Oh, and we are at a noon meeting in a lecture hall with the blackout shades drawn and the lights all the way up. One or two speakers have pointed out this nonsense without any effect. Since then I've tried to make it a habit to open the blinds (there are glare shades you can leave in place while letting in most of the light) and turn the lights down when I have the opportunity. But last time I did that, it took about 5 minutes before somebody else came in noticed the room was only well, not blindingly lit, and turned the lights back to max.

From here on, plain text is the speaker:

I'm not good at speeches because I fall asleep listening to them. I like Q&A better. Joel's note: fairly generic Singapore governance speech. We have limited resources, business hub, etc. It's not possible to have policies that please everyone.

Someone told me "You guys cheat all the time" "Why?" "You have the database, you see the good students, you pamper them, and when they get out they want to work for you." Through that process we ensure there's a core group in Singapore who have the talent to do things right.

Joel's note: He's right, he really isn't good at speeches. He has a rambling style and hesitant speaking style that make it extremely hard to follow his point. Having briefly skimmed the criticism site linked above, which calls him incompetent, it's tempting to concur simply based on how bad his speech is. Not only because of the poor delivery, but because he doesn't give any hints of interesting thought. While he drones on, I'll continue with the research.

The authors of a book called "Escape from Paradise" claim:

He fell into extreme disfavor with the Singapore Government. On Dec. 2, 2002, it was announced that he had been removed from Singapore's People's Action Party (PAP) all powerful Central Executive Committee. This was the beginning of the end for Yeo, which is what happens when a Cabinet Minister and his wife go out on a limb to ban a book that brought attention to a property transaction, that stuck fear into the Yeos. Escape from Paradise did not say what Helen Yeo had done. However, when she threatened to sue us, we let it all hang out on the web.

He's still rambling. Deregulation, phones, cheap IP calls, low-cost airlines invited into Singapore. Etc. Finally the concluding sentence. "All of these relate back to having clarity in policy making." 35 minutes. Meanwhile I found this book, which looks like it might be worth a read.

Q: What's the relationship in Singapore between policy making and politics. How are stakeholders involved? A: The stakeholders with the loudest voices are private companies and mumble. We try to listen to the stakeholders; are their inputs self-serving or do they provide greater clarity. [about five minutes of ramble that adds nothing to his answer] We have to hold the ground every 4 years or the people will vote us out.

Q: can you give some examples of where the policy-making process went wrong and how it was corrected? How important is it in your opinion for people to be able to complain? What opposition do you face in re-election? A: If you have 20 people, not everybody will agree. (Joel's note: A revealing comment, I think, because it suggests that 1) there are about 20 people present in whatever meeting really makes decisions, and 2) Yeo thinks those twenty people are all that matters.) The core of the policy, few people would disagree with. Just because people argue at the margins doesn't mean the policy is really wrong. The "stop at two" policy—I thought it was wrong because I came from a family of 12. But later on I realized it was a good policy. ... Many people have the perception that there's no dissent allowed in Singapore. but this is not true. In Singapore we engage the dissent and argue, and many times convince them. And people who can't stand the heat may leave. ... Competition: I faced competition twice. Explanation of GRC (a mechanism the PAP uses to help maintaing a monopoly on power) as a means to ensure minority representation. Once I faced the strongest group of 5 opposition ever. I got 80.1%. So competition is there. We don't buy votes in Singapore.

Joel's note: yes, he really did just cite beating the best opposition ever 80-20 as evidence of fair elections. As with Blair's unfortunate answers on Iraq, he gives every impression of believing his own answer

Q: What changes have there been with the three prime ministers? Are there two factions within the cabinet? A: I joined with LKY. No change in substance, only in style. He's mellowed since then. He challenged you, and you either stood up to the heat or you shouldn't be there. Goh was a lot milder. The policy that was hottest was the integrated resorts. No gambling means no gambling. Even today there are dissenting votes.

Q: Based on your speech it seems like one of the keys to your success with difficult policies is a very cooperative business sector. Why is this? A: A sense of trust. Built up over many years of working together that they know, at the end of the day, that we have their interests at heart. Government doesn't create wealth, it consumes wealth. We depend on the private sector to create wealth.

Q: something about the Philippines and the power of the church. A: Our system is much simpler than many other countries. Many policies don't have to go back to Parliament to be approved. Otherwise policies could be watered down.

Q: I recently became a PR (permanent resident), thanks to your investment plan. I've been fascinated by the Singapore story and you guys have done a fabulous job here. One limitation in the future could be land. How will you deal with that? A: regionalize, internationalize. Do only what absolutely needs to be done in Singapore. Singapore can have a maximum population of perhaps 8 million; you can do a lot with 8 million. Involve countries in region in Greater Singapore. They should realize it's win-win.