must also know that if you just let fly, things can easily get completely out of control. And it depends on the audience. It depends on the maturity of the kids, what age they are. It depends on the context. For example, if I am doing it across 100 secondary schools in Singapore, I would have to take one approach. If I am doing it in a format like this, HarmonyWorks! with 300 people in one room with a facilitator, I think everybody is prepared, I can go further. If you have a pre-university seminar and the kids are put together three, four days and discussing it, you can also go further. I think how far you can go depends on the format and on the readiness of the kids. We need to be sensitised to them, but it is a very difficult judgment to make, exactly how to do it.

And with Israel-Hamas, the lesson plan for CCE, I do not think that it has changed our approach. What it has done is to show us how difficult it is in order to do it right. The best efforts you make, in the end you must be able to do it so that the teachers are comfortable and feel equipped to teach it and can convey it. Also you may have a lot of things you want to tell the kids, but I have one hour; what can I do which will be helpful and useful. Let us scope it so that I can make an effort, I can do something which will be productive and helpful. And if I need to do more things I will come back later on. So I think fundamentally, the approach has not changed.

Online, where should the OB markers be? This is one of the things where it is not like when you go on a golf course the OB marker is very clear. You have a stick on the ground with some colour on it. And if we go beyond the red line, you know you are beyond the red line. But when you are talking about human things, race, religion, people getting along or not with one another, right or wrong. There arei no lines which are so clear at all. You know when you are way out. You know when you are perfectly okay. And in between? Well, that depends. And we have to judge and sometimes you only know after the fact whether it is okay or not. And we have to be careful. So that is how it is. I think I would say on online we have to be extra careful because of the risks which I explained just now.

The chances of people piling on, of having a cancel reaction, of having an excessive uproar, are much higher than if I have it in a face-to-face discussion. Because face-to-face, if I say something and I sense that the audience is not comfortable and you are not listening to me or you are really fundamentally very uncomfortable with what I am saying, I will adjust. You will accommodate and accept that. You will know okay; we will not go there. But online by the time I finish my post, typing furiously and I type enter, gone! We cannot take it back anymore. I mean, I can edit it, but somebody will have a screenshot and then he will copy it around. Then I will be running around chasing my tail and therefore we have to be very careful.

Moderator: Mr Lee, there are two dimensions to effective integration. On the one hand, even Singaporeans can perhaps be a little more gracious and inclusive. At the same time, new migrants must also put in that effort, and they must want to integrate with larger society. So which of these dimensions do you think poses more difficult, or poses more challenges and may be more difficult to overcome? This is also in the context of a future in Singapore where we are looking at significant demographic shifts and possibly a greater reliance on new migrants.

SM Lee: I think both are challenging, both take effort. For the Singaporeans it takes effort because we know we need to be an open society. We know there is no way to close up because there is no future in that. And yet, it is not so easy to be a society, we are continually having a steady stream of people arriving, joining you and not quite the same, and not quite fully integrated into our society yet. It is not something where take it today, tomorrow will be okay, you know, because it is continuing to be like this, and I have to be able to accept this and mitigate the specific problems to the extent that I can.

For the migrants, it is a process. They come to Singapore, sometimes visitors, sometimes studying, working. Sometimes some of them go on to be PRs. Eventually some of them, not so few, go on to be citizens. There is a range and I think we want to be welcoming to them, and we treat them as friends, and there are gradations of friends, from friends to family. Actually, by the time they become citizens, they are family. Before that, PRs, maybe extended family, but before that, you may not be family, but you are certainly honoured guests and friends here. We want to welcome you and we hope you will be a good guest. To make that journey takes time, because they come as non-Singaporeans and as I said just now, Chinese Chinese is not the same as Singapore Chinese. Same same, but different.

How do you go from that to being comfortable here, adapted to our norms and then eventually, maybe you are taking that direction being one of us.

