factors that have to do with the spirit and philosophy of Singapore itself, the way it is governed, how the government approaches domestic issues, and how it deals with the world.
In my study of Singapore, I have found three compelling qualities woven into the fabric of the country that have enabled it to achieve outstanding successes in so many areas, healthcare included. They are long-term political unity, the ability to recognize and establish national priorities, and the consistent desire for collective well-being and social harmony of the country.
Political Unity and Constancy of Purpose
From the time the British withdrew from Singapore and left its former colony to fend for itself, Singapore has been able to develop and grow as an integrated whole. The People's Action Party (PAP) has been in power since independence, resulting in sustained political stability. Along with stability has come a unity and constancy of purpose and action throughout government. Contrast this condition with other countries where government regularly changes hands and different parties espousing different agendas go in and out of power. A clear and uninterrupted approach to solving a nation's problems is very difficult to achieve in such situations. The government has been steady in its broad general vision of what care should be and what role it should play in the lives of Singaporeans. That continuity of philosophy and approach, I believe, has made possible the ability to plan and execute over a long period of time.
I have also observed an unusual degree of unity among the country's various ministries—an acknowledged spirit of cooperation among governmental departments that makes possible the formulation of policies that reaches across ministries. A member of the team that assembled the 1983 health plan discussed in this chapter and Health Minister from 2004 to 2011, Mr. Khaw Boon Wan, has noted that each month, Permanent Secretaries of each ministry meet to focus on issues that require participation by more than one ministry.1 It is simply assumed that ministers will work as a team on issues that need interdepartmental cooperation.
I find it relevant that the government realized early on that improvement in health conditions and care had to be approached as an integral and inseparable part of the overall development planning for the country. As a heavily urbanized city-state with a population of two million at independence, caring for the health of the people meant more than just building hospitals and clinics. Health would be affected by almost every aspect of life in an urban setting: housing, water supply, food supply, air quality, waste disposal, road traffic, parks, tree planting, and more. Ensuring the health of the people of Singapore had to be built into every aspect of urban planning, requiring a comprehensive approach and the cooperation of numerous ministries over all the various sectors of government. The culture of cooperation made it all possible.
Some have suggested that Singapore is a thinly-disguised dictatorship, and that political stability is attained at the cost of democratic freedom. That is simply not the case. Although one party, the PAP, has been in power since independence, it is elected and does not hold power through force, and could not have maintained its rule without being highly responsive to the concerns of the electorate.
The government is responsive to the concerns of the electorate. In the 2011 elections, healthcare was one of the issues raised. There were concerns that the government was not doing enough for the elderly and that families were experiencing severe financial strain and even bankruptcy as they tried to pay for older family members’ care. Opposition parties organized themselves around issues of healthcare affordability and eldercare costs.
Early the following year, the government responded with a new program of increased spending—doubling the Ministry of Health's budget over the next five years—to address citizens’ concerns. It announced increased subsidies for long-term care, even for patients being cared for in the home, and expanded eligibilities for subsidies, giving middle-income families some financial relief. Subsidies were increased for nursing homes (including eligible patients in private nursing homes), day care, rehabilitation care, and home-based care. These actions by the government seem to me to be a direct response to the issues raised in the elections.
Establishing Priorities
The health of the populace was not a top priority for the government at the start of independence. As Lee Kuan Yew observed in his memoirs, he had three immediate concerns to deal with: international recognition for Singapore's independence; a strong defense program that would “defend this piece of real estate”; and finally the economy—“how to make a living for our people.”2 Yong Nyuk Lin, the Minister for Health at the time, stated the situation bluntly: “health would rank, at the most, fifth in order of priority” for public funds. National security, job creation, housing, and education were in the queue ahead of health, in that order.3 With the exception of the basics of public health, healthcare planning and development would have to wait until the nation achieved a level of military and economic stability.
It seems to me that this ordering of priorities was apt for the time, as it was vitally important first to set up the defense of this small nation, and then to attract investors to set in motion economic growth, and tackle glaring issues of unemployment, housing, and education. After these critical problems had been dealt with, others, including healthcare, could be taken on. Exactly where health comes in the priorities of an emerging economy may vary. In countries where HIV/AIDS is highly prevalent, or if another epidemic or disease threatens a broad segment of the population, health may become the first or second national priority.
Wisely, the initial focus in Singapore was on public health: putting proper sanitation procedures in place, controlling infectious diseases, all successful efforts. Early initiatives were launched to provide clean water, develop a vaccination program, and guarantee access to basic medications, clean food, and more.
In time, the priorities set by the government proved to be effective. The security situation stabilized and the economy grew to the benefit of all. The creation of the healthcare system was aided immeasurably by the outstanding growth. One important indicator to consider: GDP grew from just under S
Promoting a Sense of Collective Well-Being and Social Harmony
One of the most important tenets of Singaporean governance is that a strong society requires social harmony. If tensions between social groups and races are to be avoided, all groups should be included in the life of the country and should benefit, to some degree, from its successes. The government's actions on behalf of this belief have undergirded the building of modern Singapore. As part of the social fabric, the government built a system that promotes a sense of fairness and well-being through both economic opportunity and delivery of social services. I find these words of Lee key to understanding Singapore's approach:
A competitive, winner-takes-all society, like colonial Hong Kong in the 1960s, would not be acceptable in Singapore…To even out the extreme results of free-market competition, we had to redistribute the national income through subsidies on things that improved the earning power of citizens, such as education. Housing and public health were also obviously desirable. But finding the correct solutions for personal medical care, pensions, or retirement benefits was not easy.5
One important solution Lee and his ministers found was the Central Provident Fund (CPF). It was set up during British colonial rule as a compulsory
