Singapore’s government has a penchant for cherry-picking comparisons with other countries when it suits their narrative. Recent statements by Senior Minister of State for Communications and Information Tan Kiat How in response to a postage rate hike serve as a perfect example of this tendency. While the government is quick to compare Singapore’s postage rates to those of other nations to justify the increase, they conveniently overlook similar benchmarking when addressing more critical issues such as the death penalty.
Selective Comparisons: The Postage Rate Hike
Singapore’s postal service, SingPost, recently announced a substantial 65% increase in postage rates, citing rising costs and declining mail volume. In response to concerns raised by Members of Parliament, Tan Kiat How justified the hike by claiming that Singapore’s postage rates would remain comparable to those of countries like Japan and the United States. While this comparison may provide some context, it raises important questions about the government’s consistency in using international comparisons.
The government’s willingness to benchmark Singapore’s postal rates against other countries reveals a pattern of cherry-picking comparisons to justify their actions. While it is understandable to reference international standards to provide perspective, this practice becomes problematic when it is not consistently applied across various issues.
Death Penalty and Selective Comparisons
One glaring example of this inconsistency is the government’s approach to the death penalty. Singapore continues to employ capital punishment, a practice that has faced widespread criticism and calls for reform from international human rights organizations. Yet, when it comes to justifying the use of the death penalty, the government conveniently refrains from comparing Singapore to countries that have abolished it.
Instead of using international comparisons to justify the death penalty, the government relies on its own justifications, citing deterrence and maintaining a tough stance on crime. This double standard in the use of international benchmarks raises concerns about the government’s willingness to engage in open and honest dialogue about its policies.
Profitable SingPost vs. Loss-Making Domestic Business
Another aspect of the postage rate hike that warrants scrutiny is the government’s rationale for approving it. Tan Kiat How explained that SingPost’s core business in Singapore, post and parcel, incurred operating losses of S$16 million due to a global decline in letter mail and competition from logistics companies and e-commerce players.
While it is reasonable for a publicly-listed company to take measures to address loss-making segments, the government’s stance raises questions about its commitment to ensuring essential public services remain accessible and affordable. If the government is willing to approve rate hikes for a profitable entity like SingPost, it raises concerns about their priorities when it comes to protecting the interests of ordinary citizens.
Singapore’s government must be consistent in its approach to international comparisons. While it is convenient to compare Singapore to other countries when it makes the government look good, such comparisons should also be employed when addressing more contentious issues like the death penalty. The selective use of benchmarks not only erodes trust but also raises questions about the government’s commitment to transparency and accountability.
In the case of the postage rate hike, it is essential to consider the impact on the most vulnerable segments of society, including small businesses and charitable organizations. While the government argues that the rate increase is necessary for SingPost’s financial sustainability, it must also ensure that essential public services remain accessible and affordable for all Singaporeans.
Ultimately, Singaporeans deserve a government that applies consistent and principled approaches to policymaking, rather than one that selectively picks and chooses international comparisons to suit its narrative.