I think it takes effort, it takes interaction, we also need to know certain things. In Singapore we are multi-racial, that we get on with each other, that if I have a neighbour, he may be cooking something fragrant. Maybe curry, maybe satay, maybe some Chinese spicy dish. I share my neighbours’ aromas; we live cheek by jowl and friends with each other. And that is the way Singaporeans are. You need to know that, and you need to know the social norms, that you do not go around flashing your latest car, your watch, your shirt, your shoes. All of these can cost millions of dollars. It is a certain tone in our society, and you fit into our society. You also need to know that this is Singapore, and this is Singapore society, and you are in Singapore, and not just in some prosperous city somewhere in the world. Singapore is this way, and Singapore wants to be this way, and so you will try your best to belong here. There is a space for you but there are also certain ways we expect foreigners to be here and behave.

Just now, there was a question, ‘We have stringent laws, but do foreigners follow these laws?’. Actually, if you look at the record, the foreign population in Singapore, per head, are more law-abiding than Singaporeans. Crimes per head. Very few. You know why? Because if you are a foreigner and you commit a crime here, I can send you home. If you are Singaporean and you commit a crime here, I may have to give you a home for a while in Changi. After that you are still here, and I do not know whether you are okay or not. I hope you are okay, and most are. But foreigners actually, as a matter of fact, they behave themselves, by and large. So it is not true that they contribute to our law-and-order situation.

Therefore, it is a process, and the process takes time. Zaobao had a letter from somebody who has gone on this journey. They published it just a few days ago. This is from an immigrant from China, and he came here, I think, in 1996, 28 years ago, and he has become a citizen. He says now this is my country, but I still remember my original homeland. I still have friends; I still remember the food. I go back, I remember the dialects and it is also part of me. That is 28 years. And is it wrong?

No, I think human beings are like that. You take on a new citizenship. You are now this nationality. But you have friends, you have links, you have previous networks. When we go overseas, when I go overseas, I often have overseas Singaporean gatherings in the city. I was in Kuala Lumpur recently, I did one. When I go to Europe or America or Australia, I do it, and we invite Singaporeans who are living there to come. They come with family. They come with friends. And very often, the family and friends may not be Singaporean. The spouses may be Malaysian or British or Australian. Every time, we also have people who are friends of Singapore, who have worked and lived here, who remember us fondly, who come to Singapore, who therefore come to our events and say I am not Singaporean, but I had a very happy time living in Singapore and I am very happy to come and see you.

I think these are all part of our extended family, our network of friends, and I think we should welcome them and see them as a strength. Something plus for us and when we celebrate, we hope they celebrate with us.

So National Day, we celebrate. In the schools, they have celebrations. Some of the kids are not Singaporean, but they come, and they join us and join our celebration. We put up National Day banners. We show pictures of people living in Singapore, who are happy living in Singapore. Most of them are Singaporean. Once in a while we have somebody who is a PR, or somebody who is a visitor. They are guests here; I think it is good. Recently Tanjong Pagar put up one like that, and there was a bit of a kerfuffle because somebody made an issue of it and then said why do you have this non-Singaporean for National Day? I think it is a small-minded, foolish, nasty approach. They want to be friends with us. Why should we not want to be friends with them? They want to celebrate with us. We should open our hearts, welcome them; that is the way to behave as a Singaporean.

I went for a walk at Botanic Gardens one evening, a stranger came up to me and said hello. Ran past me, Caucasian, obviously not Singaporean. He said: “I am not Singaporean, but this is a marvellous place to live. Thank you for keeping it a good place. The only thing is I wish you could reduce the temperature by two degrees.” I said: “Thank you very much. I will try.”

So, people wish us well and I think we should welcome them to be part of our extended family, our network of friends. And that way, I think there is a future for Singapore.

Moderator: Thanks, Mr Lee. I am going to come right back up front. Ladies, both of you go ahead and ask your question, okay?

Catherine: Good afternoon, Mr Lee, my name is Catherine, I am from ITE College East. So you talked about immigration. The question here is how can we ensure immigrant workers or expats get the same chances at work while also maintaining employment priority for local Singaporeans? And since there is a large increase in immigration, how do you think the western culture will impact how Singaporeans think in terms of their core beliefs and how do you think us Singaporeans can help mitigate that impact?

