Soaring above Singapore’s central business district, the seven towers of The Pinnacle@Duxton have a distinctive silhouette. The blocks are linked at the 26th and 50th storeys by bridges, each of which is home to half a kilometre of garden.
In many other countries, iconic residential housing in the heart of the city would be reserved for the super-rich. But this is a public housing project.
As we enter Brexit’s endgame, the “Singapore model” remains a favoured strategy for those who believe lower taxes, lower public spending and less regulation would clear the way for a more competitive and entrepreneurial Britain. The Pinnacle@Duxton offers a reminder that the social bargain Singaporeans have accepted is very different from the British way of life.
The Pinnacle’s seven blocks are finished to a high standard, with amenities including a food court, childcare centre and jogging track; but it is also super-dense, housing 1,848 apartment units on just six acres of land. If Britain truly wanted to become a Singapore of the north Atlantic, the change would have to go far deeper than taxation: there would have to be radical changes to the British way of life.
For decades, Singapore has been run by a far-sighted elite that governs for the long term and buffers itself from democratic pressures by dealing ruthlessly with sources of political opposition. Leftwing leaders have been detained without trial, critics of the government ruined in libel actions. The country’s citizens value the stability this political setup has created, but many of them justifiably chafe at the deplorable constraints on their freedom.
Singapore’s policymakers allowed rampant income inequality but ensured a basic safety net of affordable public housing, built to a high standard. Not all were built in the style and to the quality of the Pinnacle, but the state housing and development board has built more than 1m homes, housing over 80% of the country’s permanent population (a large chunk of the population is made up of expats living in private housing).
The People’s Action party, which has governed since independence, is flexible about ideology. While Singapore’s rulers have declined to build a broad, western-style welfare state, the government plays a big role in the economy. It has prioritised making the Asian city a hub for hi-tech manufacturing, with companies benefiting from a strong logistics network, excellent infrastructure and a pool of engineering graduates as well as tax breaks. Singapore scored a victory with Dyson’s recent decision to manufacture electric cars there.
There is plenty to admire. While there is inequality in Singapore, there is also a strong sense of loyalty and shared sacrifice. Young men required to do compulsory military service form friendships across social boundaries. State schools attended by all strata of society are among the world’s best for maths and science. At lunch hour, rich and poor mingle in hawker centres, tucking in to the same mouthwatering plates of laksa, popiah and chicken satay.
Forging this consensus required a leader with singular determination and vision – Singapore’s founding father, Lee Kuan Yew, who declared: “We decide what is right. Never mind what the people think.” He was surrounded by a gifted group of politicians, backed by an efficient civil service, and showed a willingness to sweep away nearly any impediment. In other countries, ancestral languages are cherished. In Singapore, the traditional southern Chinese dialects were ditched to make way for Mandarin.
Replicating the Singapore model would be a challenge in a western country with stronger democratic safeguards, a less vigorous political class, and a cynical distrust of experts.
It would also require deeper sacrifices than Britons are accustomed to. Ordinary people in Singapore put up with modest living space and know they will never earn enough to afford a car. Singapore is already one of the world’s most expensive places to own a vehicle because of the exorbitant cost of car ownership permits, and has this year capped the number of cars on the road.
Britain is turning to Singapore at a time when the Asian city-state’s own consensus is fraying. There is much to like about Singapore, but it is also a stressed and often unhappy place, from the schoolchildren shuttling between tutors to the office workers reporting low job satisfaction while working some of the longest hours in the world. A Singaporean campaign to encourage fathers to “eat with your family” starts from a low base: dads are urged to make it back for mealtimes just four times a year.
Some of the forces that have driven its success to date mean Singaporeans sometimes struggle to find the passion or flexibility required in a modern economy. Singapore emphasizes material prosperity – this is a society in which sports cars ride elevators and designer handbags take up seats in restaurants – and hierarchy, from its exam-based pecking orders for children to its rigidly stratified workplaces. This is not a mindset that adapts easily to working at a tech startup. Singapore’s rulers are conscious of these challenges, and have begun trying to address them.
Singapore is an unreliable guide to the UK’s post-Brexit future. Even if we had the capacity to emulate them, few Britons would enjoy living in a north Atlantic Singapore. And many Singaporeans think it is high time their society changed.