SM Lee: Okay, I understand the question.

Moderator: Thanks, Catherine. I invite your friend behind you to pose a question as well.

Participant: I am a Singaporean Chinese Muslim. So I have been Chinese all my life and I took on Islam. And also, my husband is not a Singaporean. So we have lived 18 years here whereby there is a lot of changes and a lot of improvements. And because I also have my own learning and development company that teaches about cultural biases and so on and so forth, so Sir, may I ask, understanding the context of emotion when racism and all these issues are in place, do you think there is a possibility or improvement in learning about emotional intelligence, about self-awareness? Because you talk about not reacting, not responding immediately and pressing that button to further investigate what is – probably negative – is going on. All this takes a lot of self-awareness as well as emotional intelligence. So in the context of education, is there something more we can do in that aspect, so that overall certain things can be more integrated? That is my question. Thank you so much.

SM Lee: Okay, I think I take the first question from Catherine first. How do you keep priority for Singaporeans, at the same time be fair to the foreign workers who come here? I think first of all, we bring in foreign workers where there is an economic need for them. There is a job to be done, we cannot find enough Singaporeans or suitable Singaporeans to do it — we bring them in. And the way we design our policies is to allow in the workers where we most need them. For example, construction workers — we have hundreds of thousands of foreign construction workers because we just cannot get those people in Singapore. Manufacturing workers — we have also quite a big number because there are not enough Singaporeans. Even in the service industry, we have a certain proportion, but tighter, because there are Singaporeans but there are not quite enough. And then you have got professionals, and there you are looking for skills and experiences which are very diverse, and we have to take from all over the world, and we have to say well, if you are qualified, if you are earning a certain amount of money, and that means at a certain level in the organisation, I presume that you are bringing skills with you and I allow you to come to work in Singapore.

It is very difficult for me to say in each case you must hire a Singaporean first. But what we do say is that in each case, you must be fair to your employees and a Singaporean must not be disadvantaged. And that is why we have a Fair Employment Practice framework, it is called TAFEP – Tripartite Agreement on Fair Employment Practices. We are introducing legislation against discrimination at workplaces to try and make sure that people will be equally treated to the extent possible, and we are educating employers to do the right thing. And I think generally it is working. If there are specific instances where there is unfair treatment, we will deal with it.

But overall, the question is: what can I do to maximise the chances for Singaporeans to have work? And the answer is: allow in a controlled flow of foreign workers, foreign talent, foreign experts, specialists, and they will complement us. There was an earlier question: do we know that they are better than Singaporeans? Maybe not always. But if they were not needed, I do not think they would come here, and I do not think people would go to the expense of bringing them all the way here in order to work here. So they are needed — not that they are better than me, but there are just not enough of me. I only got three and a half million Singaporeans. Even adding all the foreign workers, that is about another million, that makes four and a half million. Well, maybe five. There are 100 million Vietnamese, there are 1,400 million Chinese, there are about 1,400 million Indians. So do I have enough? There is no number which is enough, but definitely I need more than I have and that is why the foreigners are coming. But when they come, they must know that this is Singapore, and this is how you are supposed to behave in Singapore, and keep this the way Singapore is, with this spirit, this ethos, and this sense of identity and national belonging.

The second question, I will just give you a quick answer. How do I get people to be educated in having the emotional maturity? Well, inherently kids have to grow up. And some kids are hyperactive, some kids are calmer, some kids grow up, mature faster, some kids are slower. You can help them to grow up better when you are in school because it is not just schoolwork, academics, but also co-curricular activities, also community activities, leadership training, and we have a lot of that in schools. I talked about Outward Bound School just now, that is one of the efforts.

And there are other things which we can do. Some people try making little kids do meditation. I do not know whether it works or not. But for maybe 10 minutes the teacher will have peace and calm in the classroom. All the kids are supposed to sit there and say “Om” and then learn to centre their soul and spirit and control their emotions. It may be helpful, there is some evidence that it is helpful, but I think these are all ways in which you are trying to bring up a kid to have the right values and the right emotional reactions and not just have that intellectual knowledge of how to answer the book exam.

Moderator: We will invite the next two questions, go ahead.

Hon Soo: Hello SM Lee, I am Hon Soo, and I am from NTU. I want to ask you how can we improve the way that society is structured, either physically where homes are located, where we house various communities together, especially Singaporeans and foreign workers being separated through foreign worker dormitories, and we have expats who have their own enclaves as well. How can we maybe improve on those structures such that they become more conducive to more intermingling and more cohesion between the communities? And I guess also there are social structures that still reinforce these divisions, so how can we mitigate those social structures as well?

Moderator: Could you just give us an example of a social structure you believe?

Hon Soo: A social structure maybe for a kind of club I guess, or an interest group? Because I do tend to see that it is usually mostly Singaporeans who are in those groups, rather than migrant workers, domestic workers, and construction workers. I do see one or two of them, but I would like to see more of them in these groups as well.

Moderator: Thanks, and we will take one more question.

Jerome: Good afternoon, I am Jerome from SAJC. Mr Lee, you have mentioned speaking to religious leaders and other political leaders. Do you believe that there is much significance for Singapore to voice such racial issues at an international level given our small size? I would like to hear your personal take on this. Thank you.

SM Lee: First question, on social structures for mingling between Singaporeans and foreign workers. I think the foreign worker dormitories are a specific solution to a specific problem. The specific problem is we are talking about construction workers, process workers. Many of them come from South Asia, some from China, some from Southeast Asia, but they are a specific group of people and they are very large. You are talking about 350,000 people in construction and maybe 80,000 more who are in the shipyards and process industries, so 400,000 people. It is a practical solution to organise a dormitory, well-equipped, well-appointed, comfortable, safe, with adequate facilities and to have them live in those dormitories. Going to work and coming back to work – logistics, transport, everything is easier to do. I think if we did not have those dormitories, the social impact of having 400,000 people like that scattered all over our HDB estates will be quite considerable and I think we will have a lot of problems.

Interaction with them – yes, you have community events. They come out, they go to all the entertainment places, all the normal shopping and food places in Singapore. You interact with them, but basically that is a more or less self-contained community, working in our midst and generally working quite well. They are not really meant to be integrated in for the long-term because this is a transient population. They come and after they finish their contracts, maybe six years, maybe 10 years, they expect to go back home. Others are integrated. Many are living in HDB estates, they rent rooms, sometimes they rent an entire flat, some are living in private properties. In HDBs, we have set limits on the foreign proportions, so that we try not to have a very dense enclave, but in the private estates, it is harder to do. It is not legally easy for us to control that. In a private estate, sometimes we have a concentration and we have to make a bigger effort in order to engage them and to have them have interactions together with the rest of society.

There are opportunities for mingling when we have community events. Foreign work permit holders, foreign workers here sometimes do participate. Numbers may not be small. I often see them when I go down for events in Ang Mo Kio or Teck Ghee, and we welcome them. But at the same time, you want it to be a Singapore event. If a lot of them came for a Singapore event, you will also feel the balance is not quite right. It is something which we have to progress in a practical sort of way.

The second question on whether we can be vocal and speak internationally? I think we have to be very careful. We are solving Singapore's problem. It is three and a half million Singaporeans, and altogether, the population is nearly six million. So far, we have done not badly, but it is in Singapore's context. Other countries are in a totally different situation. Much bigger, different history, more complicated. Our solutions cannot necessarily be their solutions. In fact, two weeks ago, I was in Kuala Lumpur and I made a speech. I told my audience our relations will always be sensitive, they are very important, we are friends with each other. But our relations will always be sensitive because we are both multi-racial societies. We both celebrate being multi-racial societies, but with very different history and we have very different policies for managing our multi-racialism, for being a multi-racial societies. In Singapore, we have gone for multi-racialism, for equality, for meritocracy. In Malaysia, they have a bumiputra policy. It is radically different. Therefore, we always have to be careful with what we do and try not to rub up against each other. Supposing I had gone up to Malaysia and say, this is how I do multi-racialism in Singapore and I encourage you to do the same. I think we would have had a big problem. We would not be friends anymore. We have to understand that the world is complicated. We are proud of ourselves and if people ask us how we do it, I will tell them, but I will not teach them. I have no position to do so and they are not asking me to do, so I think we should understand.

Moderator: But we are a good example for others to follow.

SM Lee: Well, we are one example that it can work. If other people say that the Singaporeans have found a way to work it, let us find a way to work it, then I am glad we have contributed to raising hope in the world.

Moderator: Thank you Mr Lee. Now, this has come as a pleasant surprise. Mr Lee has kindly offered about 10 minutes of anything that is on your mind. It does not necessarily have to be about the conference. If there is anything you wish to ask him – he is in the hot seat right now – so go ahead. But of course, if you are enjoying the discussion on the topics of the conference and if you have not had the opportunity to ask any questions, you can do so now. But I will take some moderator privilege and ask the very last question. Mr Lee, is it okay if I take two questions? Okay, two questions starting from the back at the top of the auditorium. Go for it.

Shujay: Good afternoon, I am Shujay and this is Jotsnam. We are both from SOTA. We have two questions regarding the Singapore identity. I know a few friends, like myself, who have been children of immigrants in Singapore for basically their entire life and we have our permanent residency. But for some reason, when we apply for citizenship, we get rejected and that is personally a bit disheartening. I would just like to clarify, is there a reason for this and whether there is something I can do so that I can reclaim my Singaporean identity. Because as a child of Indian Indians, I have been in Singapore my whole life and I resonate with the Singaporean identity more than I do with my Indian identity, which I do not know of.

Jotsnam: My follow-up question is on this idea of what the Singaporean identity is. Because we have so many different people in Singapore, I think there is no such thing as a norm or a box that everyone can fit into. We all struggle to find a way to fit in, just to feel comfortable in our society. How can we mediate preserving our unique identities but simultaneously building a common identity as a nation?

SM Lee: On the first question, I do not want to comment on a specific immigration case. I do not know the specific details of your case. I think we have immigration policies and we bring in a big number of PRs and citizens every year. But if you have a case and you want to be considered again, I think you can let us know and we will take it offline.

On the Singaporean identity, you are quite right. There is no single box which we all fit into. In fact, we all started off in different boxes. Now we are trying to bring them together and not to merge them, but to overlap them to the extent that we are able to and gradually to increase the overlap. So that you feel that you are Singaporean at the same time as you have your ethnic identity, your language identity, your religious identity, which for many Singaporeans is very important. But your Singaporean identity should be one of those which is quite high up in your sense of who you are.

And what is it? It is partly having grown up here. It is partly having known this society and having multi-racial friends who are Singaporeans. It is partly in your attitude to life, expecting to work hard, expecting to compete, but expecting to be treated fairly and expecting the government to be serving you and doing the best for you. It is also a sense of pride that you are a Singapore citizen. Or you may be a friend of Singapore and you have helped to build Singapore and to make it a successful place; a place which we are proud of and which other people look on with admiration. I am a Singaporean and I am proud of that. In addition to that, of course the Singapore identity has to do with eating roti prata, thosai, char kway teow and going to chill out at — where should I say which is safe — Botanic Gardens. Young people go other places though. And that adds to the identity. But the core of it is that sense of values, sense of who we are and therefore, when I see another Singaporean when I am overseas or in a strange land, we feel a certain kinship. We have more in common with each other than with anybody else in the room. And that is what it is.

Moderator: I will take a few questions at the front now.

Prana: Good afternoon, Sir, I am Prana from Naval Base Secondary School. I would like to ask a question about whether international students in government schools are better supported because they are paying higher fees close to two thousand dollars and their parents may be migrants as well because they are from international countries, so when Singaporeans are given scholarships like the Edusave Awards, EAGLES awards, how are the international students supported so that they can continue their education in prestigious Singapore government schools. Thank you.

Moderator: Next question?

Participant: This is pertaining to the issue discussed earlier about migrants. Since current attempts to integrate migrant workers under the construction industry often result in backlash or increased xenophobia, what concrete measures are Singapore taking to overcome this issue and promote effective inclusion? And what benchmarks or indicators are being used to assess the progress in reducing xenophobia?

SM Lee: First of all, Singapore schools primarily exist to educate our population. We take some foreign students because their parents may be living or working here. Sometimes, people send their kids to come to Singapore schools to study because they prefer the Singapore education. We will take them. But the Singapore education is expensive. I mean, for a kid in school, a primary school kid, every year it costs the government around $10,000 to provide the education to the kid. The kid pays like $13 per month in miscellaneous fees. And we do that for Singaporeans. But when a PR is studying in our school, or a foreign student is studying in our school, then we also give support, particularly for the PRs, but it cannot be the same level of support, and therefore the school fees are higher. And there are scholarships for foreign students, we have some, and those we hope that they will stay on and then they will eventually work here and maybe make a longer-term contribution here. But there are also others who are here on their own and for them, well, the fees have to be somewhat higher, it cannot be helped.

The second question on integration of migrant workers — I do not think I would say that the integration measures are creating a backlash. I think it is a question of what do you want to achieve when you say you are integrating them. You want them to be able to live here, you want them to be able to interact with the population here. We are not trying to make them long-term members of Singapore society, because they are migrant; they are here, they work, they go off. And so as long as they are well-treated, safe, work hard, well-housed and they can have all of their amenities in life, and between them and Singaporeans, we can get on together and we do not have a problem, I think that is what is practical for us to achieve. And I think that is what we have been trying to do.

Moderator: Okay, next few questions from the front.

Participant: Good afternoon, Senior Minister. For these kinds of events, where you have to travel around Singapore, do you prefer it most to be in the Central area, North, the East, the South, the West? Which area of Singapore do you most enjoy attending events at?

SM Lee: Where do I enjoy attending events at? I enjoy attending events at Ang Mo Kio. But I am very happy to come back here because in 2006, I opened ITE East.

Moderator: Where do you stay?

Participant: I stay in Pasir Ris.

Moderator: You want to make a case?

Participant: The seaside is good. Now I got another question that is related to the topic now. Earlier on, you mentioned about how in Western countries, they have kind of a different mindset and a different take on multiculturalism. You mentioned cultural appropriation, how it is viewed negatively there. Through social media, I have seen these mindsets, and these kinds of views have kind of taken root in some of my peers of similar ages. So I have had this experience when interacting with people of similar ages. It feels weird because it is kind of, I do not know how to set the boundaries, because there are different boundaries. In Singapore, you treat the norm as is. You know what topics are sensitive, what to avoid. But then out of the blue, you just see these kinds of new boundaries, new sensitive waters to tread on. Do you believe that there needs to be something to be done about this, how the influence of these ideas have taken place over social media?

Moderator: We will take one more question from the friend behind you.

Vanessa: Good afternoon, Mr Lee. I am Vanessa Choi from Raffles Girls’ School. Before I start on my question, firstly, I think on behalf of everyone over here, we just want to thank you for your contributions to Singapore, and on behalf of the youth, I think we are very grateful and lucky to have had you as our PM. Now on a more personal level, my question is, what is your biggest regret of your tenure as Prime Minister of Singapore? Thank you.

SM Lee: I have no regrets. I always wish I could have done even more, but I have done my best and Singaporeans have responded, and I could not have asked for more.

The question before that was adjusting to different cultures. I think it is going to be very difficult because there are many different societies and views in the world. We will be exposed to them. We may be influenced by them, inevitably. Or you may go overseas, and you may encounter them for the first time and suddenly have a culture shock. And that is the way the world is, which is why I say we should grow up in Singapore to cultivate robust attitudes. If we treat everybody like a strawberry, somewhere or other you are going to get bruised, because the world does not always have nice, soft plastic wrapping for you. So you have to grow up robust, able to take some knocks and when you go into a new environment, well, it is a shock for a while, but if you have to learn to swim, you learn to swim. And I think that is the way it should be.

At the same time, when a new idea comes to Singapore, you have to keep that balance. Keep an open mind, do not automatically reject it, but neither should you say ‘Wow, this comes from the most advanced country in the world — I do not know, it can be anywhere now, it could be in the East, it could be in the West, it could be in Asia — and therefore I am completely sold head over foot, I also adopt, and I get culturally captured’. It can happen. So I think we have to keep a balance and knowing that you are Singaporean and having a certain pride in who you are helps you to keep that balance.

Moderator: Okay, we have got time for one last question from right way back there.

Rui Min: Hello Senior Minister, I am Rui Min from Hwa Chong Institution. So as said previously, you have been our former Prime Minister. So what is one thing you dislike about Singapore after your tenure as Prime Minister? Please do not say the heat, everyone hates the heat in Singapore. So do not say the heat.

SM Lee: It is very difficult to answer that question. You do not start off with such a mindset — what you do not like about this place. This is your country; God gave it to you. He decided to draw this land, gave you this history, this population. And it is what you have and what you can make of it. And you can like it, you can not like it, you can say ‘I wish he had given me more. I wish we had had an oil well in the ground. Diamonds even better’. He did not, but he gave us our wits and I think we are grateful for that. So I think that is the more productive mindset with which to look at the world and to think about Singapore.

Moderator: That deserves a round of applause. So Mr Lee, I will use that privilege to ask one final question if I may.

SM Lee: I already put down my mic.

Moderator: Thanks for picking it up again. But without mentioning names, one of your colleagues in Cabinet had once previously described you and I believe this is still true, that Mr Lee, this is a leader who is absolutely colourblind. And I was just wondering, truly, how has this come to be, what life experiences — I mean, of course, it is a very loaded question, but how do you think your life experiences have shaped you to be this individual who is leading — which is very inspiring for the young people in the audience today, and of course — being colourblind. So you know, it has not been an issue for you, and I think there was that question earlier about are we ready for a non-Chinese PM. And I think we know the answer, but I was just curious from you, really, how have you come to be a leader who is absolutely colourblind? What life experiences have shaped that?

SM Lee: I would not claim to be absolutely colourblind. We all have our prejudices; we all have our biases. We try our best to be neutral, to be fair and what helps you is the environment in which you grew up, the family, your parents, the way they brought you up, your experiences in school, at work, in NS and the SAF, and working with Singaporeans and knowing what works and what does not. And therefore, feeling that this is what people really truly deeply want, and what we should work with them to try and go and achieve.

And because you have a certain set of experiences and mental points of reference, fixed stars, so you have a sense of direction; a subject comes up you say this does not sound like it is in the right direction; ‘No, I do not want to go that way, I want to go a different way. That other option looks hard, but it is the right thing to do, let us find a way to do it’. And it has to be from your personal experience. In school, you have leadership opportunities. You may be in the band, you may be editing the school magazine, you may be working with your friends on some project or other. At work, there are many opportunities to be tested and to feel the impact of what you are doing on people and to get a sense that what you are doing is making a difference, and people are benefiting from it, and are appreciative. I think it has been a strong motivation for me and I am sure it will be for anybody who takes this path. You will find your own way to have the right values and to take Singapore forward, because you need to find younger people always who are prepared to take this path.

Ground-up is fine — [we] need it, encourage it, we must have people who do not just wait for orders, but who will go and do things because they believe they want to do things. But leadership is always crucial. Without good leadership, you can have a lot of good-intentioned people, they will be very frustrated, [things] cannot be done. And we must have the best leader, and the best leader he may be Chinese, may be Malay, may be Indian, may be some other race, may be Eurasian. It does not matter — if he can win Singaporean support and mobilise Singaporeans and command respect in the world, he should be the Prime Minister. Look for such people and develop such people.